Welcome Guest 

Register

Forum Home » Movies Discussion » Discuss the Movies » All About Bakshi....
123
Author Topic:
~nólemë~
Fan Creations Admin & Creations Forum Moderator
Posts: 10423
Send Message
Avatar
Post Re: All About Bakshi....
on: September 02, 2012 03:14
I watched Bakshi's animated LotR yesterday for the first time, and I was impressed, and very pleasantly surprised. Compared to PJ's movies, it lacked the beautiful scenery, the music, and some of the animated characters didn't look too sightly (Barbie-like Galadriel, Viking-like Boromir...), and some of the action was rather blurred and hard to distinguish.
However, a big point in Bakshi's favour was how closely he managed to follow the original book, despite his movie (FotR plus part of TTT) being as short as about half of PJ's RotK. Much was omitted, but the plot was in places funny, swift-paced (save for the Ford sequence mentioned in one of the posts above), and without the excessive character twisting, quote assigning to other characters, and without abundant violence, which were the main things I disliked about PJ's movies. I can even say that I found Bakshi's Nazgul and fell beast scarier than PJ's, and there was something very creepy about the black face-less orcs with red eyes.
I felt relaxed watching Bakshi's movie, and enjoyed the closeness to the original despite lesser deviations: no matter how much Bakshi's red-cloaked Saruman resembles a Santa, I appreciated him 'freezing' Gandalf in place on top of Orthanc, instead of a display of martial arts. I am definitely planning to buy Bakshi's version on DVD, and wonder how well he could have done if he had the movie length available that the new LotR has. Bakshi's movie is for me a living proof that a movie based closely on the book is doable, and that it works; at least it did so for me.
I'd recommend this 1970s oldie to those who weren't happy about the script part of PJ's movies (and his characterisation of Frodo), and long for a movie that follows the book more.
---------- Image "If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." J.R.R. Tolkien - The Hobbit
DarthMI
Council Member
Posts: 8
Send Message
Post Does any other Fan feel the Bakshi Film was Darker than Jackson Trilogy?
on: May 20, 2014 06:50
I just watched earlier the much maligned 1978 animated version of The Lord of the Rings adapted by Ralph Bakshi. While it has glaring flaws, I enjoyed the movie to the point I say I LOVED it. If only Bakshi had a bigger budget, we can only imagine what the MASTERPIECE it would be.......


I still LOVE the Peter Jackson Trilogy more by a long shot. I will bluntly state its been years since I watched Jackson's Trilogy from start to end so I am recounting my memory but one area where I felt Jackson totally failed in adapting the book (and I just finished reading Tolkien's work in 1 volume compilation this weekend) was that it did not have the dark atmosphere of terror and hopelessness conveyed throughout the story (especially in the major battles like Moria and Hornberg).

I always felt with the way the heroes were massacring hordes of Orcs in Jackson's trilogy, it felt nothing but hopeless and even the Siege of Minas Tirith (which portrayed the terror Gondorian soldiers felt quite accurately to an extent) did not match the dark gloomy atmosphere of the book.

Not taking into account how seemingly superhuman the heroes were portrayed in Jackson's trilogy, I also felt Jackson's artwork was rather very bright and anything but gloomy. Don't get me wrong I just LOVE the Designs and Artworks of Jackson's vision of Middle Earth, they are just GORGEOUS but after reading the books when I look at them, esp. the Orcish designs I never get the feeling of doom and darkness the books portrayed Middle Earth as being during the War of the Rings.

This is were Ralph Bakshi's animated film reigns superior to Jackson's Trilogy. I won't deny the designs are rather crappy compared to Jackson but so the film as a whole felt dark and gloomy. Despite the bad designs, so many scenes were rather unnerving and had I watched the movie as a child I would have felt they were frightening. The sequence where the Dark Riders chased Frodo on horseback? Oh if the animation was much better, I would say it'd be absolutely terrifying. Even with the limits Bakshi had, I still felt the scene was scary and of impending doom.

While Bakshi does not capture just how terrifying Moria was in the book, he did a much better job of portraying how evil and dark the mines were than Jackson did. Minus his portrayal of Balrog (which Jackson really did a great job in his version) I felt the heroes were really in a Diabloesque style Dungeon trapped by hordes of demons and were desperately fighting their way out.

While Jackson's portrayal of the Battle of the Hornburg was much better (though Bakshi was more faithful to the book's descriptions), I felt Bakshi's version really did make the Orcs look really like creatures of the dark and so monstrous. I will admit I don't like the rotscoping the Bakshi's version used but nonetheless the way the movie portrayed the Siege felt like savage demons from darker Fantasy stories like Diablo were truly besieging the fortress.

I still LOVE Peter Jackson's Trilogy by the far more, but I really felt Peter Jackson created a much lighter more optimistic Middle Earth (despite creating such GORGEOUS artwork and architecture) and his version downplayed how dark and gloomy the book's world was like during this point of Middle Earth's history. I mean while Jackson's Dark Riders had the far better designs, I felt the way Bakshi portrayed them were scarier than Jackson's version (especially at the scene were Frodo was stabbed and later their chasing of him to Rivendell).

What do you think?Any Tolkien fan agree or disagree?

IMO Bakshi's adaptation is the MOST FAITHFUL movie interpretation of Lord of the RIngs.

