Bakshi's LOTR worse than I remembered

"Bill O'Meally" <OMeallyMD.TakeThisOut@wise.rr.com> writes:

> I don't know. I'd have to be drunk, stoned, or tied up (probably all
> three, actually) to watch RB's RotK a second time!

At least that got the Gandalf/Witch King confrontation and the
death of the Witch King right, unlike Jackson.

--
Rich Carreiro rlcarr.TakeThisOut@animato.arlington.ma.us
 >> Stay informed about: Bakshi's LOTR worse than I remembered 

Wes ðu aelfwina hal!

> Cure for an ear-worm? Something even *worse* How about "Little Bunny
> Foo-foo" or "The Song that Never Ends"?

Great, now I can't get that out of my head

#Little Rabbit Foo-foo
Hopping through the cornfields
Scooping up the fieldmice...#

MAKE IT STOP!

--
There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable, and
praiseworthy.
-- Ambrose Bierce
 >> Stay informed about: Bakshi's LOTR worse than I remembered 

"aelfwina" <aelfwina.RemoveThis@cableone.net> wrote in message news:<10b41r2drgla20c.RemoveThis@corp.supernews.com>...
> Last night the Cartoon Network broadcast the old Bakshi LOTR.

Figure I'll share my old post again:

Hey, all. I was cleaning off my bookshelves this weekend, and almost
convinced myself to get rid of some of my collection of Sci-fi stories.
I opened Dozois' "Best Science Fiction Stories of the Year: Eighth
Annual Collection", and the acronym "LOTR" caught my eye. I felt like
sharing with you Dozois' impressions of the animated feature. For those
of you unfamiliar with Dozois' collections, he begins each one with an
introduction covering the main events in science fiction of the year, as
he sees them. He goes over magazines, stories, conventions, books,
deaths, television, and film. (I ended up keeping all the books, of
course)

He opens this particular paragraph singing the praises of "Watership
Down", and then:
"Ralph Bakshi's _Lord of the Rings_ is much more disappointing, although
it wasn't as bad as I had feared it might be-- after Bakshi's last film,
_Wizards_, a monumental exercise in stupidity and poor taste that Bakshi
had proclaimed was a dry-run for _LOTR_, I was fully prepared to see
_LOTR_ turned into a similar camp underground epic, perhaps retitled
_Fritz the Hobbit_. However, while I doubt that _LOTR_ will totally
satisfy any Tolkien fan, it is at least a decent technical solution to
an extremely difficult aesthetic problem; I would give it a C-plus,
anyway. Not that the film doesn't make more than its share of aesthetic
missteps: Galadrial looks like an airline stewardess, for instance, and
Treebeard like a walking carrot. More seriously, Bakshi's rotoscoping
technique (animating over live film footage) severely cramps both action
and atmosphere in several places by limiting the animated characters to
only those movements their live-action counterparts were physically
capable of making. The film may also confuse (if not bewilder) those
not already familiar with Tolkien's work, and ends with one of the most
enormous (unannounced) cliff-hanging anticlimaxes anyone has ever had
the nerve to foist on the viewing public."

--
-Matt (mattneu@hotmail.com)
Angband in action! Constant escalation to new depths to find angrier,
meaner letters and more punctuation!
 >> Stay informed about: Bakshi's LOTR worse than I remembered 

"TT Arvind" <ttarvind RemoveThis @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b1d9a8a4172849c989b8a@news.individual.net...
> Wes ðu aelfwina hal!
>
> > Cure for an ear-worm? Something even *worse* How about "Little Bunny
> > Foo-foo" or "The Song that Never Ends"?
>
> Great, now I can't get that out of my head
>
> #Little Rabbit Foo-foo
> Hopping through the cornfields
> Scooping up the fieldmice...#
>
> MAKE IT STOP!
>

Whaackkk!

You're a goonie!

)

T.A.
 >> Stay informed about: Bakshi's LOTR worse than I remembered 

>Subject: Re: Bakshi's LOTR worse than I remembered
>From: "Neil Anderson" nandersonNOSPAM.TakeThisOut@northrock.bm
>Date: 5/24/2004 8:39 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <%Awsc.2475$Hf.1429441@newshog.newsread.com>

>> Only thing that always has bothered me quite a bit about it is
>> continuously calling Saruman, Aruman.
>>
>> I have no idea where THAT came from!
>
>I think it was so that the viewers/listeners did not confuse Sauron and
>Saruman.
>
>I distinctly heard Gandalf say Saruman at one stage though - I believe it
>was just after he met North American Aragorn, Gimli of the sack-hat and
>gotch-eyed Legolas in Fangorn.

