Mnementh said:
Fair point. And I have to say I admire that you stay strongly minority positions (also in the case of Baldur's Gate 3). You don't just have an anti-mainstream position, you also can argue your position. And to be fair: I don't know anything about earlier adaptations, I just got the general impression they are disliked by the majority. What did you think about Rings of Power? |
It's an animated adaptation that condenses the events of the first two books into just two hours. I watched it as a kid and hated it because I found the animation dull and the story confusing especially compared to Peter Jackson's movies, which streamlined the plot enough for even the seven-year-old myself to understand
As a teenager, I read the books and realized this adaptation was actually faithful to Tolkien's original texts, but it still felt flawed because it only captured a few key story points while leaving out the worldbuilding and character depth that give context to the plot. I believe the whole plotline of Rohan to be the one the suffers the most, it's almost incomprehensible in the 1978's adaptation
Watching it again as an adult, I think I finally see other issues: it lacks the artistic qualities that make animation a great medium. It’s as if someone decided to make a film that simply retells the story, without embracing any of the strengths unique to animation. Imagine putting on a play of Hamlet, a great story right? But a play requires good dialogue (and monologues), acting, and stage direction to bring it to life. That's the problem with the 1978 adaptation imo, its primary goal seems to be delivering a two-hour summary for people who want to know the story without the commitment of reading the books, sacrificing depth and artistry along the way. I think it was a mostly conscious choice of the director (still don't get why didn't adapt only the first book), but still dragged his movie
