Cinemaphile must therefore be better than Cinemaphile, because the books blow Peter Jackson’s movies away no contest, and there are many books better than LOTR.
Every book is better than every movie except Stephen King's stuff.
He's a bad writer but directors can take his weird stuff and make it cool.
And no I'm not talking about "It". Bad movies, bad book.
I'm going to put a target on myself with this one and say I couldn't ever really get into the books. I was jarred out of them early on when Frodo is told to toss the ring in his fireplace and visibly can't, in front of Gandalf... which struck me as bizarre, because then why would they trust him as ringbearer knowing he's already incapable of tossing the ring when the time comes? Did they expect someone else to give him a shove into Mount Doom? Did they expect SAMWISE to do that?
>which struck me as bizarre, because then why would they trust him as ringbearer knowing he's already incapable of tossing the ring when the time comes?
Maybe it's because Frodo didn't understand the stakes yet and they were banking on him having the willpower after he fully understood the weight of his mission and once he had already suffered and worked hard to achieve the goal.
>when Frodo is told to toss the ring in his fireplace and visibly can't, in front of Gandalf
What the hell are you talking about? Gandalf threw the ring into the fireplace, not Frodo. You’ve never read the books.
Wonderful thing about famous old books: you can guarantee they're easily available online. In this case, in a PDF, available with a single Google search.
NTA but one of the ideas floated by the Council of Elrond was to ship the ring to Valinor so Aule could destroy it. They turned this idea down because it would take too long to ship the ring and there's a risk Valinor would just send it right back.
Did they really have no quicker way to get a message to Valinor explaining their situation?
This is why you should read the books all the way through. The ring has an effect on the mind of its bearer. This is well known. In the end Frodo fails to cast the ring into the fires of Mount Doom, and it’s ultimately Gollum that ends up unintentionally doing so. Gandalf goes on a long spiel about why Gollum should not be killed and how he may yet have a part to play in events as they unfold.
99 times out 100 if someone tries to point out a plot hole in LOTR, it’s already explained in the book.
Wonderful thing about famous old books: you can guarantee they're easily available online. In this case, in a PDF, available with a single Google search.
Eat shit.
He volunteered during the meeting at Rivendell. Almost no one was suitable to carry the Ring.
>"None of us are suitable to carry the Ring" >"So we will have the Ring carried by this squat, naive country bumpkin with no battle experience who is also unsuitable to carry the Ring"
This is why you should read the books all the way through. The ring has an effect on the mind of its bearer. This is well known. In the end Frodo fails to cast the ring into the fires of Mount Doom, and it’s ultimately Gollum that ends up unintentionally doing so. Gandalf goes on a long spiel about why Gollum should not be killed and how he may yet have a part to play in events as they unfold.
99 times out 100 if someone tries to point out a plot hole in LOTR, it’s already explained in the book.
>"Our working gameplan is that Gollum will jump out at the last minute and rip the ring off his finger, then kamikaze into the lava with it"
My God, Tolkien's literary genius truly is boundless.
All options were explored, including why they couldn’t send it to Valinor, toss it into the ocean, give it to Tom Bombadil, etc. In the end it was decided by the council that it was a task divinely appointed to Frodo, and conveniently so, given that he was small and diminutive, and could more easily sneak around Mordor without getting spotted.
It’s not just about destroying it, they have to get it there first and Frodo is the best choice for carrying it for a few reasons.
1. Hobbits are resistant to the taint.
2. Even if he does fall to the ring, he’s just a hobbit so it’s not like if Gandalf or Galadriel had it.
3. He’s politically neutral, an Elf, Man or Dwarf carrying it would upset the other two (especially Dwarf v Elf)
In short, pun intended, hobbits are disposable powerless mediators.
>Cinemaphile must therefore be better than Cinemaphile
It kind of is. >and there are many books better than LOTR.
There are way better books out there that are far greater in scope and scale. War and Peace, Moby Dick, and The Tartar Steppe come to mind.
Once upon a time in the west is probably in the running but I’d say Thief is my favorite. I just don’t get much from the characters in Lotr, and the movies drop off for me so much after Fellowship.
lightweight movie for babies
It's a great movie for white men actually.
What the frick does any of that have to do with this you idiot?
I don't expect a mutt to understand.
You are white
You are not white
post your recommendations. should probably wash your hands first, don’t want to get any more cheeto residue on your keyboard.
Goodbye Uncle Tom
no other film is required watching
Cinemaphile must therefore be better than Cinemaphile, because the books blow Peter Jackson’s movies away no contest, and there are many books better than LOTR.
Completely nonsensical argument.
You say that, and yet you fail to produce any sort of counter argument or explanation.
You can make a great film out of a mediocre book, and a film can be better as a film than the book is as a book.
Every book is better than every movie except Stephen King's stuff.
He's a bad writer but directors can take his weird stuff and make it cool.
And no I'm not talking about "It". Bad movies, bad book.
>Every book is better than every movie
The movie Psycho is better than the book.
