Welcome Guest 

Register

Forum Home » Movies Discussion » Discuss the Movies » Movie first, book afterwards?
Author Topic:
Fattybolger
Council Member
Posts: 111
Send Message
Avatar
Post Movie first, book afterwards?
on: February 18, 2006 03:34
I'd be interested in knowing the reactions of people who got to know LoTR from the movie, and then went on to read the books. Were you shocked/surprised/delighted/disappointed by the books? Did you find them very different from the movie, and if so, which version did you eventually decide you preferred?

[Edited on 18/2/2006 by Fattybolger]
Brethil
Council Member
Posts: 53
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: February 18, 2006 07:50
woo, first post...I read the books after i saw the film but i started when the fellowship was in the cinema so i didnt' really know it and by the time i started reading TT i had seen the film. I think really that as i didn't know the films that well, but was still blown away by them, I was able to read them and have my own picture of it all in my head. I think the only thing that dissappointed me was the amount they left out of the second movie. Other than that I loooooved the book, my very favourite part was A Journey in the Dark just becaue its alot of amazing description.
I alfraid to say tho that I still haven't finished Rotk as I dont want to because once I've finished Rotk thats it, no more new LotR stuf :cry:
ahh well, still love it :love:
newsgirl
Council Member
Posts: 1270
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: February 18, 2006 08:07
I watched the fellowship, then read all three, and then waited for the other two movies to come out. I think it's best to read the books first, so you'll know the original story
Timinator
Council Member
Posts: 2
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: February 19, 2006 05:28
I also watched the movies before I read the books but I disagree with that. I think one should read the books first just because they give more detail and let you create how you think the characters and all should look like. I guess I watched the movies first to see if I would like the books. I didn't want to spend all of my time reading long books that I didn't enjoy. I watched the movies and loved them and when I read the books they were just so much better.
hobbitnamedeliza
Council Member
Posts: 148
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: February 19, 2006 09:51
I'll tell you the truth--I don't think my enjoyment of either would have been affected no matter the order I'd experienced them. What DID happen, was that I saw FELLOWSHIP and then read the entire trilogy....

I would venture that it was more FUN to have read the books first just for the awe-inspiring MARVEL at the accuracy of PJ's recreation of Middle Earth--I will NEVER forget the delightfully spooky feeling that PJ and WETA had a window into my own imagination...

So, for that reason, I guess, I'd say "read the books first..." But honestly, it's like asking whether to put peanut butter or jelly on the sandwich first--it probably doesn't matter at all.
Dolwen
Store Admin & Head Weaver of Vairë
Posts: 15050
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: February 20, 2006 08:28
I also saw the Fellowship then read the books, in two weeks, I couldn't put them down. When I saw the other two movies, I was excited and thought they were pretty close to the books. I was a little disappointed that some of the things were left out or changed. I can understand some of the changes and omissions, but not all. Anyway, I still love the movies, I just love the books a little more.
ElvishrulesLegolas
Council Member
Posts: 3
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: February 20, 2006 03:59
I watched the first two movies, then read the books, then watched the Return of the King.
I really loved the movies, and the books. A lot of people I know were mad because they said the movies were totally different than the books, I don't think they were trying to re-creat the stories. I think they were making a movie about the books. They knew that there was too much, magic to the books to actually be able to really re-creat that in the movies. I loved the books, I loved the movies. I LOVED them both!:love:
Failië
Council Member
Posts: 287
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: February 20, 2006 04:34
Techincally, I read the books first. For half a page....and then got bored. Hey, I was in fifth grade. But I actually watched the movie for twenty minutes when my Dad bought the extended edition on DVD (I fell asleep). However, last year I read the books and then got obsessed, watched the movie, and enjoyed Middle Earth all the more.
Fattybolger
Council Member
Posts: 111
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: February 21, 2006 04:35
It's great to know that the movies got you folks on to the books, or back to the books. There's an awful lot of PJ's version that I personally don't like, but if he's getting people to read the books I'll forgive him everything. Except Faramir, of course.

Keep on postin', please!
~Arwen~
Council Member
Posts: 59
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: February 21, 2006 06:14
I consider the movies to be a version of the story, another way of telling it..I saw the movies first, read the books later...of course they're different but u cant expect the movies to be exactly alike..is just impossible..I love both..tho maybe more the movies cuz I find them to be vissually stuning
Failië
Council Member
Posts: 287
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: February 21, 2006 04:34
I'm totally with you on the Faramir thing...until I saw the Extended Edition..sorta. And then I cried my eyes out of the rejected son thing. Because I'm very emotional I guess. But after that I began giving everyone The Two Towers lecture again.
Dolen_i_vad_a_nin
Council Member
Posts: 56
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: February 23, 2006 06:23
I saw Fellowship, then read the book. Saw TTT, read the book. Saw ROTK, then read the book. I was so tempted to read on after the first book, but I held out amazingly!

