Writer's Block: Wait, that's not how it happened

[choroneko]

[Error: unknown template qotd]
LORD OF THE RINGS LORD OF THE RINGS LORD OF THE FUCKING RINGS

peter jackson what the hell did you do to the two towers
elves don't belong in rohan
they did not come to helm's deep
the only elf there for that battle was legolas
gtfo
also that one elf they made a big deal of killing off
DOESN'T DIE IN THE BOOKS K THX
he lives on just fine and goes to the west with galadriel
BECAUSE HE WAS NEVER AT HELM'S DEEP

i mean i can understand, like, leaving out tom bombadil in fellowship of the ring
he's fucking weird.
but just... the hell is wrong with you when you worked on the two towers
i remember there being some images of arwen in some earlier versions of the script being at helm's deep too
no no no. arwen is not some battle-elfwoman.
it was weird enough that you had arwen save frodo from the ringwraiths in fellowship
i assume it was for not having some dude who only showed up once
sry glorfindel...


well, anyway, i do admit that despite some oddities, fellowship of the ring and return of the king were adapted fairly well.
it's just the two towers that sticks out. badly.
people who haven't read the books probably don't notice or care about the changes...



and finally, off-topic:
YEAH YOU GUYS ON PLURK WERE RIGHT ;O;
P3P'S SHIPPING TODAY
GAMESTOP WILL GET IT TOMORROW
/cries

Comments

I think Peter Jackson did a very good job with The Lord of the Rings

[oncenefarious.livejournal.com]

We all know it wasn't exactly the same, but he adapted it very well. I think having another Alliance of Men and Elves (after the "Last" Alliance against Sauron) was a nice and surprising touch. Haldir (at Helm's Deep and in Caras Galadhon) existed as a link between the elves and men that may not have existed so clearly in the books. Peter Jackson did a good job of turning the trilogy -- which was long, complex, and not easy to read for most people -- into a set of movies that could be easily followed and understood, but he still kept very well to the general feel of The Lord of the Rings. There isn't enough time in a movie to introduce all those extra characters, like Glorfindel, and Elrond's sons in the Paths of the Dead, etc. Considering the movies were each almost four hours long anyway, explaining the plot elements that Peter Jackson chose to change would have made it impossibly long and difficult to understand. If people who haven't read the books don't notice the abnormalities, then that means it WAS adapted well and seamlessly.

Just something I thought you should consider.

He did mess up Boromir and Faramir, though.

Re: I think Peter Jackson did a very good job with The Lord of the Rings

[tategamiwolf.livejournal.com]

I'm not saying he did horribly, I just thought that The Two Towers was done rather oddly.

I suppose you have a point about another Alliance being a good thing, but part of me is just screaming "THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN!!"

But, yeah, if people enjoyed it and didn't notice any issues, then it succeeds as a movie.

I enjoyed the movies, too. I just like the books far more.

Oh, Faramir... so much of that made no sense. :/

[queenofdueljean.livejournal.com]

There were books? Oh, you mean like those lame tie-in books like the Bayformers novels and those harry potter things?

[tategamiwolf.livejournal.com]

...


I'm not replying to that. Seriously.

[queenofdueljean.livejournal.com]

[tategamiwolf.livejournal.com]

:|