Your favourite movie

[Ionstormsucks]

Ok, I'm gonna make this a hard one. Name one movie (or one series of movies, e.g. Star Wars) that you think is your favourite one. You can name only one - no lame excuses - you can name only one movie!

Did I mention that you can name just one movie?


I'll begin:

Pirates of the Caribbean (unless they will screw up the third part)

[Alrik Fassbauer]

Uh, oh, a difficult one ... But the one most dear to me is The Last Unicorn.

[Arhu]

Princess Bride

[Arma]

Hard pick, since I'm not that much into Movies, but I'd go for Kill Bill. Part 1 if I had to chose between the two.

[Corwin]

Singing in the Rain!!

[Sorcha Ravenlock]

Oh, dear, this is so embarrasing.
I'm torn between 'Sleepless in Seattle', 'Sound of music', and Star Wars 4 to 6...
I can't chose, I love all of them :)

[JDR13]

Good luck trying to get people to mention "only one" movie:)

Series- Star Wars

Individual movie- Way too hard to choose, maybe Pulp Fiction?

[Ionstormsucks]

Oh, by the way, you can give some explanations why you have chosen a particular movie if you like. Maybe it was a movie that influenced you most when you were young. Or maybe you were in love at the time you watched a certain movie... stuff like that.

I chose Pirates of the Caribbean mainly because it is a recent example for the fact that the adventure movie genre is not quite dead. Such movies are a rarity nowadays... a shame really.

[txa1265]

I think many of us are too old to choose just one to represent our entire life experience.

Here is a different thought: if you had a few extra hours and were to watch a movie by yourself, what DVD would you pop in *now*?

Me? Still hard to choose one, but ...

Real Genius

I have loved that movie forever.

[dteowner]

Excellent choice, Mike, but I've got to go with "16 Candles".

[txa1265]

Excellent choice, Mike, but I've got to go with "16 Candles".

Yeah, but around that time I was building a CO2 laser in a lab project with a professor ... and then it was on cable all of the time :)

[dteowner]

Ah, those were good years. "Real Genius", "Weird Science", "Revenge of the Nerds"...

Excellent choice by Arhu, too!

[curious]

@dteowner--that's my fiance's favourite too. she loves that thompson twins song. gotta love any movie that has a character name 'the donger'...

personally i agree with Mike in that picking one movie is near impossible but my favourite 80's movie (since were in that vein) is "explorers" from 1985 starring river phoenix and ethan hawke (who i don't normally like as an actor). i also enjoyed goonies as a kid, but this movie deals with space and dreams so its a match made in heaven for me. also kids building a spaceship.is infinetly cooler than building a treehouse or soapbox car, etc.

[Gorath]

My favourite movie changes all the time. Currently it´s ...

Lock, Stock & Two Smoking Barrels (Dir. Cut).

When I´m in a less chaotic mood I like ...

Once Upon a Time in the West (Dir. Cut)

[Jaz]

If it's just one, it's Star Wars. I was 11 when SW came to the theaters, and being a fan of SF movies, I was so thrilled! When dad and I went to see Star Wars, I borrowed my mother's high heels because the movie was 12+, and I thought the missing year would show. It was the first movie I saw twice within one week. My favorite in the series is ESB, though.

To follow up on dte's idea, I'd pop in and watch Final Fantasy: Advent Children now, mainly because I haven't seen the dubbed version yet. Unfortunately a friend borrowed my DVD the day after I bought it, and he still has it.

[Lucky Day]

Lawrence of Arabia, hands down.

So many great things about that movie and then its really odd that these were real historic figures in the 20th Century. I just saw General Allenbrook's statue in London when I went there. Then I saw a documentary on Iraw and how Prince Feisel was appointed its ruler.

Great scenes..Great Lines

No Prisoners! No Prisoners!

Wow, I never seen a man killed with sword before *snaps picture*

..He will help us because..it will be his pleasure.

Does it hurt?
Yes. The trick is not to care.

Nothing is written!

sometimes my friends and I would insult each other by calling one a Bedu! the other would respond with Howitat!

What music..what a cast that movie had.

So many great scenes..and there was so much left out of the stories that were reported. One time he was captured as prisoner and tied up. Lawrence escaped his bonds killed his two captors and held off a troop coming up a moutnainside by sniping at them.