I think that this way worked for me. I fell in love with the story just stripped "down to the bare bones". And going back and then reading the book was so incredible for me. I am a book lover and have always been one. What PJ has done will never be done again, and what he has created is so beautiful. But the books, these amazing storys, filled with all the complexities and backstorys, (which are my favourite!) are so original and breathtaking. Books all the way!
abhishek_kohli
Council Member
Posts: 1
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: February 23, 2006 11:23
Like most of here, I saw the movie FotR first. I loved it so much that I procured the book in 2 days and started reading it. I was thouroughly impressed by tolkien's magical and vivid description, as well as Peter Jackson's adaptation of it.
I got RotK before TTT, but held on and watched them in sequence. Now waiting to get my hands on the extended editions of the movies, haveing finished my 3rd reading of the book.
But I must say I was a bit disappointed by TTT, with the battle unnecessarily stretched out.
Still, the best Trilogy, Best Fantasy, Best adaptation from a Book, all these titles got to LOTR..
Wot say you???
Drauglin
Council Member
Posts: 147
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: February 24, 2006 02:50
I saw the movies first myself. I suppose when you're a teenager, a book recommended by your 'un-cool' parents is a turn-off. If I listened to my dad, I'd have read LoTR and the Sil before high school.
I'd say see the movies first if you're skeptical, because they are pretty flashy and get your attention easily (unlike the first half of FoTR). But sad to say I no longer respect the movies a whole lot, most of my favorite scenes are cut or cut down.
(i.e. Tom Bom and the BarrowDowns, Voice of Saruman, Ghan-Buri-Ghan, and the Mouth of Sauron to name a few).
hobbithole_dweller
Council Member
Posts: 166
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: February 24, 2006 02:46
I went with a friend who had read the books to see FotR one fateful December afternoon. A couple of months after seeing the movie I read the books and the obession got worse.

What's strange is that the movies were what got me hooked to the world of Middle-Earth, but I've become something of a purist. BUT I try to see the books and the movies as seperate entities so one's not better than the other, they're just different.
pallando_the_blue
Council Member
Posts: 4
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: March 07, 2006 04:15
Im kinda weird, cuz i saw TTT first, and was totally confused, so i read the books, and then watched the movies and understood them. i belive you should read the books first because then you get a feel for what the stories like. yup, thats my two pence (yes pence).
Skuijs
Council Member
Posts: 1
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: March 11, 2006 12:37
Im getting the books soon only know the movies but i seen the moves vs books and im already bothered that pj changed as much as he did !

Edited by Mara for inappropriate language

[Edited on 11/3/2006 by Mara]
Felnor
Council Member
Posts: 115
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: March 19, 2006 10:17
I saw the movies first but I found the books much better than the movies. Not to say the movies were bad but you can do more in a book than is possible to do onscreen.
Nienna1977
Council Member
Posts: 6
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: March 19, 2006 11:24
No movie can ever put every detail of a book on screen, it's just not possible. Considering that, I love and admire the movies, even though there were some changes I didn't like either, but the Extended dvd makes up a lot, I prefer watching the extended dvd over the theater versions.

But overall, I'd pick the books. I saw FOTR first, when TTT was just coming out on dvd. You see, I was bored and decided to see what FOTR was all about. I wasn't too enthusiastic about a bunch of guys being controlled by a magic ring, all seemed silly childish stuff to me. So only out of boredom I watched the Fellowship, of course I got hooked. Lucky for me, I didn't have to waite for TTT, it was just on dvd and I got to watch it quickly.

Then I couldn't waite for the ending and I had ot read the books to know. In the end, I loved the books more than the movies.

You know, I had no trouble enjoying the first two movies, I guess becauase I hadn't read the books yet, but the third movie, I couldn't enjoy! Even though it was magnificently and so beautiful, I kept thinking 'why did they leave that one out? I was hoping to see that on the screen' throughout the movie. While for the first two movies, reading the books after seeing them, it was more understanding the whole movie, the relations between the characters better, their histories and discovering all the layers of Middle Earth. It was like a revelation. I had to watch ROTK three times to like it, now it's one of my favorites.

But on the other hand, I enjoyed other movies whose books I had already read, like Sense and Sensibility, I loved it and wasn't disappointed at all. The script was more funny and the subtle humor worked really well, it was very well done and the drama/humor was well dosed. That was one of the few times I enjoyed the movie dispite knowing the story.

