iTunes (U.S.)
eBay (U.S.)
Glisten Effect
Editorial Reviews
Scoreboard Forum
Viewer Ratings
     1. The Lego Movie 2
    2. Aquaman
   3. Spider-Man: Into Spider-Verse
  4. Bumblebee
 5. Mary Poppins Returns
6. Ralph Breaks the Internet
         1. Batman
        2. Star Wars: The Last Jedi
       3. Apollo 13
      4. Edward Scissorhands
     5. How to Train Your Dragon
    6. Jurassic World: Kingdom
   7. First Man
  8. Solo: A Star Wars Story
 9. Justice League
10. Ready Player One
Home Page
Menu Options ▼

Edit | Delete
Re: Praise the LORD and SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST, not the Lord of the Rings!
• Posted by: Kristen   <Send E-Mail>
• Date: Sunday, January 19, 2003, at 7:14 p.m.
• IP Address:
• In Response to: Praise the LORD and SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST, not t... (Steve)

Where to begin...I didn't even bother reading all of the responses to this very uneducated post, so many of my points have probably already been mentioned. But, being me, I just have to throw my two cents in. Even though the post was posted over a year ago. *shrugs*

First of all, if you disliked the movie so much, why did you sniff around on the internet and find a site with a review of the soundtrack, for crying out loud, to post your opinion. You know what they say about love and hate being very similar.

Essay here>>>

Yes, it did cost a ton of money to make the movie (all three for that matter.) Balrogs don't come cheap, you know. There are knights in Middle-earth, but they're not in FotR at all. Yeah, they have shields, but did you see any crests? Coats of arms? Full suits of armor? Destriers? Didn't think so.

And what "wierd" dark color? A lot of the scenes are at night. Middle-earth isn't so different from our own world that the sun is shining in the daytime. What do you suggest, installing street lamps in Moria? It's a big-arse mine/cave system under a mountain! Of course it's going to be dark. I never saw any "weird" colors in Monty Python, the Quest for the Holy Grail, but that's got a lot more knights (that say "ni") than FotR. Please stop making stupid generalizations.

Yeah, 3 hours = quick? No comment.

> There is about 30 minutes of
> actual action and the rest of the time there is either a shot of "the
> ring" or someone in a conversation about a bunch of nonsense...

Actual action...well, aren't we such a sucker for battle, yet such a devout follower of Christ? *cough* Yeah, there's a lot of shots of the Ring. Not as many as of Frodo, or Gandalf, or Aragorn, but the Ring plays an important part. You're supposed to be able to see the control it has over people, and Frodo's struggle with resisting it. And what is "a bunch of nonsense" supposed to mean? Would you rather have no exposition (and obviously, since you haven't read the books) and sit through a three-hour movie not knowing what the hell is going on? There's a reason for all the conversation (after all, FotR is the first in the series and they do need to set the plot up) and they worked very meticulously on the script.

> the
> kind of nonsense that disgraces the teachings of Jesus Christ.

How does fighting the forces of evil disgrace Jesus? Isn't that what he did? Hate to break it to you, but J.R.R. Tolkien was a very Godly man (I've even recieved book called "Finding God in Lord of the Rings" that's full of Biblical messages and parallels found in LotR) and although he disliked the use of allegory writing, there's absolutely no way you can say that LotR is pagan, or satanistic. It's been positively brought up by my pastor in church multiple times.

> Give me
> the movie and I could have easily edited out an hour and no one would know
> the difference.

*laughs* Oh really? I'm sure you could. It's not like Peter Jackson (you know, the director?) and Co. didn't have to edit anything out of the books. There are characters missing, things had to be cut out. There's an extended version DVD with 30 minutes of edited scenes out, even. And Tolkien purists were already on their tails for that. Scary that at first New Line wanted to make it a two hour movie. So, no. There is no way you can cut out one more hour of the movie. It just doesn't work that way. Perhaps if you paid closer attention (or, you know, read the books) that might have been a little more obvious.

> There are some great looking monsters and the wizard is
> excellent, but the fight scenes are not as spectacular as people are
> saving (see Braveheart).

The wizard is Gandalf. They only said his name fifty times. *rolls eyes* Somebody's got a short attention span. You should stick to half hour sitcoms, it seems. May I suggest Everybody Loves Raymond?

Braveheart and FotR are a lot different. Different ratings, FotR is complete fiction, Braveheart isn't, it goes on. The objective of the killing of the Troll (and most of the battle scenes in general) were not to kill for the sake of killing. There is no warmongering on the side of the "good guys." Their battles were not taken lightly by the Fellowship. I have quotes from Peter Jackson, the crew, the cast, etc saying that they especially wanted to convey that they were not joyous victories; it was life or death and every moment their lives were in peril. They wouldn't have killed the troll, goblins, orcs or Uruk-Hai at all if there had been any other options.

All that aside, for all your "Lord of the Rings is evil, it puts down the teachings of Christ" talk, you seem especially disappointed that the battles are not...bloodier? Longer? More in quantity? *cough* I'm sure you'd even complain about Helm's Deep.

> There are the typical dumb hollywood things like
> the wizard not using his power when he really needs it

Gandalf! His name is Gandalf! Say it with me...Gan...dalf...Gan...dalf... *sighs* Gandalf is an Istari, along with Saruman and Radagast (who isn't in the movie), and he is also a Maia. He is an immortal being sent to Middle-earth to aid the peoples in their struggle against evil. He isn't supposed to use his powers to directly fight evil. If you want more of that, may I suggest Harry Potter? It's really getting pathetically obvious that you haven't read the books, much less knew that they existed, or that FotR was based on them.

> and Hobbits (who
> did a little training with swords on their way to the mountain)

FYI, the "mountain" is Caradhras. Little bit of useless info.

> are taking
> out huge orcs that are bred for nothing but to kill, maim and destroy
> anything in their path. The ending is ridiculous, they leave you hanging
> on for the sequel...

Orcs are not bred to main and destory. Uruk-hai- with the white hand of Sarumon on their armor- are. (Sorry, getting a little overly-nitpicky here, but hey. I'm having fun.) And the hobbits don't actually do all that much fighting in the movie; they hack at the troll a bit, Sam gets a few goblins with his frying pan, but they are pretty admittedly useless against the Orcs. In the book they fight a bit more, and it's not like they only practiced that one time. They cover long time periods. It's days, weeks from Bree to Rivendell, for example. They aren't going to include every little happening or conversation along the way.

And the ending's supposed to be like that. For crying out loud, the book endings are like that! Last line of The Two Towers? "Frodo was captured by the enemy!" Thats it. Boromir doesn't even really die until the very beginning of the next book, so the beginnings (of TTT and RotK) are generally like that too.

> One day Jesus will come back and He will fight evil the right way.

Yeah, it's fiction, buddy. Fiction. As in, not real. As in, made up. Would you like me to write it in another language? Perhaps I should call up ol' P. Jackson and request a disclaimer before the movie starts, saying that it isn't real, and that they don't expect people to act like it is. We aren't supporting Tolkienism here. We aren't substituting Lord of the Rings for the Bible. Who says they fight evil the wrong way? The Fellowship does a very fine job of it in my opinion, especially given the final results. I can't wait to find your review of the Two Towers...

Oh dear, that was an essay, wasn't it?

My (Legolas/Aragorn/Orli/Viggo) fanpage

Comments in this Thread:     Expand >>

Copyright © 1998-2019, Filmtracks Publications. All rights reserved.
The reviews and other textual content contained on the site may not be published, broadcast,
rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of Christian Clemmensen at Filmtracks Publications. Scoreboard created 7/24/98 and last updated 4/25/15.