Nicely done.

Yeah great review :lol:

Look I know no matter how lightly I step with this comment I am still going to get backlash from people who feel it is necessary to agree with Doug on every tiny detail. I love NC to death, but for the first time I can't deny that my own opinions differ greatly.

I won't sit here and nit-pick, but just throw a few of my major differences of ideas. I understand this review leveled the playing ground by keeping ROTK on the sideline, but still Aragorn shows as much kingly potential in PJ's version as possible without turning the film's focus completely on him. The thing is in the PJ films his leadership qualities are downplayed, and subtle to help keep Aragorn from looking like an arrogant dick. Which is much more the impression I got from the animated film.

Yes John Hurt is a legend, and can play a huge variety of characters. It wouldn't be fair to sell his take on Aragorn short, but due to the low budget of the animated film it is hard to take him seriously. In the 70's version Aragorn seems a bit like a tyrant demanding loyalty, where the modern Aragorn has more of a leadership aura which earns loyalty. I think the perfect example is at the battle of Helm's Deep where he convinces King Théoden to ride out face their enemies presumably to the death, and leave the safety of the barricaded area.

10 positive.
1 negative.

I'd say... you're not the only one. (I agree with you as well and was going silently insane at that part of the video.) Not that my opinion means anything. :unsure:

To Be Honest, I have always loved Peter Jackson `s approach to making LoTR. Though some people would call it 'loving the subject so much he would take it in his a**' (yathzee), it remains ever convincing, as he dedicates so much time to the build up of every scene and character. Even though Bashki did some nice things as well ... the fact his version was animated annoyed me to the highest degree.To me personally, real people are better at showing their emotions better than animations and a longer story is always better. As Jackson `s characters get more time to evolve, they also have more chances to endeer themselves to us.

The only sad thing was the fact that he did n´t have enough time to tell more of the story. Probably due to bugetary reasons. Kinda sad really, because if it was doable ... a BBC miniseries style of 12 episodes would do the 3 books more justice as he would have more time to add more weight to each scene as slowly and as precisely as he pleased.

Then, I would probably just die from watching the sheer awesome that would be .. my dream film O_o

while i agree that real people work very well here, I think in essence animation suits LOTR better because it's simply so far out. I think if Pixar made LoTR, it would be solid gold win

Completely agree (wow, late reply).

Aragorn's entire storyline is about how he is one of the Dunedain Rangers - He knows about his heritage but he doesn't feel he's up to the task. His entire character is built around *not* being a king untill the responsibility is thrust upon him, and i would say that the Jackson version is far superior.

How awesome is it not that Anthony "C-3PO" Daniels is voicing Legolas? :P

What about Legolas...?

Hey, Coldguy, you already pissed off the Harry Potter fans. Don't insult another movie based on a book. Save it for Twilight 2.

I guess we should conclude that coldguy dislikes movies based on books.

Hey great video, I never know of that animated one

Site Wide Nerd Rage Fueled Ranting War in 3...2...

Not site wide, but hey... close enough.

hey, if u dont like movie based off of books then why are you bothering with this you hate??? seriously... hypocritical asshole, sure u can comment on the video, its a free country, but you dont have to flame on it and piss of people who enjoy it, so just to the tgwtg community and stop it!! and yeah i agree with rebeltaxi, save it for something that deserves complaining about...

why is it theres always someone on these videos that leaves a comment and then theyre spat on...maybe theyre th fanboys

I never exactly liked them, but these movies are pretty cool.

Glad I stayed up for this :)

wooo!

Well done sir.

B) "Long time watcher, first time poster"

:0 "Epic video, I really enjoy these Old vs New ones."

good vid as always. well worth the wait.

i know! when i first saw he was doing this I watched both of them again so I can decide for myself. it's still a toss up though. I appreciate both just as much.

03:39 thats me at my last job. :s

Ah, so that's the animated Lord of the RIngs movie. Haven't seen it myself, but I can see why you thought the Jackson films were better over all.

Interesting how Frodo's character is closer to the original books in the animated film rather than Jackson ones. I began reading the original books (I only have Return of the King left to read), and I was surprised on how much Frodo was changed.

Oh and the part where you're doing Smeagol and Gollum arguing over whether "they're" going to have diet coke or regular coke nearly had me on the floor laughing.

Excellent job, Critic!

Brilliant

^
|
Thumb it down and don't fall for it.

wooo also 1st time poster!!! cant believe im posting early, in any case... keep them ace vids coming!!!

lol 1: 06 great one NC. I personally didn't like the animated lord of the ring movie (while i liked the hobbit one). I think the live action movies are alot better.

Good review Doug
as always :lol:

Another great video NC.

Very good review :D - To bad the animated film sucked...

Wow. I was actually expecting you to bash the Bakshi version from beginning to end like everyone else...

Jackson version wins in an overall comparison, but people like to turn a blind eye to the fact that Bakshi did a handful of things better, and that Jackson has admitted to lifting a good amount of his ideas directly from Bakshi.