I don't think there really is an answer to wether or not one shoudl read first or watch first. It depends on the number of changes and especially the kind of changes that were made in the movies.

Also depends on your taste, if you love to visualise the characters for yourself first, without automatically picturing the actors, of course reading the books first would be more important. The movies are a good help though to see descriptions you couldn't visualise well yourself.

If you want to see if the story would be interesting enough, prehaps the movies are an outcome, even though there is a lot of difference still. Sometimes you love certain scenes from the movies, which you find a bit boring reading and the other way around.
Fattybolger
Council Member
Posts: 111
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: March 20, 2006 04:06
Heck, you have a point about automatically picturing the actors.

If I'd seen movie Faramir first and then read the book .... shudder, would I ever have got the right, droolsome, tall-dark-handsome-and-above-all-INTELLIGENT image into my head? Probably not. More shudder.

It's easy to talk about the things they left out of the movie, but what about the things they put in - like the Elves at Helm's Deep, all that stuff about Arwen beetling off to Valinor, or Gandalf's duel with the W-K (in the EE)? Did you miss those episodes when reading the books?
Nienna1977
Council Member
Posts: 6
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: March 20, 2006 05:30
No, not really, though I kept (and still sometimes) mixing things that were in the movies and not at all in the books. (and what about lines they gave to certain characters in the movies, which in the books are said by totally different characters?)

I did hate some of the newer things of the movies though, like Faramirs behaviour on screen versus the movie, when I read the books, I liked the character of that Faramir better than the character as portrayed in the movies. But the extended dvd made up a lot.

Also could have done without Frodo sending Sam away. I understand they wanted to make it more interesting for these two, but to me their journey was interesting enough as it was without Gollums evil manipulation working!

And what about poor Haldir dying in the TTT? (even though that actor who played him, didn't really completely seem believable as an Elve, but that's just my humble opinion).

It's true, not only things left out were bothering, but also new things included.

Though I love this huge change: Frodo's age. When I read the books, I do miss that, the younger age of the movie-Frodo. But that's the only thing. And I also still love Arwen rescuing Frodo from the Nazgul and asking the water for help against them. It's a nice scene. The whole Rivendell part is one of my favorites anyway. Wouldn't mind living there!

I guess we shouldn't crucify PJ and his crew. Sure, they changed many things we didn't like, but others were very well done. They can't please every one!

Where I like one change, the other person will hate that one. That's life and a matter of taste.

We should be thankfull to have the movies and that Tolkien is being recognised even more thanks to them. I live in Holland, and I remember my school days, more than 10 years ago, secundary school, we would have English lessons and our teacher let us read books of famous English authors from the past. Penguin classics, hahaha! But no Tolkien. I have never heard of the name Tolkien here before the movies. I'm not a person who has a habit of reading fantasy. Though there are many loyal Tolkien fans here, who were fans long before the movies, he'just wasn't a household name. Not as a childrens author, not as an author in general.

As a child, there were Astrid Lindgren, Roald Dahl, foreign writers like them who were and still are widely read here. But I had not heard of Tolkien in primary school either.

So, the movies really have turned Tolkien into a household name. Ask people anyone on street, most of them will know him now.

Without the movies, I would never have known Middle Earth.That would have been a pity.


[Edited on 20/3/2006 by Nienna1977]
Rainyaviel_of_Rivendell
Council Member
Posts: 130
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: April 30, 2006 08:50
i saw all the movies before i read the books.well i read the Hobbit in year 6 but didnt really get into it.anyway i like the books but since im really more of a movie person i like the movies better.
Miranduviel
Council Member
Posts: 21
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: May 01, 2006 04:17
It's great to know that the movies got you to the books, or back to the books. There's an awful lot of PJ's version that I don't like, but if he's getting people to read the books, I'll forgive him everything. Except Faramir, of course.


As someone else wrote, I don't think it matters in which order you came to LOTR, what matters is that you came and stayed. PJ had to do a lot of things that 'book fans' don't like, and they don't understand that movie-making has limitations, so things had to be cut or altered. He's as much a "Ringer" as anyone else, I think; do you really think he *wanted* to make big cuts or changes? Every time something had to be cut, it caused an inconsistancy that had to be 'fixed' somewhere later.

I do have to agree about Faramir; it would have been better to have his 'right-hand-man' or sargent-at-arms or whoever be the one pressing for the Ring's capture and transport to Gondor; only to show Denethor's disregard for him (F). But remember, however, that PJ had to cut a lot of book-action, so Faramir was changed, not necessarily for the best.