Yes, you are correct. In fact, Gandalf says "Saruman" at least three times,
possibly more.

It's appalling enough I suppose to change Saruman to Aruman, though I can at
least follow the logic behind that decision. Sauron and Saruman *do* sound
pretty darned similar, and they're both "evil wizards" in the minds of
passersby who may not be paying particular attention to details. I get the
decision on that level.

What's mindnumbing is to hear the corrupt wizard called Aruman about 2/3ds of
the time, and Saruman the other 1/3rd.(!!) Just an amazing continuity gaffe.
It would even be marginally understandable if one character was calling him
Saruman and the rest were using the altered form Aruman. At least that way you
could pass it off as an inconsistency that occured in one looping session,
i.e., the actor playing Frodo for instance being given the wrong
direction/pronunciation by whomever was directing the ADR (Additional Dialogue
Recording) session.

But clearly Gandalf calls him both Aruman and Saruman, which indicates to me
that they decided to change the name fairly late in the game and failed to go
back and correct some of the dialogue which had already been recorded.

Given the production problems, and the enormous fights Bakshi had with the
studio execs, I could definitely see him throwing his hands up in exasperation
and saying "Screw re-dubbing that stuff, I've had it" before everything was
completed.
 >> Stay informed about: Bakshi's LOTR worse than I remembered 

Did you say something, mattneu.RemoveThis@hotmail.com (Matt Neumann)?

>He opens this particular paragraph singing the praises of "Watership
>Down", and then:
>"Ralph Bakshi's _Lord of the Rings_ is much more disappointing, although
>it wasn't as bad as I had feared it might be-- after Bakshi's last film,
>_Wizards_, a monumental exercise in stupidity and poor taste that Bakshi
>had proclaimed was a dry-run for _LOTR_, I was fully prepared to see
>_LOTR_ turned into a similar camp underground epic, perhaps retitled
>_Fritz the Hobbit_.

My fiance told me only a couple hours ago that he wants to see that
Wizards film. Hold me, I'm scared.


Cel
 >> Stay informed about: Bakshi's LOTR worse than I remembered 

Guglielmo Portas wrote:

> Absolutely rent it, along with The Hobbit. Put on some love beads and
> fire up a fatty before that one to get you in the mood.

Love beads? It was late 70s, not early 70s. Disco era. Put on some
designer jeans so tight they cut off the blood to your brain, and that
movie will start to look downright good!

-- Chris Csernica
 >> Stay informed about: Bakshi's LOTR worse than I remembered 

Naryldor <naryldorNOSPAM DeleteThis @hotmail.com> wrote:

<snippo>
>A perfectly respectable position, yet AFAIK Bakhi's adaptation is not
>particularly accurate either, and someone who hasn't read the book will
>be at a lost in less than 10 minutes, that at least, doesn't happend in
>PJ's movies.

Bakshi's version is like a string of beads: you get a scene, then a
gap, then a scene, then a gap and so on.

Which, of course, means that it is /very/ helpful if you already know
the story. No argument, then, on whether viewers who do not know the
story can follow Bakshi's version. But the accuracy is harder to
judge.

There are a few things that are major departures: pulling Sam out of a
bush, lightning bolts from Isengard.

And Elrond in a lounge suit ... I mean really!

But there are some things that should not be forgotten:

1) The dialogue is almost entirely from Tolkien. And I had a lot of
fun, two years ago, telling people who were complaining about the
omission of (for example) the scene in the book where Merry and Pippin
tell Frodo they are coming with him that the dialogue is in Bakshi
although the location is different. In terms of actually hearing
JRRT's dialogue, Bakshi is much more accurate than PJ.

2) Bakshi ran out of money, which shows up particularly at the end.
Some scenes are clearly Bakshi's old trick of using footage from other
films (as he did with /Zulu/ and /Alexander Nevsky/ in his /Wizards/)
to provide large armies.

3) In 2hrs 15min Bakshi covers most of what PJ took 6 hrs to cover --
and he ends the Frodo/Sam story at the proper point, chronologically
speaking. while PJ moves it 4 days in advance of the story in the
West.

4) After the Arwen-meets-Frodo scene, snide remarks about Bakshi's use
of F-Stops on the elves ceased.

So, on the one hand, we have a financially disasterous attempt to film
/LOTR/ by a director who clearly intended to film JRRT's /LOTR/, and,
on the other hand, we have not only a much more successful financially
but also vastly superior action film by a director who, clearly, had
no such intention.

