I think I can finally articulate this one. But I'll need a lot of counter-criticism to solidify this position, so like the title says make use of the comments section.
Without having read the books and only seen the first movie and about 30 minutes of Two Towers I think my problem is the style of storytelling. The fact that these movies are 17 hours long and given Peter Jackson's primal need for footage preservation aside (because I am all for context), the movies still can't manage to hold my interest.
The number of characters, locations and events seem to have come into being as a way of justifying an immediate storytelling need. When an enemy is needed, they appear. When a fantasy world needs to be established, or reinforced, rather, Liv Tyler shows up all horseback riding through the woods. It's just too convenient. And static. What if Gandolf was horseback riding through the woods? (I have no idea the probability or laughability of that question but I'm sure it'd add something to the story and characters, right?)
I understand Middle Earth is a big place filled with plenty of people, but to explore each and every place and person with or without consequence is a little...Traveloguey. And who wants to sit through a four hour-long Travelogue. (When I was in third grade I went to one for Puerto Rico held in a high school auditorium packed with seniors and it still remains one of the oddest, sleepiest memories of my life.)
Another analogy would be the MadTV parody of Shakira--"Whatever, Whenever, I could sing about pancake batter..." I understand the worlds, characters and events of all works of fiction are equally arbitrary. So then, how can the canon of Star Trek be tolerated? I guess the nature of being on a voyage lends itself to encountering new people and places along the way, as in LOTR. But heck, even on Voyager, they managed to re-encounter the same species in different situations and develop characters and storylines internal to their voyage home (not that they were particularly good or anything, but it made the stakes a little higher).
Maybe LOTR would be better as a miniseries. The built-in commercial breaks would provide a little more structure and propel the story through those boundaries.
Whatever the case, this started as a coffee-induced moment of clarity and has turned into a coffee-induced spiral of consciousness so it's gotta end. There are more reasons in my head but if I kept going with them I'd run the risk of churning out the same "and then...and then...and then" as that which I'm criticizing.
Many people like LOTR; many people I like like LOTR. I'm not one of them. Make me a hypocrite.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
This isn't going to do a damn thing for your argument, but I, too, hate Lord of the Rings. However, my case is of much less (or rather "of absolutely no") substance.
A few years ago, when I was still working at the Riverview in Minneapolis, a co-worker, who was about 5 years my junior, actually said to me, "the worst Lord of the Rings film is better than the best Star Wars movie". Now, obviously, neither Peter Jackson, nor anyone else involved with the Rings movies had anything to do with that statement, but how do I, as an American male born in 1977, let something like that go? I can't.
At the time that he said it, I had never seen the Rings movies. In fact, I think I swore not to, at one point. Well, I have since seen them, and, while I didn't exactly go into it with an open mind, I was sort of unimpressed. They are, by no means, bad movies...I just don't see what the big deal is. And, they're too long.
Thanks, Nathan. I'm glad I'm not the only one.
Star Wars for me almost holds up to the same argument as LOTR. Just not to the same degree--maybe because chapters 4-6 of Star Wars seem to have time on its side. Maybe in 20 years LOTR will occupy a similar spot in mythology and it'll be more tolerable. 'Cause the new Star Wars movies are a lot more unbearable than 4-6, in my opinion.
I've been thinking about this and trying to figure out redactionist counterpoints to present. When it comes down to it, though, all I've got is this: I enjoyed watching the LOTR movies.
I'm normally the first person to analyze the hell out of films (ex. I hated Juno and started a list of reasons why DURING the movie), to the extent that I rarely see movies in the theater because I'm so picky and prone to smacktalking and rage.
But the LOTR movies were, simply put, fun to watch. The costuming, scenery and music were successful in their mission to transport me out of my everyday life. I didn't once think about anything except what was happening in each movie as I was watching it. And despite my crippling inability to watch any movie more than once, I've seen all of the movies multiple times without being bored.
And you know what? I don't care if that makes me really simplistic. Sometimes sheer entertainment value is all I need, and that's the case with LOTR. Now, the new Star Wars episodes...don't get me started.
Post a Comment