Oh wait..I'm torn whether I like this or Citizen Kane better.

[txa1265]

If it's just one, it's Star Wars. I was 11 when SW came to the theaters, and being a fan of SF movies, I was so thrilled!

I skipped Star Wars as a choice since it would require either cheating or picking only one ... and I'm pretty enthusiastic about 5 of them.

Star Wars was the first movie I really remember seeing more than once in theaters (perhaps it was the first ... ), and also the first movie I paid for my own admission - I had my own money coming in (paper route) so I went a dozen times in the first year of release ...

[JemyM]

I watch over 100 movies every year from all over the world, and with that I have so much to take from that I just cannot put my finger on one single movie and say that it's the perfect candidate. If I would pick one, I would probably pick a movie that covers as many aspects of human life and behavior as possible, which would be Lord of the Rings. The twelve hour epic tale is a superb blend of cultures from all great epochs, a capture of the great human conflicts, individual heroism, failure, deceit, betrayal, greed, cultural clashes and unlikely friendships. The visuals, the audio, the storytelling techniques, the decor, the designs and the landscapes is the best humankind have to offer, worldwide. Lord of the Rings is not only a modern classic, but a testament of our time, of human history and everything we stand for, good and bad.

However, it's still not the movie which effected my life the most. That's probably Star Wars, which similar to LoTR captures many different cultures and aspects of humans and human behavior, although perhaps at a simpler level. Star Wars captures our world on a more political level, as well as the human conflict in any modern man, the conflict between thoose of your duty, cultural reponsibilities and thoose of your own inner feelings.

[JDR13]

@txa1265, So which SW are you NOT enthusiastic about? I'm guessing TPM.

@JemyM, LOTR was an epic movie series, but it pales in comparison to the books. Peter Jackson really tarnished some of the scenes by adding his own little ideas to them.

[JemyM]

@JemyM, LOTR was an epic movie series, but it pales in comparison to the books. Peter Jackson really tarnished some of the scenes by adding his own little ideas to them.

While I miss a few scenes, the changed role of the women improved the tale.

[Arhu]

Regarding LotR, in terms of the amount of enjoyment I got out of it, I found the movies much better than the books.

I chose Princess Bride, by the way, because it has, like, everything. And it's timeless. Lots of movies loose something when they get older or when you watch them too often. This one, I believe, doesn't.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

The second I would've said was THe Dark Crystal.

Full of creativity.

Not story-wise, but with the whole layout.

[txa1265]

@txa1265, So which SW are you NOT enthusiastic about? I'm guessing TPM.
Yeah, I don't find myself wanting to watch it too much ... great lightsaber scenes, some nice Ewan McGregor stuff, but too much pod-racing. I really like the other 5.

@JemyM, LOTR was an epic movie series, but it pales in comparison to the books. Peter Jackson really tarnished some of the scenes by adding his own little ideas to them.
I liked the movies quite a bit, and also the books, but the thing to remember was that the books were not originally written as 'high fantasy fiction' we're used to reading now but more of a melding of academics and fantasy, creating loads of lore and almost a whole backstory of the realm. As such the pacing of 'big boom' moviemaking is certain to be more interesting.

But as much as I like the movies, I think 10 years from now they will not have the same shine in viewers eyes ... we're not talking Titanic-style opinion reversal here, just some loss of esteem.

[Jaz]

@txa: my least favorite SW movie is AotC. It felt jumbled, and there was way too much mushy romance. Don't get me wrong, I like romance when I care about a character, but in this movie I didn't feel attached or attracted to either participant. The clones were great, but they didn't have enough screentime for my taste.

[MudsAnimalFriend]

Once Upon a Time in the West (Dir. Cut)
Harmonica man: Frank?
Leader of three thugs: Frank sent us.
Harmonica man: Did you bring a horse for me?
Leader: (laughs) Well now, looks like we're one horse shy.
Hamrmonica man: You brought two too many.

BLAM, BLAM, BLAM, BLAM (thugs drop dead)



Aguirre, der Zorn Gottes (1972)
Meglomanic Conquistador, Don Lope de Aguirre, leads a doomed expedition up the Amazon in search of El Dorado. Notable for mesmerising opening and closing scenes.

Delicatessen (1991)
A blacker than a lump of coal dipped in tar and rolled in soot comedy. The French really will eat anything.