I think it's a pity Bakshi could never finish the second half. I
suspect that his Faramir and Denethor would have been much closer to
JRRT's than PJ's (especially Faramir). Sam might have given us either
the "Oliphaunt" nursery rhyme (Bakshi's Hobbit's sing and dance like
JRRT's) or the meditation on the dead Southron, or both. Shelob, on
the other hand, would probably have been about as impressive as the
Balrog (ie, not very impressive) and we would be seeing a lot more
stock footage in the battle scenes.

And Bakshi might have read the book closely enough to realize that The
Battle of Pelennor Fields is called that because Pelennor was a hilly
farming community, not a perfectly flat battle plain, except, perhaps,
quite close to Minas Tirith. PJ clearly had no idea that this was the
case; his Pelennor has no (agricultural) fields at all. And certainly
no hills, however small.
--
I still mostly download on Saturdays & upload on Sundays. Patience is a virtue.
 >> Stay informed about: Bakshi's LOTR worse than I remembered 

"Paul S. Person" <pperson.RemoveThis@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote in message
news:ae1kb0ldvcp8jhr0l0g1s6dsequj2vtl5d@4ax.com...
> Naryldor <naryldorNOSPAM.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> <snippo>
> >A perfectly respectable position, yet AFAIK Bakhi's adaptation is not
> >particularly accurate either, and someone who hasn't read the book will
> >be at a lost in less than 10 minutes, that at least, doesn't happend in
> >PJ's movies.
>
> Bakshi's version is like a string of beads: you get a scene, then a
> gap, then a scene, then a gap and so on.
>
> Which, of course, means that it is /very/ helpful if you already know
> the story. No argument, then, on whether viewers who do not know the
> story can follow Bakshi's version. But the accuracy is harder to
> judge.
>
> There are a few things that are major departures: pulling Sam out of a
> bush, lightning bolts from Isengard.
>
> And Elrond in a lounge suit ... I mean really!
>
> But there are some things that should not be forgotten:
>
> 1) The dialogue is almost entirely from Tolkien. And I had a lot of
> fun, two years ago, telling people who were complaining about the
> omission of (for example) the scene in the book where Merry and Pippin
> tell Frodo they are coming with him that the dialogue is in Bakshi
> although the location is different. In terms of actually hearing
> JRRT's dialogue, Bakshi is much more accurate than PJ.
>
> 2) Bakshi ran out of money, which shows up particularly at the end.
> Some scenes are clearly Bakshi's old trick of using footage from other
> films (as he did with /Zulu/ and /Alexander Nevsky/ in his /Wizards/)
> to provide large armies.
>
> 3) In 2hrs 15min Bakshi covers most of what PJ took 6 hrs to cover --
> and he ends the Frodo/Sam story at the proper point, chronologically
> speaking. while PJ moves it 4 days in advance of the story in the
> West.
>
> 4) After the Arwen-meets-Frodo scene, snide remarks about Bakshi's use
> of F-Stops on the elves ceased.
>
> So, on the one hand, we have a financially disasterous attempt to film
> /LOTR/ by a director who clearly intended to film JRRT's /LOTR/, and,
> on the other hand, we have not only a much more successful financially
> but also vastly superior action film by a director who, clearly, had
> no such intention.
>
> I think it's a pity Bakshi could never finish the second half. I
> suspect that his Faramir and Denethor would have been much closer to
> JRRT's than PJ's (especially Faramir). Sam might have given us either
> the "Oliphaunt" nursery rhyme (Bakshi's Hobbit's sing and dance like
> JRRT's) or the meditation on the dead Southron, or both. Shelob, on
> the other hand, would probably have been about as impressive as the
> Balrog (ie, not very impressive) and we would be seeing a lot more
> stock footage in the battle scenes.
>
> And Bakshi might have read the book closely enough to realize that The
> Battle of Pelennor Fields is called that because Pelennor was a hilly
> farming community, not a perfectly flat battle plain, except, perhaps,
> quite close to Minas Tirith. PJ clearly had no idea that this was the
> case; his Pelennor has no (agricultural) fields at all. And certainly
> no hills, however small.