It would have been nice if more scenes with Faramir and Eowyn were in the extended edition. I'd love to have a scene before Arg's coronation where Faramir tells her that Eomer and Arg have agreed to marry her off to him. Faramir, used to having people run roughshod over his feelings, expects her to do the same. It'd be pleasant if Eowyn realizes that this heroic, good-looking young man is also in goofy-love-at-first-sight with her and gives him a chance. :love:

I'm defending Peter on principle; we know he's got scenes and longer versions of scenes that didn't make it to the extended editions, no reason for him not to make a hugely long, closer-to-the-book version for DVD.
anais
Council Member
Posts: 407
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: May 01, 2006 09:16
Well,I have to be honest.First I saw the movie, and after seeing Fotr nothing in the world copuld've stoped me from reading the entire work.Usually, I would say read the book first then go see the movie.But in this case,like others have said it ,it really doesn't matter.You'll be amzed anyway.Pj's work is very close to the magic of the book,he captured its essence if not all its elements.
So if there is someone out there who hasn't seen the movie or read the books yet, and god knows why is reading this,just follow your heart and do whichever.You will be a different person at the end of it no matter what you do first.
Fattybolger
Council Member
Posts: 111
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: May 05, 2006 02:37
Anais, I think you just put your finger on the really important thing about any great work of art, however you come to it, viz. you're not quite the same person after experiencing it as you were before. The work of art becomes part of you and enriches you.

Personally I don't think the movie is a great work of art - though it has its magnificent moments - but if it has that enriching effect on people, that's great. I'd still be happy to feel that they went on to the books, though.
Deagol112LotR
Council Member
Posts: 118
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: May 05, 2006 12:41
I read the books for the first time last June (I saw the movies in March... yes I was late). I was completly hooked on them. I had to bring the FotR to the camp I went and read it whenever I got the chance. So, it didn;t take me very long to finish them. I didn't really like the fact that they were split into two parts though... you had to wait so long to find out what happened to the characters! Other then that, they were awesome!
Fattybolger
Council Member
Posts: 111
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: May 10, 2006 04:19
Glad to hear you were hooked, Deagol! What did you think about the movies after having read the books?
Denethorsgirl
Council Member
Posts: 33
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: May 11, 2006 10:28
If I remember correctly, I read the Lord of the Rings after seeing the Two Towers. I have compared the book and the movie and they changed some parts. Also some parts are left out. If there were more parts put in the films, I think the movie would have been alot longer.
Deagol112LotR
Council Member
Posts: 118
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: May 15, 2006 09:28
After watching the movies again after reading the books, the only part I was disappointed about was leaving Tom Bombadil out. But I really liked that fact that he wasn't completly forgotten since Treebeard has some his lines. Oh yes, and the fact that Haldir dies!
DaugtherOfThranduil
Council Member
Posts: 13
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: September 06, 2006 02:59
i read the books first then watched the movie i'll ay books are deffenetly better than the movie but i still love themovie it is always good to know the original story
Celebne
Council Member
Posts: 26
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: September 07, 2006 08:00
I have read the books about 20 years the first time. Now I am rereading the books the third time.
I am not very interested in watching movies. I had never watched the LOTR movies, if I had not read the books. I was curious, how they would adapt these books and I was not dissapointed. But I must confess, that my remembrance of the books wasn't so good in the year 2001. I reread the books after ROTK the second time.
I didn't remember Faramir in the books, when I watched TTT in the cinema. So I didn't notice the changes. But I became a fan of Faramir first, when I watched the EE of TTT.
I can understand, if book fans don't like the changes of the character, but I don't understand, if people rant about Faramir's fair hair and blue eyes. Btw, Boromir is fair haired too. The actor David Wenham is very handsome and has a big fan base in the internet. He was voted as Sexiest man alive of Australia in 1999. :love:
DW has made the best of the script. He shows the nobility and sadness of Faramir very well, especially in ROTK.

These are my two cents about Faramir.
Mullog
Council Member
Posts: 90
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: September 07, 2006 08:52
I read the books before and am so glad I did. In my experience you'll always remember the first impression of a character. That means that the looks of some characters will always be associated with movie looks(and that often aren't correct). The large number of changes to the plot of the movies also affect the way you read the book. In the movies you lose much of what was the atmosphere of LoTR. The only movie that really felt like LoTR was FoTR, the others were too changed too be good enough...
Child_of_Lúthien
Council Member
Posts: 153
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Movie first, book afterwards?
on: November 07, 2006 12:02
I read the books before the movies, but only by a short amount of time. Seeing the movie previews are what got me interested in the books to begin with. In general, I find reading the books before seeing the movies better. I like to compare the movie while I'm watching it with what I know from the books. It's just more fun that way for me, personally.
Members Online
Print Friendly, PDF & Email