Metropolis (1927)
Ground breaking and influential German expressionist sci-fi (which is something you don’t see every day). The restored version available on DVD features a very 80's soundtrack which, bizarrely enough, actually suits the movie.

[txa1265]

Metropolis (1927)
Ground breaking and influential German expressionist sci-fi (which is something you don’t see every day). The restored version available on DVD features a very 80's soundtrack which, bizarrely enough, actually suits the movie.

Get the more recent edition with really restored stuff - it goes back to the original even better. I made my family sit through this and they actually enjoyed it quite a bit. Silent films are quite visually demanding, actually.

[titus]

My all time favorite: He-man master of the Universe. great action movie
it was an great cartoon and actionfigure.
Every time I was ill I watched that film, and IO have been ill a lot in my younger years.
An other great Movie, never seen on tv anymore: labyrinth with david bowie
and don't forget WILLOW, so funny :d

[Alrik Fassbauer]

It felt jumbled, and there was way too much mushy romance.

Depends on how you see Star wars.

To many, this is simply an action movie of some sorts, be me, I belong to the people who saw in Star Wars some kind of fairy tale.

The fairy tale aspect of Star wars has always been there, but sometimes below heaps of Sci-Fi stuff. This is more & more the case with the modern novels.

If you *really* want to get a glimpse on how the fairy-tale-aspect in SW was originally conceived, then buy the spin-off book "Splinter of the Mind's Eye" by Alan Dean Foster.

[curious]

i also didn't like phantom menace either (it really did seem like the pod racing was 1/3 of the movie). and since i was never a huge fan of star wars i haven't seen the others. i enjoyed the 'camp' feel of the first 3 and the new ones just didn't have that for me. i think he makes a much better writer than director. willow was wonderful as are the indiana jones movies. captain eo was better than star tours though. did anyone ever see thx-1138? now that was a wierd movie, that a friend made me watch! not good or bad just not very comprehensible watching it once.

[Jaz]

@Alrik: I like fairy tales, but the Jedi/Force thing is the aspect of Star Wars I like the least. It didn't appeal to me when I was a child, and I'm still indifferent today. I own Splinter of the Minds Eye (and several shelves filled with other Star Wars novels), but the older I get, the less appealing they seem. A few years ago I decided to stop reading SW novels altogether (after the horrible Traitor - some say it's the best SW novel ever), but then a friend forced Hard Contact on me. It's my favorite SW novel to this day, and it even made me buy the Republic Commando game :biggrin:.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

Personally, I stopped readint with Vector Prime - I decided that everything following that in the timeline is not "my" SW universe.

But everything before that - I might still be happy to read. :)

I also have two long filled shelves with SW novels ;) and Hard Contact is a very nice book, I must agree. Especially because of the anti-hero. :)

If you want to, I can give you a few links to self-written fan fiction stories. :)
They are "non-action", by the way. ;)

[txa1265]

the Jedi/Force thing is the aspect of Star Wars I like the least.
I absolutely love it. It is actually central to how I approach RPG's as well - I play a Paladin / Light Jedi ;)

but then a friend forced Hard Contact on me. It's my favorite SW novel to this day, and it even made me buy the Republic Commando game :biggrin:.
I love it as well, because it does a great job of detailing squad based combat ... Triple Zero didn't grab me like that, though. Oh, and I loved the game - not 'great' but a load of fun.

Personally, I stopped readint with Vector Prime - I decided that everything following that in the timeline is not "my" SW universe.
I like some of the books - Thrawn, of course, as well as I, Jedi and a few others I can't recall ... but the whole NJO triggers a NFW reaction in me ...

[Arhu]

I love it as well, because it does a great job of detailing squad based combat ... Triple Zero didn't grab me like that, though. Oh, and I loved the game - not 'great' but a load of fun.
Mm, this is really getting off-topic but.. speaking of tactics, do you guys know the book "Ender's Game"? Made me want to play some RTS.. and I don't like RTS. ;)

[Jaz]

@txa: I always play good characters, too, but I cannot bring myself to like the Force user visual style ;). Triple Zero was a decent book, but just not as good as HC with its mayfly moment.
@Alrik: I don't think I read your fanfics yet, so please point me towards them :). I don't prefer action over character development, anyway!