Yes, I was extraordinary dissappointed by Jackson's realization of the
Pelennor battle grounds to be just flat, uniform grassland. It was sorely,
sorely lacking, is so much as varied geography is neccessary to having
complex and highly interesting battle tactics and formations.
 >> Stay informed about: Bakshi's LOTR worse than I remembered 

Paul S. Person <pperson.TakeThisOut@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote in
news:ae1kb0ldvcp8jhr0l0g1s6dsequj2vtl5d@4ax.com:

> And Bakshi might have read the book closely enough to realize that The
> Battle of Pelennor Fields is called that because Pelennor was a hilly
> farming community, not a perfectly flat battle plain, except, perhaps,
> quite close to Minas Tirith. PJ clearly had no idea that this was the
> case; his Pelennor has no (agricultural) fields at all. And certainly
> no hills, however small.

Well, making the Pelennor fields flat is a perfectly asumable license
IMHO, and I probably would be more critic about it though if there
wasn't a few other MAYOR adaptation flaws, the worst, no doubt to me, is
the inclusion of the Dead army, what in the name of wonder was PJ
thinking about when he did that? He gave most of the glory of the
greatest battle in the book to a buch of dead people, I couldn't beleive
my eyes when I saw that. All those greenish spirits taken from a
Castelvania video game swarming through Minas Tirith, disgusting.

Another thing I'd rather not mention is Denethor (aka the royal human
torch) running ablaze through that very convenient gap in the fence. I
can imagine the conversation of the Dunedain of old constructing it:
"Lord. Shall we close the last gap in the fence and thus finish this
beautiful city of ours?". And the other would answer: "Nay! Let us
leave the gap, for my heart foretells that some day a crazy maniac will
set fire on himself and jump from this very spot. We must think of
something though, to keep the kids away from here through the next
centuries. Any ideas?"

--
"La cosa más bella que podemos experimentar es el misterio.
Es la fuente de cualquier arte y ciencia verdaderos".
ALBERT EINSTEIN

Javier Caselli Fernández
aka Naryldor (javicaselliNOSPAM@yahoo.es)
 >> Stay informed about: Bakshi's LOTR worse than I remembered 

Paul S. Person pperson.DeleteThis@earthlink.net.invalid wrote:

>In terms of actually hearing
>JRRT's dialogue, Bakshi is much more accurate than PJ.

Right. Tolkien was famous for the brilliant subtext created by vacillating
between the two wizards Saruman and Aruman, both of which looked identical and
lived in Isengard. Bakshi should rightly be lauded for his strict adherence to
Tolkien here. Jackson took leave of his meagre senses and reduced the wizards
to simply Saruman. I presume he did this to help out the aging Christopher Lee
handle the workload of playing two such similar characters. [/end sarcasm]

I also have always enjoyed the bit of revisionist history Bakshi indulges in
during the introduction where "the last alliance of men and elves fell..."
They fell? I guess Bakshi had a different take on the Red Book than the good
Professor did. He's entitled.

>After the Arwen-meets-Frodo scene, snide remarks about Bakshi's use
>of F-Stops on the elves ceased.

Oh as if anyone could pull themselves away from Legolas's lazy eye. <g>

And, be honest, if Peter Jackson had portrayed Sam as some wobbling, bulb-nosed
lump, or Boromir as some displaced member of Leif Ericson's latest walking
party, the calls for his head would be deafening. Bakshi is damned lucky the
Internet wasn't publicly available back in 1978; he would have been
eviscerated.

>I think it's a pity Bakshi could never finish the second half.

All sarcasm aside, if I had $50 million sitting around doing nothing, I
guarantee you I'd hand it over to him and let him take a swipe at finishing it.
Heck with the licensing, just finish it privately and never screen it. I like
the dark surreal atmosphere of Bakshi's version. It's clearly not Tolkien, but
the plot is so incomprehensible that it has an almost enigmatic quality to it
that I find myself enjoying for some strange reason. It would have been
interesting to see him finish it.

>And Bakshi might have read the book closely enough to realize that The
>Battle of Pelennor Fields is called that because Pelennor was a hilly
>farming community,

Don't be so sure. This is the same director who had the Balrog wearing Zsa Zsa
Gabor's bedroom slippers and turned Treebeard into a garnish.

PJ clearly had no idea that this was the
>case; his Pelennor has no (agricultural) fields at all. And certainly
>no hills, however small.

Had no idea, or changed it to suit the medium? Remember, this is the same film
crew that had the foresight to create "steps" next to the Argonath, reasoning
that the statues' bottom halves could be carved from the mountainsides, but the
top halves would have to be built, and thus the remains of a nearby quarry (the
aforementioned steps) would be in clear view.