Its the only one that successful captures the atmosphere of the era of the War of the Rings as a dark and seemingly hopeless one. I was so surprised how dark the books were and Bakshi was a complete success in capturing the spirit of Middle Earth and how gloomy that specific period of LOTR was.
tarcolan
Movies Moderator and General Dogsbody
Posts: 6046
Send Message
Post
on: May 20, 2014 06:53
*bump*
Hangman Helper program
Gandolorin
Council Member
Posts: 24040
Send Message
Post
on: May 21, 2014 11:23
Just read the whole thread from the beginning in 2002.
The Bakshi movie was my first contact with LotR, in early 1983. It was only (shortly) after that that I read the book in a German translation. Have re-read it at least 15 times since then (including at least two re-reads of the German translation I bought for my wife).
I now have it on DVD (original © 1978, a re-release from 2001 - we can all guess why! ).
To repeat myself from other posts, my wife and I saw FotR in the cinema the first week of January 2002. I blew a lot of fuses trying to make a mental list of where PJ had goofed compared to the book. We went to the cinema TWO DAYS later because I realized that I had practically no memory of the movie-as-it-is, only the-movie-where-it-goofed.
I don't remember when I managed to buy Bakshi's version on DVD, after PJ 1 or later. I just remember several impressions IN FAVOR of Bakshi:

Bakshi stayed closer to the book, no question in my mind whatsoever. No Aragorn being dragged over a cliff by a Warg, or the trek of the Rohirrim (with entirely other, fewer participants) even being attacked by Wargs at all on their way to Helm's Deep.

The Hobbits; they are much closer in appearance to JRRT's vision than PJ's version. Hobbits have different proportions compared to us Big Folk, and all the Hobbits in PJ's by now 5 films are much to long-legged! Also, I believe I remember that Frodo looked much closer to his 51 years in the book than does Elijah (PJ dumped the 18 years between Bilbo's farewell party and Frodo's leaving Hobbiton).

Aragorn: compared to the way PJ had Viggo play him, PJ's Aragorn is a pathetic wimp! I have always had the impression that Viggo's Aragorn as per PJ would have made a passable (but not more!) Faramir as per the book.

If I re-view it soon, I may find more reasons to fire broadsides at PJ - one of my favorite hobbies in recent times.
Image
~nólemë~
Fan Creations Admin & Creations Forum Moderator
Posts: 10423
Send Message
Avatar
Post Does any other Fan feel the Bakshi Film was Darker than Jackson Trilogy?
on: May 26, 2014 02:30
DarthMI said:
I still LOVE Peter Jackson's Trilogy by the far more, but I really felt Peter Jackson created a much lighter more optimistic Middle Earth (despite creating such GORGEOUS artwork and architecture) and his version downplayed how dark and gloomy the book's world was like during this point of Middle Earth's history. [...]

What do you think?Any Tolkien fan agree or disagree?


Yes and no. At present, I love Bakshi's LotR more than PJ's as a whole. IMO PJ's movie had much better music, details (props etc) and visuals (scenery, effects, most of the cast). But I love Bakshi's script and characterizations.
I disagree that Bakshi is darker than PJ. I find his monsters scarier (for the most part... sans the balrog, for example ), true, because they're not as over-the-top as PJ's. Less is more. But at the same time, the movie seems lighter and more innocent than PJ's (singing hobbits leaving the Shire, Sam at Amon Hen & with Gollum, the interaction of Gandalf and Saruman...). There is less visual violence.
Like I said above, for me the main strength of Bakshi's movie is in the book-respectful characterizations and to a large extent, plot: granted, it's rather obvious that by TTT, B. realized he was running out of time and condensed the plotlines drastically. But even though he left out Ithilien and Entmoot/destruction of Isengard completely, he didn't get as far from the spirit of the original books as PJ did. Gandalf and Saruman did not fight physically like common thugs. Frodo defied the Witch-king twice as he should have, and put Gollum in his place. Arwen didn't play a warrior princess at the Ford. Aragorn and Gandalf didn't give moronic battle advice to Théoden. Gimli wasn't reduced to a burping comic relief. Etc.

Bakshi is for those for whom *book* spirit, characters, morals and plot are the most important thing. But if one prefers epic vivid battles, handsome actors, lots of digital effects, constant action or at least drama, needs a love plot, and loves contemporary jokes and behaviour patterns... basically if one loved PJ's Hobbit movies, then Bakshi is a waste of time.
---------- Image "If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world." J.R.R. Tolkien - The Hobbit
hobbithole_dweller
Council Member
Posts: 166
Send Message
Avatar
Post Does any other Fan feel the Bakshi Film was Darker than Jackson Trilogy?
on: May 27, 2014 07:37
~nólemë~ said:
Bakshi is for those for whom *book* spirit, characters, morals and plot are the most important thing. But if one prefers epic vivid battles, handsome actors, lots of digital effects, constant action or at least drama, needs a love plot, and loves contemporary jokes and behaviour patterns... basically if one loved PJ's Hobbit movies, then Bakshi is a waste of time.


I agree that Bakshi's film captures the book better than the Jackson films, but I don't think it's an either/or thing. I really love both (The PJ Hobbit films, not so much) films but for different reasons .

As for the original question, I guess I would say that the Bakshi film was dark than the Jackson but only because the Bakshi film is closer to the book. The sense of despair--and the desire to fight it--is palpable in the books.
123
Members Online
Print Friendly, PDF & Email