On a side note, was there a movie that was totally different from what you expected when you went to the cinema? If so, were you surprised in a positive or a negative way?

[Icefire]

Easy choice: American Graffitti. The first movie I remember seeing in the theater. SO many memories with that film.

[txa1265]

On a side note, was there a movie that was totally different from what you expected when you went to the cinema? If so, were you surprised in a positive or a negative way?

A few I think of right away:
- Open Season - we had my son's 10th birthday at a 'dinner theater' with 15 of his friends, and this was the selection. I expected absolute crap based on the trailer, and it was actually pretty decent.
- Bridge to Terabithia - same deal as above, but for my younger son's 9th a month ago ... we'd read the book and I didn't think they would deliver - but they did!
- Night at the Museum - family movie night because my younger son was having a 'sleep deprivation EEG' so we needed to be up late. Movie occupies a few hours, sounds great! Again, low expectations, laughed the whole time.

Here is another:
- The Cook, The Thief, His Wife and Her Lover ... I don't know that I could be prepared for that ... and done so artfully ...

[magerette]

Formative years : Fort Apache/Rio Bravo

Adult years: Little Big Man

Over the Hill Years: Lonesome Dove

Westerns, to a small nature loving child trapped in the slums of Chicago, were a fairytale-land of amazing promise: the perfect, flamboyant horses confidantly ridden, the panoramic mountains and skies, the exotic bare bones of a living desert-- not to mention Good vs, Evil, so clearcut, and of course, John Wayne never died, (except in The Alamo, causing many youthful tears)-- but with age comes resignation, so the later titles evoke that melancholy for the past that never was...and a more cynical view of Black and White Hats. :)

[Ionstormsucks]

I chose Princess Bride, by the way, because it has, like, everything. And it's timeless. Lots of movies loose something when they get older or when you watch them too often. This one, I believe, doesn't.

Very good explanation... and how true. I love Princess Bride.

When it comes to Star Wars I can only say that I loved the first 3 movies but would rather forget the later ones. They somehow screwed up Star Wars for me. And I think they were just not necessary.

[JDR13]

I can't understand how anyone who read LOTR could think the movies were better than the books. Jackson tried to add way too much humor, and the constant crying and hugging between Hobbits was just annoying.

What really killed it for me was how he portrayed the Battle of the Pelennor Fields in Return of the King. One of the grandest battles ever described on paper. He wasn't satisfied with the epic portrayal in the novel, he had to add an army of floating green phantoms that looked like something out of a Disney movie.

[txa1265]

... which is part of why I don't think in 10 years time they will be held in such grand regard ...

[Corwin]

Give the poor man a break, it was made in NZ which can explain a great many things!! :)

[gaboru93]

Star Wars
2Fast2Furious
er... Harry Potter?:beam:

[xSamhainx]

impossible question for me. I tried once, and it took me hours.

The aforementioned 16 Candles and Weird Science do definitely rank very high tho if we are talking sheer volume, I think me and my brother and friends watched both of those at least once a week for quite a while! They are very good movies too as well, I'm snickering just thinking about Wyatt's asshole brother, Chet, or Long Duck Dong passed out on the front lawn. Might have to give them another look here pretty soon.

[Arhu]

I can't understand how anyone who read LOTR could think the movies were better than the books.

Easy - I was spoiled because I had read other fantasy books, which were obviously inspired by Tolkien's work, before I eventually got to LotR. When I did read LotR, the story was ok but not "special", plus I found Tolkien's language a bit.. slow. I enjoyed the Wheel of Time much more, for example (minus the first book and some of the last ones).

I realize that LotR was the forefather of probably all High Fantasy as we know it today and I acknowledge the vast universe that Tolkien has created. Still, the books didn't work for me. In comes the Peter Jackson's version, which I liked a lot for the simple fact that it was the biggest and greatest fantasy movie to date and there hasn't been anything like it before in terms of sheer scope.

I know someone who has been reading LotR annually for who knows how many years, I believe he gets a bit more out of it through every reading or uncovers another hidden truth. I can even see how that's possible, although I couldn't and wouldn't want to do it myself. If I recall correctly he hated the things Peter Jackson changed in the movie, and that's something I will never understand. How someone can believe so devoutly that a movie adaption has to be or could be exactly like the original book. That can't and will never happen. Even Tolkien said as much if I'm not mistaken.