In truth, I enjoy both filmed interpretations, while being aware of their
shortcomings (and successes). It's easy to write the nitpicker's guide to LOTR
movies (and quite fun to an extent), but I think my bottom line opinion on
Jackson is that he did a hell of a job with what is inarguably the most
demanding and logistically dizzying film project in the history of the planet.
 >> Stay informed about: Bakshi's LOTR worse than I remembered 

In article <20040601143424.02485.00000292.DeleteThis@mb-m01.aol.com>,
radagast5.DeleteThis@aol.com (Radagast5) wrote:

> Paul S. Person pperson.DeleteThis@earthlink.net.invalid wrote:
>
> >In terms of actually hearing
> >JRRT's dialogue, Bakshi is much more accurate than PJ.
>
> Right. Tolkien was famous for the brilliant subtext created by vacillating
> between the two wizards Saruman and Aruman, both of which looked identical
> and
> lived in Isengard. Bakshi should rightly be lauded for his strict adherence
> to
> Tolkien here. Jackson took leave of his meagre senses and reduced the
> wizards
> to simply Saruman. I presume he did this to help out the aging Christopher
> Lee
> handle the workload of playing two such similar characters. [/end sarcasm]
>
> I also have always enjoyed the bit of revisionist history Bakshi indulges in
> during the introduction where "the last alliance of men and elves fell..."
> They fell? I guess Bakshi had a different take on the Red Book than the good
> Professor did. He's entitled.
>
> >After the Arwen-meets-Frodo scene, snide remarks about Bakshi's use
> >of F-Stops on the elves ceased.
>
> Oh as if anyone could pull themselves away from Legolas's lazy eye. <g>
>
> And, be honest, if Peter Jackson had portrayed Sam as some wobbling,
> bulb-nosed
> lump, or Boromir as some displaced member of Leif Ericson's latest walking
> party, the calls for his head would be deafening. Bakshi is damned lucky the
> Internet wasn't publicly available back in 1978; he would have been
> eviscerated.
>
> >I think it's a pity Bakshi could never finish the second half.
>
> All sarcasm aside, if I had $50 million sitting around doing nothing, I
> guarantee you I'd hand it over to him and let him take a swipe at finishing
> it.
> Heck with the licensing, just finish it privately and never screen it. I
> like
> the dark surreal atmosphere of Bakshi's version. It's clearly not Tolkien,
> but
> the plot is so incomprehensible that it has an almost enigmatic quality to it
> that I find myself enjoying for some strange reason. It would have been
> interesting to see him finish it.
>
> >And Bakshi might have read the book closely enough to realize that The
> >Battle of Pelennor Fields is called that because Pelennor was a hilly
> >farming community,
>
> Don't be so sure. This is the same director who had the Balrog wearing Zsa
> Zsa
> Gabor's bedroom slippers and turned Treebeard into a garnish.
>
> PJ clearly had no idea that this was the
> >case; his Pelennor has no (agricultural) fields at all. And certainly
> >no hills, however small.
>
> Had no idea, or changed it to suit the medium? Remember, this is the same
> film
> crew that had the foresight to create "steps" next to the Argonath, reasoning
> that the statues' bottom halves could be carved from the mountainsides, but
> the
> top halves would have to be built, and thus the remains of a nearby quarry
> (the
> aforementioned steps) would be in clear view.
>
> In truth, I enjoy both filmed interpretations, while being aware of their
> shortcomings (and successes). It's easy to write the nitpicker's guide to
> LOTR
> movies (and quite fun to an extent), but I think my bottom line opinion on
> Jackson is that he did a hell of a job with what is inarguably the most
> demanding and logistically dizzying film project in the history of the
> planet.

You'll never win any friends in RABT by being fair to Peter Jackson.
 >> Stay informed about: Bakshi's LOTR worse than I remembered 

>
> >> My fiance told me only a couple hours ago that he wants to see that
> Wizards film. Hold me, I'm scared.
>
>


For What it's Worth Department :

Anyone here a fan of ElfQuest? Wendy Pini worked with Bakshi on
Wizards. In the opening sequence of the film, with the depressed or
very tired female narrator talking over the still shots, you'll see an
elf female who's a dead ringer for ShenShen and Leetah.

Well, I thought it was interesting when I first noticed her, anyway...

(And for the love of all that's sacred and holy : Wizards is OK. Just
OK. But never, EVER watch Bakshi's Fire and Ice-MUCH worse , not only
compared to Wizards, but also compared to Bakshi's LOTR. Yes, I am
serious.)
 >> Stay informed about: Bakshi's LOTR worse than I remembered