And THANK YOU for pointing out that Bakshi's villains are far more intimidating.

Edit: Little tidbit I manage to dig up today: Bakshi's film was actually a box office success. 30.5 million on a budget of 4 million(remember, 1970s). The second was never made because of all the meddling he had to put up with from the studio and his producers, none of whom had any respect for the books.

I saw Bashki's film in the theater when it came out. I agree with you that his version of the villains are, for the most part, more intimidating with one big exception: The Balrog at the bridge of Kazadum. Bashki's version does look evil and menacing, but Jackson's is bad-assed lethal and terrifying. When Gandalf stands up to it is one of cinema's great on the edge of your seat moments. I actually was disappointed that Bashki didn't get a chance to finish the series and do Return of The King. Oh well....I am gratified that Peter Jackson did his films with obvious passion and respect for the source material. I'm also glad I saw both versions on the big screen. Peace.

Pfft!
Have you ever lived in a social democracy?
I didnt think soo!
But let me tell you....its pretty damn good
except maybe for all the immigration from third world countries.
Not that I have anything against immigrants as people but they tend to make a mess.
And your talk of "American freedom" is utterly pointless since I have about the same freedom as you(except I can walk about everywhere without getting shot by some frickin hillbilly).
And if anything we censor less.

I mean seriously do you folks live in a bubble!
You seem to think that america is politically at the forefront of the whole civilized world.

"Ohh a progressive slightly left wing politician is in office!
Will this mean a new soviet!?"

Uhh....yeah have you ever heard of that strange mythical continent to the east called "Europe"?

Because from where I come from Obama isnt really that big of a deal.

Uhm dude, just because he made big joke on President Obama doesn't mean he's against him =/. Alot of people joked about Obama's presidency including his reliance on the teleprompter, and his stimulus bill, but that doesn't mean we're against him; it just means we see him as any normal president who is doing his job to make sure America runs smoothly and makes the countrya world leader and a well liked one.

No offense, but that is bit reduntant to say that; considering that he's just doing his job to make America a better place for everyone, while some of you guys who's political beliefs are the complete opposite of his beliefs make claims his actions are destroying America. That isn't political bravery, that's political paranoia, and it's very common for people who are deeply involved in politics, whether they're politician voters who are against someone and claims such radical things but don't have concrete proof to back it up.

Yeah, Bakshi's versions are WAY more intimidating.

The Black Cheerleaders of Moria are DEFINITELY better than the undead wraths of Moria.

The Dark Lord Who Says Ni is WAY more awesome than the powerhouse armor-clad warrior of the Jackson version.

Better yet, there is NOTHING, and I mean NOTHING that can stand up to the robe-clad, lion-head wearing Balrog with butterfly wings and carpet slippers...

You're right, the Bakshi version's cheap-ass villains were SO MUCH MORE FUCKIN' AWESOME than the well-crafted ones of Jackson...

/sarcasm

New all the way!

I enjoy these old vs new videos a lot, thanks.

Yep, I Jackson worked best.

NC, I hate to mention it, but on the title card you've got 4 digits on your right hand but 5 digits on the left.

Look again, four digits per hand.

There's 4 digits on the left as well.

Maybe goullum bit it off!
He did that to Frodo if you didn't watch the movies.

Wonderful compare and contrast, as always.

Really takes me back. The cartoon films were pretty ok ... some of their animation and "action scenes" don't look like they withstood the test of time, but that can be overlooked every once in a while.

It was no suprise that Jackson won but was a suprise was that the other one got 2 points.
Jackson's LOTR is one of the best movies of all time and will forever be up there with Star Wars etc. The Baski film is forgotten for a reason.

Never saw the animated version.. And i will never see it :D

haha Love your Golum impression xD
Nice review

The ending was hilarious.
I agree with NC's view completely.
Man I feel old for watching both the animated and the new one.

Oh by the way: Am I the only one that loved the "where there's a whip" song?

I adored that song as a child, and would sing it to my family. To this day, my mother can sing it as a duel with me.

haha, i was wondering if you were going to fully review the animated 'return of the king'. thank you for sparing us. we hates it.

I REALLY need to pull out those old VHS tapes and watch the old Baski films. Only one I dont own is the Return of the King (For a damn reason too). Anyways, Good review overall. While I do agree about Sauron in a way you cant forget most of the villians in Jacksons film. What really took me was of course Sarumon.

"Aw sword mean..." I remember first seeing the old versions when I was seven thinking, "What is this?" Great as always.

Funny that he mentioned the "Aruman" issue. My understanding is that there was some concern that people who hadn't read the books would confuse Saruman and Sauron. As such, Saruman became Aruman.

And they were just too lazy to edit the part where Saruman tried to talk Gandalf into giving the location of the ring away?

Yes, because somehow SORE-ON could be confused with Saruman....

*facepalm*