[Jaz]

I know someone who has been reading LotR annually for who knows how many years, I believe he gets a bit more out of it through every reading or uncovers another hidden truth. I can even see how that's possible, although I couldn't and wouldn't want to do it myself.This only happened to me with Greenaway's movie 'The Draughtman's Contract'. Each time I saw it, I thought I had come soooo close to understanding what it was about, only to discover something new the next time I saw it.

[magerette]

Easy - I was spoiled because I had read other fantasy books, which were obviously inspired by Tolkien's work, before I eventually got to LotR. When I did read LotR, the story was ok but not "special", plus I found Tolkien's language a bit.. slow. .

I was lucky enough to read Tolkein in the 60's--a few of the "brainy' kids( a pre-geek term) in high school were passing it around. I still re-read it every few years, but it's very much a child of it's time (pre- & WWII Britain) when the advantages of a classical education and the formalities they engender were more commonplace. Back then, if you had a higher education, you learned Greek and Latin and traded quips as a matter of course. The amazing thing about the books is that they are able to transcend these conventions and speak to such an enormous audience.

I enjoyed the films as well, but they'll never be the same to me --like any thing you really love and think is perfect, it's hard to accept someone else altering it to "improve" it, which in this case meant to popularize and capitalize on the original.
To me the films missed a lot of the real emotional cargo of the books and substituted a rather saccharine and schmaltzy rendition of relationships. But Golem was absolutely perfect! :)

[JDR13]

[QUOTE=magerette;23833]
I enjoyed the films as well, but they'll never be the same to me --like any thing you really love and think is perfect, it's hard to accept someone else altering it to "improve" it, which in this case meant to popularize and capitalize on the original.
To me the films missed a lot of the real emotional cargo of the books and substituted a rather saccharine and schmaltzy rendition of relationships. QUOTE]


I agree 100%

[Ionstormsucks]

I still re-read it every few years, but it's very much a child of it's time (pre- & WWII Britain) when the advantages of a classical education and the formalities they engender were more commonplace. Back then, if you had a higher education, you learned Greek and Latin and traded quips as a matter of course. The amazing thing about the books is that they are able to transcend these conventions and speak to such an enormous audience.


I'm one of the persons that is still reading Tolkien once in a while and everytime I read it, it becomes clear to me why this book was so damn successful. It's not only a nice story it's also flawless from a technical point of view. Here is someone at work who could actually write, in contrast to the many R.A. Salvatores out there who produce mere fast-food fantasy.
I liked the movies, they are a nice interpretation of Tolkien's books - but they are just that really. The main problem that Jackson was facing was that he was competing with the ultimate teller of fantasy tales, a competition which he could only lose.

[Corwin]

Plus, he had to fit 3 LONG books into the movies. Think about it, it takes several hours to read each book, but the movies have to be shorter. What to cut?? I think he did an excellent job!!

[Alrik Fassbauer]

Here is someone at work who could actually write

Personally, I don't believe Tolkien himself would've said that about his works. ;)
(Just read the foreword of LOTR to see what I mean.)

For me, the books were and always are a totally different beast than the movies.
I regard Mr. Jackson's attempt as a fully recognized artistic "version" of the books, but it is - for my personal taste - nowhere near the books.

The main point, which the movies don't transporet at all, but are always there in all of his works of Middle Earth, is the grief and deep, deep, deep sorrow of the High Elves that they have to leave Middle Earth behind. We simply cannot feel this kind of sorrow, because we are mortal beinhs. Elves, however, are basically immortal. So their sorrow is with them as long as they live - and that is basicaly forever.

The Loss of the Two Trees, the Loss of Beleriand, the Loss of the Silmarils, the Loss of Elrond about his brother, Elros, the Loss of Arwen, daughter of Elrond ... the list goes on forever.

So, their lives is spoiled forever. They might live in peace and harmony on their "blesses continent", but the fgrief and sorrow is always there, deep at heart.

Lothlorien acts like kind of a time capsule, keeping all that was dear to the High Elves in a perfect, peaceful form.
With the waning might of the ring responsible for this, the world turned grey for them. All colours, taste and hamonies - vanished. So, the world became dull for them. They decided to leave.

