TV/Movies Megathread

[frunk]

What appealed to me about Dune when I first read it was the originality and completeness of the universe he had imagined.  I read it again maybe five years back and definitely didn't get the same rush.

Agree with Beeb about the exponential decline in quality of the series.  Cliff edge after #3 I'd say.

2 is ok, 3 is good, #4 is awful, 5 and 6 are ok, the posthumous books are hot garbage.

[Admiral Yi]

Here's one troubling aspect of the Duniverse:

If Navigators need spice to travel faster than light, how did they first get to Arakeen? 

[The Minsky Moment]

Presumably Arakeen was discovered before the Jihad proscribed the use of computers. The Navigators are needed because you can't use machines to make the calculations for faster than light travel.

[dps]

What appealed to me about Dune when I first read it was the originality and completeness of the universe he had imagined.

Oh, yeah, I agree with you and BB--the world building is first-rate, and quite original.  And I want to stress again that while I say I think it's over-rated, I still think it's very good.  Good enough that I was eager to read the 2nd book.  After that, though, I wasn't all that interested in reading the 3rd book.

[Tonitrus]

What about the cheesy deal where Merry and Pippin have to trick the Ents into attacking Saruman?

I mean don't get me wrong, I loved that trilogy but yeah Jackson's attempts to improvise new stuff was a little rough...and obviously that was a warning of things to come in The Hobbit.

Pretty much every time the movies deviated from the book, the change was a disaster.  The army of the dead making the whole charge of the Rohirrim and the death of Theoden completely pointless (the battle would have gone the same way of the whole nation of Rohan had just stayed in bed that morning), the silly walking around on piles of skulls, the even dumber Legolas slays the Oliphant thing (worst setup to a wisecrack ever), etc.

The LOTR movies could easily have accommodated all the good cut scenes by eliminating all the dumb added stuff.  The Hobbit movies could have been greatly improved by eliminating every scene without Smaug.

For some reason, the he deviation that irked me the most was the Mouth of Sauron scene.

This is still the definitive portrayal....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVgZDcUQPEY

[grumbler]

For some reason, the he deviation that irked me the most was the Mouth of Sauron scene.

This is still the definitive portrayal....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVgZDcUQPEY

Though that movie irked me as well because, like Jackson, the director completely missed the point that the reason the armies of the West marched on the Black Gate was to convince Sauron that Aragorn had the ring, and that Sauron to regain it by emptying his lands, surrounding Aragorn's army, and taking it from his corpse.  That's why Aragorn challenged Sauron by looking in the Planintir, that's why he took the Paths of the Dead (because summoning an army of the dead is something you could do with the Ring), etc.  Sauron "knew" where the ring was, and so was blind to Frodo's mission.

Without the knowledge of that strategy, Aragorn's march looks like idiocy. His army couldn't threaten Sauron, and Sauron could just close the Black Gate and wait for hunger to send Aragorn's army home.

[Threviel]

Did they miss the point or did they fail to find a way to make the point a good movie at the same time? I have a hard time believing that Jackson missed very many points, I think he just didn't know how to weave them into his vision of the film. But I haven't watched all the extras, perhaps he missed a lot of points.

One extra bit I have watched is when Jackson discusses the weapon that the witch king wields at Pelennor. He wanted it bigger and bigger and bigger. Something in the way he told the story irked me to no end, it was like a puerile kid wanting totally absurd unrealistic things to be cool.

What he did good was the majority of the long walk of Frodo and Sam. The book can be a bit long-winded, but the film version is less boring.

[Tonitrus]

...wanting totally absurd unrealistic things to be cool.

I think that is just about all of it.

His version of the scene with the Mouth of Sauron irked me because they made him from a normal man to some grotesque freak.  The only plausible reason was that a freak was "cooler".

And just the same with having Aragorn decapitate him.

[Threviel]

...wanting totally absurd unrealistic things to be cool.

I think that is just about all of it.

His version of the scene with the Mouth of Sauron irked me because they made him from a normal man to some grotesque freak.  The only plausible reason was that a freak was "cooler".

And just the same with having Aragorn decapitate him.

Yes, Aragorn would never harm an envoy, totally out of character. But that probably told us something storywise that Jackson wanted to tell. The freak thing would have been far more fearsome if the Mouth of Sauron was replaced by some good looking Dûnedain that acted in a fearsome manner. Or something like that. But Jackson was foremost a horror-movie director back then IIRC, it probably felt natural to use more direct story-telling.

[viper37]

I liked that scene.  It reminded us that heroes aren't perfect, and things can't get on their nerves too.

[Oexmelin]

I think that is just about all of it.

His version of the scene with the Mouth of Sauron irked me because they made him from a normal man to some grotesque freak.  The only plausible reason was that a freak was "cooler".

And just the same with having Aragorn decapitate him.

Yep. Same with Gandalf basically hitting Denethor with his staff (more or less killing him), or Aragorn threatening the King of the Dead with his sword. It's that disease of wanting characters to appear "badass" with material that was entirely created against such characterization.

Not a fan of Theoden's exorcism either, or Sauron's searchlight. Subtlety would have paid more there.

[grumbler]

...Not a fan of Theoden's exorcism either...

I had put that scene entirely out of my mind (along with most of the second movie). 

Thanks for reminding me. 

[dps]

It's that disease of wanting characters to appear "badass" with material that was entirely created against such characterization.

I think that's an excellent summation of a lot of what's wrong with many modern movies and TV shows.

[The Larch]

Jackson's LOTR films are indubitably iconic and almost the perfect adaptation (first one is the best in this regard, IMO), some changes are ok others less so but let's accept them for the sake of adaptation to cinema. Then there are those super cringeworthy and completely pointless parts that make you want to bash your head against a wall. Gimli as comic relief, ninja Legolas, Theoden's "exorcism", and so on and so forth.

[Threviel]

With you there. All six movies dropped in quality successively, the fist one was excellent and then the second and third dropped somewhat, but still good. First Bilbo was again a drop in quality, but still ok, and then there was a sharp drop and the last two were just a retarded crapfest.