Lord of the Rings

Timmy · 03-14-2006, 02:55 AM

Do you think the LOTR movies were true to the books?
They left alot out of the movies. I know they could not include everything as the movie would go forever, but I remember some parts that were huge and were left out of the movie.

etali · 03-19-2006, 01:37 PM

I think they did a good job converting it - they are good movies in their own right, and as close as you could realistically get, in my opinion.

I do think the ending of the last one was overdone though.

cochise · 03-20-2006, 11:46 PM

I don't think they left out a lot at all. You can't have everything from the books go to the movies, LOTR took as much as any adaptation really has. They were great movies that made a lot of money.

I mean what more could you want? They were 12 hours long all together if you have the Extended Editions, won boatloads of awards, and are highly praised overall.

MHJ · 05-16-2006, 09:02 AM

The old Ralph Bakshi animated film was pretty cool, but it only adapted a small fragment of the first book. It was a hit, but sadly, no sequels were made!

ebittner · 05-16-2006, 02:54 PM

I think that the movies were as true as they could be to the books with the 3 hour time limit that they were given.

Michael311 · 05-16-2006, 08:39 PM

Yes, they did leave some big parts out, but three hours is already pushing it.

ShannonC · 05-21-2006, 11:22 PM

I think they did a pretty good job of covering the books. You can't expect an exact replica, plus I guess it might make it more interesting to watch. Usually the books are always better though IMO.

MHJ · 05-22-2006, 04:50 AM

I thought it was cool they were epic length but not dragged out to where they became dull.

Timmy · 05-23-2006, 02:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael311

Yes, they did leave some big parts out, but three hours is already pushing it.

yeah I know they could include everything. I cant even remember now which parts were not included, but at the time I remember thinking wow, thats a big thing they just skipped over.

dls07 · 06-27-2007, 05:42 AM

I have the book trilogy, but have not read it yet, but I loved the movies.
I know that they are sometimes changed for Hollywood purposes, but to makes the time longer would be too much, for me anyway.

03-14-2006, 02:55 AM	#1
Timmy Member Registered User Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 32	Lord of the Rings Do you think the LOTR movies were true to the books? They left alot out of the movies. I know they could not include everything as the movie would go forever, but I remember some parts that were huge and were left out of the movie.

03-19-2006, 01:37 PM	#2
etali Member Registered User Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 50	I think they did a good job converting it - they are good movies in their own right, and as close as you could realistically get, in my opinion. I do think the ending of the last one was overdone though. __________________ -- Etali Myth Games Gaming News and Discussions

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

03-20-2006, 11:46 PM	#3
cochise Member Registered User Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 30	I don't think they left out a lot at all. You can't have everything from the books go to the movies, LOTR took as much as any adaptation really has. They were great movies that made a lot of money. I mean what more could you want? They were 12 hours long all together if you have the Extended Editions, won boatloads of awards, and are highly praised overall.

05-16-2006, 09:02 AM	#4
MHJ Senior Member Active User Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 190	The old Ralph Bakshi animated film was pretty cool, but it only adapted a small fragment of the first book. It was a hit, but sadly, no sequels were made!

05-16-2006, 02:54 PM	#5
ebittner Junior Member Registered User Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 25	I think that the movies were as true as they could be to the books with the 3 hour time limit that they were given.

05-16-2006, 08:39 PM	#6
Michael311 Member Registered User Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 48	Yes, they did leave some big parts out, but three hours is already pushing it.

05-21-2006, 11:22 PM	#7
ShannonC Member Registered User Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 42	I think they did a pretty good job of covering the books. You can't expect an exact replica, plus I guess it might make it more interesting to watch. Usually the books are always better though IMO.

05-22-2006, 04:50 AM	#8
MHJ Senior Member Active User Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 190	I thought it was cool they were epic length but not dragged out to where they became dull.

06-27-2007, 05:42 AM	#10
dls07 Senior Member Active User Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 119	I have the book trilogy, but have not read it yet, but I loved the movies. I know that they are sometimes changed for Hollywood purposes, but to makes the time longer would be too much, for me anyway.