This is the deepest theme I can find in the novels. The loss, and the grief and sorrow over it. This isn't being shown in the movies at all.

To me, the movies are rather like a *very* well made "joyride". The pictures are great, but Mr. Jackson decided to put the "action" point of view rather into the foreground.

That's my personal impression.

I plan to read the other books as well, but they are not too easy to get here - and they are expensive.

But nevertheless : Even the Unfinished Tales are a great read !

From what I've learned and read, I think/believe the main reason to build up this world was for Tolkien the image of a phantastic world. In several early writings the picture appears of "a wind going like waves through the plants of a field", - a thing which i believe must struck him very, very deeply. What, if this hadn't been the wuind, but instead creatures we simply cannot see ? Fairies, Dwarves, Elves, Hobbits even ? What, if this world would be inhabited by sentinent, thinking beings which are similar to us humans, but never there at all ?

I have once tried to put this feeling into words - long before I read the "Unfinished Tales".
This poem was written rather for the music of a song called "Sitting Down here" by one "Lene Marlin".

Faeries In The Sunshine

Dedicated to the Tolkiens (Christopher & J.R.R.) and
the makers of The Dark Crystal.


Walking across the meadow,
I begin wondering...

Could it be,
That there is more than ONE Light ?
Could it be
That there is more than we can see ?
Could it be
That there is more than we imagine ?
Could it be
That there is more than we know ?

(And) Then,
I begin wondering, dreaming
Siting down,
Closing my eyes...


Dancing Faeries, Out of the Shadows,
Walking homewards, search for Truth,
Dancing Faeries, not seen in the sunlight,
At least not by human eyes...

Dancing Faeries, In the Shadows,
Hiding themselves before human sight,
Dancing Faeries, In the Shadows,
Forever dancing, out of human sight...


Opening my eyes, I see nothing but sunlight,
Green, green trees, providing me shadows,
But I can imagine glorious laughter,
At someone (,) who cannot see
them...

Closing my eyes again, I try to see,
The sunlight warms my face, but I look into the shadows
Trying to see them (only) with cclosed eyes
Maybe that's the only way...


(Well, and there are)
Dancing Faeries, Out in the Shadows,
Hiding themselves fro human sight,
Dancing Faeries, lurking around me,
Making unheard laughter, at someone who can't see...

(And there are)
Dancing Faeries, out (of) (there) in the shadows
Knowing that they cannot be seen,
Dancing Faeries, Out of the Shadows,
Mimicking a bird or a tree...


Dancing Faeries, In the Shadows,
Unwilling (yet) to let themselves to be seen,
We all know what they have been,

Dancing Faeries, Out of the Shadows,
Dancing and floating in the air,
Is there ever any chance to see them ?


Dancing Faeries in the Shadows
Unwilling to let themselves to be seen,
Dancing Faeries, in the Shadows,
Do we all know, what they have been ?

Dancing Faeries, In the Sunlight,
We won't ever see them there,
Dancing Faeries, In the Sunlight,
Do we really know how to see ?

[Fade.]



Additional verse.

Dancing Faeries Out in the Shadows
They do not allow themselves to be seen,
Dancing Faeries Out in the Shadows
Do we really look at what we can see ?

Dancing Faeries There in the Shadows
Laughing at the simple human side
Dancing Faeries There in the Shadows
Do we really know what we can see ?


Dancing Faeries Out in the Shadows
Enchantments of Lightning We cannot see
Dancing Faeries Out in the Shadows
(I guess) only a blind one really could see...

Dancing Faeries Out Of The Shadows
Their essence is unreachable for us
Dancing Faeries Out In The Shadows
They're living their own world distinct from us...

(C) Alrik Fassbauer

[Ionstormsucks]

Personally, I don't believe Tolkien himself would've said that about his works. ;)
(Just read the foreword of LOTR to see what I mean.)


I've read Tolkien's foreword to LOTR... more than once. Unfortunately Tolkien was very often quite wrong when it comes to the perception of his own works - he also believed that barely anyone would be interested in LOTR (probaly it's British understatement).
One should also not forget that newer literary theories attribute way more responsibilities to the reader than it was usual at the time LOTR was published. Personally I'm not a big fan of the reader-response theory and therefore agree with much of what Tolkien explains in his foreword to LOTR. But I'm also aware that not everyone does, or has to.
One should also not forget that Tolkiens works, first and foremost LOTR, is the only true fantasy novel that is read in an academic context on a constant basis. I know of no other work that could be attributed to the genre of fantasy (as we know it today) could usually be found on English literature reading lists (with exceptions of course).