That too.
Misread this as American Psycho and was about to post a bait meme image.
>except Stephen King's stuff
homie wut
You're really going to compare the Tommyknockers, Salem's Lot, and Needful Things to their movie counterparts and call them inferior?
I'm going to put a target on myself with this one and say I couldn't ever really get into the books. I was jarred out of them early on when Frodo is told to toss the ring in his fireplace and visibly can't, in front of Gandalf... which struck me as bizarre, because then why would they trust him as ringbearer knowing he's already incapable of tossing the ring when the time comes? Did they expect someone else to give him a shove into Mount Doom? Did they expect SAMWISE to do that?
>which struck me as bizarre, because then why would they trust him as ringbearer knowing he's already incapable of tossing the ring when the time comes?
Maybe it's because Frodo didn't understand the stakes yet and they were banking on him having the willpower after he fully understood the weight of his mission and once he had already suffered and worked hard to achieve the goal.
>when Frodo is told to toss the ring in his fireplace and visibly can't, in front of Gandalf
What the hell are you talking about? Gandalf threw the ring into the fireplace, not Frodo. You’ve never read the books.
Wonderful thing about famous old books: you can guarantee they're easily available online. In this case, in a PDF, available with a single Google search.
Eat shit.
NTA but one of the ideas floated by the Council of Elrond was to ship the ring to Valinor so Aule could destroy it. They turned this idea down because it would take too long to ship the ring and there's a risk Valinor would just send it right back.
Did they really have no quicker way to get a message to Valinor explaining their situation?
The Valar probably would have just told the elves to come home and left the men to their fate.
This is why you should read the books all the way through. The ring has an effect on the mind of its bearer. This is well known. In the end Frodo fails to cast the ring into the fires of Mount Doom, and it’s ultimately Gollum that ends up unintentionally doing so. Gandalf goes on a long spiel about why Gollum should not be killed and how he may yet have a part to play in events as they unfold.
99 times out 100 if someone tries to point out a plot hole in LOTR, it’s already explained in the book.
He volunteered during the meeting at Rivendell. Almost no one was suitable to carry the Ring.
>"None of us are suitable to carry the Ring"
>"So we will have the Ring carried by this squat, naive country bumpkin with no battle experience who is also unsuitable to carry the Ring"
>"Our working gameplan is that Gollum will jump out at the last minute and rip the ring off his finger, then kamikaze into the lava with it"
My God, Tolkien's literary genius truly is boundless.
All options were explored, including why they couldn’t send it to Valinor, toss it into the ocean, give it to Tom Bombadil, etc. In the end it was decided by the council that it was a task divinely appointed to Frodo, and conveniently so, given that he was small and diminutive, and could more easily sneak around Mordor without getting spotted.
It’s not just about destroying it, they have to get it there first and Frodo is the best choice for carrying it for a few reasons.
1. Hobbits are resistant to the taint.
2. Even if he does fall to the ring, he’s just a hobbit so it’s not like if Gandalf or Galadriel had it.
3. He’s politically neutral, an Elf, Man or Dwarf carrying it would upset the other two (especially Dwarf v Elf)
In short, pun intended, hobbits are disposable powerless mediators.
>and there are many books better than LOTR
name one single sci-fi/fantasy novel or series of novels published since LOTR that is better than LOTR
i'll fricking wait
I said there are many books better than LOTR. At no point did I mention the fantasy or sci-fi genres.
Victor Hugo, Leo Tolstoy and Charles Dickens have all written better novels than LOTR. LOTR is king as far as fantasy and sci-fi goes.
>Cinemaphile must therefore be better than Cinemaphile
It kind of is.
>and there are many books better than LOTR.
There are way better books out there that are far greater in scope and scale. War and Peace, Moby Dick, and The Tartar Steppe come to mind.
Correct
It’s fine and how it’s made is admirable but it’s not the best movie ever made. Not even close.
Name a better movie.
Dunston Checks Into Rehab
Blackhat
Once upon a time in the west is probably in the running but I’d say Thief is my favorite. I just don’t get much from the characters in Lotr, and the movies drop off for me so much after Fellowship.
What is this? The movie Thief, soundtrack by Tangerine Dream?
That's not even the best movie in the trilogy.
I should have pluralised my OP post tbh. I mean the trilogy as a whole. It is basically a 9 hour film really.
Jesus Christ, go watch some actual movies, ya 10 years old zoomer. This is the proto-capeshit.
I'm 43 and have 1500 films reviewed in my Letterboxd account.
>This is the best film ever made.
the definition of overrated slop
The closing credits alone are better than most movies.
Fellowship 10/10
Two Towers 9.5/10
Return of the King 9/10
The greatest movie trilogy of all time. Fellowship is definitely up there for greatest film.
What I want to know is how they made those hobbit fellows look so small compared to the others
Casted 5'10'' actors
>Casted
LOL no. The movie with the most obvious plot hole maybe
>rewatch the extended cut
>realize that most of the added scenes aren't good