I have to admit that I am not overly interested in Tolkiens other works - The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings are without doubt his masterpieces. I'm also not very much interested in the world that Tolkien wanted to create. What I'm interested in are well-written novels, and at least from my point of view LOTR is one...

[Alrik Fassbauer]

Well, I also had several misconceptions about myself in the past - being too ugly and uninteresting was only one of them.

So I can see why Tolkien might's written this. He simply didn't see it. (The potential.)

I wouldn't call myself great, even if I was a top-seller in terms of books, music or whatever. I'm just me.

[JDR13]

[QUOTE=Ionstormsucks;24113]
I have to admit that I am not overly interested in Tolkiens other works - The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings are without doubt his masterpieces.
QUOTE]


You've obviously never read "The Silmarillion."

[Corwin]

Actually, some of C.S. Lewis' works are on Lit lists, but then he and the big T were close friends!!

[Ionstormsucks]

[QUOTE=Ionstormsucks;24113]
I have to admit that I am not overly interested in Tolkiens other works - The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings are without doubt his masterpieces.
QUOTE]


You've obviously never read "The Silmarillion."

I've read The Silmarillion. And I don't think it's as gripping as The Lord of the Rings. You know, there are reasons why everyone knows The Lord of the Rings, but comparably few people are as enthusiastic about The Silmarillion. It's great that you like it so much, but the overwhelming majority of readers just does not agree with you.
Without doubt the Silmarillion is well written, but here it is the story that is just not as fascinating as that of The Lord of the Rings. Just think about how many other fantasy novels are modeled directly after The Lord of the Rings...

[magerette]

Actually, some of C.S. Lewis' works are on Lit lists, but then he and the big T were close friends!!

I've often thought some of his books would make a great rpg--the Out of the Silent Planet/Perelandra/That Hideous Strength trilogy for instance.

[Corwin]

How about a game set in Narnia?

[txa1265]

How about a game set in Narnia?


Been there, done that (http://www.gamerdad.com/detail.cfm?itemID=3008) ... how about a *good* and *original* game that integrates the themes of the Narnia universe ... that I could get behind ;)

[JDR13]

I've read The Silmarillion. And I don't think it's as gripping as The Lord of the Rings. You know, there are reasons why everyone knows The Lord of the Rings, but comparably few people are as enthusiastic about The Silmarillion. It's great that you like it so much, but the overwhelming majority of readers just does not agree with you.
Without doubt the Silmarillion is well written, but here it is the story that is just not as fascinating as that of The Lord of the Rings. Just think about how many other fantasy novels are modeled directly after The Lord of the Rings...

Actually, the Simarillion was written well before The Lord of the Rings and all the mythology in that series: Orcs, Balrogs, etc, was born from that book. I don't doubt that more people know of LOTR because The Simarillion is not an easy book to read. While LOTR tells a fantastic story that is easy to get involved in, The Simarillion reads more like a collection of history lessons that only hardcore fantasy fiction fans can fully appreciate.

As far as how many other fantasy novels were modeled directly after LOTR, I can't think of any. What other novel tells the story of 4 Hobbits, 1 Dwarf, 1 Elf, 2 Men, and 1 Maia setting off on a quest to destroy a ring by throwing it into a volcano?

[Khass]

Regarding the whole Tolkien debate (and going slightly off-topic), if Peter Jackson would ever make a movie after Nan i Hin Hurin (Children of Hurin), I'd wander the streets preaching his name. He may not capture the feelings of it entirely, but it's much more obvious than in LotR, so he'll probably (or definately) make it a key element of the movie.

[Ionstormsucks]

Actually, the Simarillion was written well before The Lord of the Rings and all the mythology in that series: Orcs, Balrogs, etc, was born from that book. I don't doubt that more people know of LOTR because The Simarillion is not an easy book to read. While LOTR tells a fantastic story that is easy to get involved in, The Simarillion reads more like a collection of history lessons that only hardcore fantasy fiction fans can fully appreciate.

That's why I spoke of LOTR as Tolkien's masterpiece. I think it's great that hardcore Tolkien fans enjoy books like the Silmarillion, but personally I consider it as negligible in terms of literary criticism. It might be important for those deeply interested in Middle Earth, but for the average reader it is fairly unimportant.
Personally, I'm not interested in the Silmarillion (and the lost tales, etc.) because I'm not overly interested in Tolkien lore. I'm interested in well-written novels.


As far as how many other fantasy novels were modeled directly after LOTR, I can't think of any. What other novel tells the story of 4 Hobbits, 1 Dwarf, 1 Elf, 2 Men, and 1 Maia setting off on a quest to destroy a ring by throwing it into a volcano?
I said modeled after LOTR, I wasn't talking about an exact copy. A significant number of fantasy books feature an abstract evil that has to be destroyed by a party of people, often consisting of members of different races. Isn't the the destruction of a mighty and magic artefact not also a well established trademark in fantasy? A companionship that has to travel long distances to reach a certain destination? Look at the "forces of evil" that LOTR features - isn't it obvious that orcs and the like have become the archetypical bad guys in fantasy novels? There are many more aspects that one could mention (the way, evil is protrayed, etc.)

I think it's safe to say that Tolkien laid down a pattern for fantasy (novels ans well as other media - just think about rpgs) that is prevalent nowadays.

[JDR13]

Then maybe you meant to say "influenced", and not "modeled directly" correct?

Also, when you say "isn't it obvious that orcs and the like have become the archetypical bad guys in fantasy novels?" I agree 100%, but that's an example of things that were born in the Simarillion not LOTR, whether people realize it or not.

Let's get back on topic please.

[MudsAnimalFriend]

Been there, done that (http://www.gamerdad.com/detail.cfm?itemID=3008) ... how about a *good* and *original* game that integrates the themes of the Narnia universe ... that I could get behind ;)
An English Anglican borderline Roman Catholic RPG?! The Narnia books are very specifically for children containing distinctly children’s themes. They’re superb books, but what possible interest do they hold for adults beyond nostalgia?

I think it's safe to say that Tolkien laid down a pattern for fantasy (novels ans well as other media - just think about rpgs) that is prevalent nowadays.
Well, it’s safer to say that Tolkien spawned legions of imitators whom have so little understanding of his medium that they can't even be qualified as part of it. The ‘fantasy’ genre is utterly intellectually bankrupt.

[Corwin]

Nostalgia sells!! :)

[Ionstormsucks]

Also, when you say "isn't it obvious that orcs and the like have become the archetypical bad guys in fantasy novels?" I agree 100%, but that's an example of things that were born in the Simarillion not LOTR, whether people realize it or not.


Who claimed otherwise?

[bjon045]

I think Orcs were used far before the Simarillion, in ancient persian tales like Arabian Nights and by William Blake for example.

Edit: My favourite movie would probably be Alien, I love how it blended the horror and sci-fi genres together.

[Ionstormsucks]

I think Orcs were used far before the Simarillion, in ancient persian tales like Arabian Nights and by William Blake for example.

Undoubtly several literary aspects in LOTR were used by other authors before Tolkien. There is a widely accepted literary theory that everything has at some point already been writen. Authors do usualy not only write, they also read - therefore it is only natural that they are influenced by other authors and their ideas. And if you dig deep enough you'll very often end up with one of the greek classics anyway. They cover most of the basic motifs that even modern novels feature - believe it or not.
I'm not an expert on Tolkien, but I would guess that he was heavily influenced by British folklore. Also, if you think about themes like travelling, adventure, dragons, etc. that's certainly nothing new (just think about the European ballads of the Middle ages - knights, war, legends, supernatural, combat, adventure, voyage - it's all in there), but Tolkien put it into a certain context that heavily influenced today's fantasy. There certainly were some other authors as well, but I guess Tolkien is just the best known of them.

I've chosen the example of orcs because you can find them in a lot of fantasy novels by various authors nowadays, usually being rather primitive grunts serving a greater evil. And while it is safe to assume that the overwhelming part of these modern fantasy authors has read Tolkien, it is questionable if they have read Blake or ancient Persian Tales.

[JDR13]

Uh.......topic was favorite movie?

[Corwin]

Yes, but this IS the OFF topic forum!! :biggrin: