I’m sure this topic has been brought up at some point on the boards; so sorry if this is old hat.
I wanted to bring up the idea of personal imagination while reading literature and the effect a movie version has on your ideas of the work. While reading a work such as LOTRs one gets visuals in their mind’s eye of the world, it’s places, and inhabitants. These images become an inner vision of that book on a very personally level. When a film version of a work that you love comes to life. It’s always a tedious and controversial affair, but of course most fans welcome this, because they wish to see this world brought to life on the big screen. When it comes to the LOTRs a good deal of the Tolkien lovers have been amazed with PJ and Co.’s ability to bring this complex and incredible work to life.
Here in lies the rub so to speak. Many of you have read the books numerous times before the first film came out, and some like myself who only read it twice before FOTR came out had our on personal ideas, etc. of everything in the books.
My point is this. How do you deal with rereading a novel after you have visuals of Viggo or Miranda Otto in place of your original ideas of these characters? If your first love for these people, elves, dwarves, etc. came from your imagination, then does it or will it affect you on your next read?? This goes for any other work that has been turned into a film. Don’t get me wrong. I love these films; I just want everyone’s opinion on this. Thanks guys!!
Achilles only had an Achilles heel, I have an entire Achilles body.
|
|
|
 by -
NastyBoy
(Thu Jul 17 21:05:12)
|
|
 UPDATED Thu Jul 17 21:19:55 |
I almost didn't see the films. I have read the books many times over the last 30 years and I have a complete image of Middle Earth and all the characters in my head. Anybody who read the books first does. We have our own personal version built by a combination of wonderfully descriptive writing and our own imaginations. I saw less than 5 minutes of Bakshi's version and stopped, not wanting those images to "pollute" the world in my head. When Jackson's version was announced, I thought long and hard about seeing it. Sight is a very strong sense, and I knew that if I saw someone else's version on screen, it had a strong possibility of overwriting my imagined version, and I didn't want that.
What I have found is that there are some overlaps, Jackson's vision has become mine in some parts, but in others, I can still read the book and have my own images in my head. Where the images are similar I have formed a merged version, but where they differ a lot I have two distinct mental images, one mine, the other Jackson's. They live side by side with little conflict.
Dobby likes me.
Dobby's a *beep* fag.
|
|
|
thanks for your reply. I hope you still haven't seen the Bakshi version. ohh God.
"Where the images are similar I have formed a merged version, but where they differ a lot I have two distinct mental images, one mine, the other Jackson's. They live side by side with little conflict."
cool. i see what your saying. That's why i started this post. i just wanted everyone's veiws on the subject. i think its kind of interesting to get everyone's opnion.
Achilles only had an Achilles heel, I have an entire Achilles body.
|
|
|
| by -
veethree
(Thu Jul 17 22:27:53)
|
|
| UPDATED Thu Jul 17 22:29:13 |
Aaah, the Bakshi version! Preserve us, preserve us!
It brings up an interesting point, though. I actually saw the Bakshi version before I read the books (I was young and naive) and it certainly didn't inspire any interest in Tolkien. When I eventually did pick the books up some years later, none of the images the the writing invoked seemed to have been influenced by Bakshi (thankfully).
PJ's version, however, is a different story. Even though I'd read them many times before seeing the movies, his images have infiltrated my visions, presenting themselves when I read the novels - much as in Nasty's case. The quality of the movie made is important when it comes to determining its influence.
"in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing"
|
|
|
what about the Return of the King(1980)?
I vaguely remember seeing it as a child, but I do remember what happened to Gollum. I watched it again several weeks ago. The music is horrible IMHO. The best thing about that version is Sam, but they turned his inner dialouge from a chaper in the book into this over the top segment of him turning Mordor into a Garden. I didn't get it at all.
Achilles only had an Achilles heel, I have an entire Achilles body.
|
|
|
I haven't reread the books since seeing the movies, but that usually isn't a huge problem for me when reading a book that's been adapted into a movie. When I read, I only have vague images in my head, and it doesn't really convert to pictures in my head. I don't usually picture the movie in my head when I'm reading, unless I consciously think about it. I do try to read a book before seeing the movie adapted from it just so I can form my own impressions first rather than borrowing another's images.
On a hot summer night would you offer your throat to the wolf with the red rose?
|
|
|
"I don't usually picture the movie in my head when I'm reading, unless I consciously think about it."
thanks for your reply unwanted birdtamer. Do you ever find yourself thinking of images from whatever random film while reading?
Achilles only had an Achilles heel, I have an entire Achilles body.
|
|
|
Occasionally--if I want to compare the two and see if the movie goes along with my own thoughts of the book.
On a hot summer night would you offer your throat to the wolf with the red rose?
|
|
|
I read FOTR once before going to see PJ Movies (the day after I finished the books). I had mental images of the characters, most of which were different to the movies.
With TTT I had read the book about 10 times before going to see it. So my own visions of characters etc had formed.
I still pretty much see the characters as I pictured them rather than the actors that portrayed them. The way I see them in my mind never changes no matter how many times I see the movie.
Deja Moo: The feeling that you've heard this bullsh#t before
|
|
|
cool. thanks for your post.
"I still pretty much see the characters as I pictured them rather than the actors that portrayed them. The way I see them in my mind never changes no matter how many times I see the movie. "
these are the replys i wanted. People ideas of reading the books after seeing the films.
Achilles only had an Achilles heel, I have an entire Achilles body.
|
|
|
The hobbits in my literary vision were much ... plumper ... 
|
|
|
ha ha. the size of Sam, bilbo, merry and the extras works fine for me. Pippen and Frodo are skinny in my mind. Farmer maggit as well, what little we see of him.
Achilles only had an Achilles heel, I have an entire Achilles body.
|
|
|
| by -
Scretta
(Thu Jul 17 22:47:59)
|
|
| UPDATED Thu Jul 17 22:49:13 |
I see them all now as the actors that played them. Well, except for Liv. I think my mind can't accept her. That is why I just substitute myself for that part. 
Advice is what we ask for when we already know the answer but wish we didn't.
|
|
|
| by -
sinaes
(Tue Aug 5 01:46:41)
|
|
I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless 
|
|
|
I actually didn't even know LotR existed until I tagged along with my brother to see FotR in the theatre. So I had no expectations whatsoever, and was completely blown away.
After that, though I think I read LotR ten times before TTT came out. I wasn't at all dissatisfied with the visual interpretations, since I'd only just gotten acquainted with it - only one year in which to soak up everything!  I didn't have the time or dedication (I wasn't a real Ringnut till after TTT came out; I was just interested and slightly engrossed) to really imagine what the Elves or Dwarves or Rivendell or Edoras looked like; so I've just taken the art from the films and adopted them as my own. So whenever I read about Aragorn, I see Viggo, and when I read about Éowyn, I see Miranda.
 You are a daughter of kings. A shieldmaiden of Rohan.
|
|
|
| by -
sinaes
(Tue Aug 5 19:30:54)
|
|
Me too Eowyn  I'd heard of LOTR a few times before, but I never had close friends that were fans of it, so it's not something I really ever learned that much about.
I practically didn't know anything until I saw the trailers. I was interested enough, that I actually went to see FOTR opening night, the first time I'd ever done that for any film. But unlike you, I wasn't impressed by FOTR that much. Maybe I was too tired from being up all day, but the film seemed almost unbearably slow paced to me. I remember it was just before the council of Elrond, I was thinking 'this film is taking so long'
Well, I saw it again a few months later, better, but not that great.
Then, thanks to blockbuster practically giving me a free copy of FOTR, I actually sat down and liked it.  I've been a LOTR fan for a whole year now, wohoo! 
I still haven't read all the books ... waiting for ROTK to come out to do that I can't say that I envy those of you who might enjoy the films less because of changes ;) But from where I'm sitting, they look fantastic 
However, I do envy not being able to discuss everything in full detail :) Oh well, not much longer now 
I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless
|
|
|
You didn't like FotR until you got it for free?  You must've had a long day; I knew I was going to like it when I saw the first ten seconds of the prologue. The ride home from the theatre was the first car trip I'd ever ridden in silence - I was that much in awe!
You are a daughter of kings. A shieldmaiden of Rohan.
|
|
|
| by -
sinaes
(Wed Aug 6 02:02:23)
|
|
Actually, I did have a long day :)
But I love it now, TTT even more so
I can't wait for ROTK.
I'm like a good haines t-shirt: tagless
|
|
|
Usually, when I read a book, I only have very vague images of people and places, more like a general feeling than a detailed vision. PJ´s vision helped me to put a picture to the name. For Example, I could never figure out exactly HOW Helm Deep was laid out...
As for the people, I´m perfectly satisfied with the fact that now the names have the actor´s faces. (Except for Aragorn, he usually has the face of my "crush-at-that-time", so the poor guy went through A LOT of plastic surgery over the years! Arwen always bore a striking resebmlance to yours truly, so a lot of freckles were added! Oh, and since Faramir has black hair in the book and Boromir looks so much alike... you know. But out of completely unknown reasons  BOTH now look more like a talended british actor...)
Knowledge is Power. Power corrupts.
Study hard. Be evil.
|
|
|
You know, I had to draw pictures of Helm's Deep to try to understand it from the books. I will always be grateful to PJ for bringing the battle aspects of the story into better focus for me.
When I re-read the books now, I still see the characters the way I've developed them in mental image over the year, despite the movie. By the time I'd seen the movie, I'd read the books at least 30 times, so those images were well ingrained and suited to my understanding of the characters. A few of PJ's cast matched my imagination, or came close enough to be integrated into my mental images: Legolas walked right out of my imagination onto the screen- amazing! Gandalf, also was very close; Eowyn and Eomer were close enough, and I loved the extra details of the Rohan culture that made them richer for me. For the most part, Aragorn, Arwen, the Hobbits and most of the Elves were nothing like my imagination, so they have not joined my mental cast. Obviously PJ wasn't into Elven beauty as much as he was into the battle scenes.
"I sang of leaves, of leaves of gold, and leaves of gold there grew..."
|
|
|
In my case it was a very mixed bag of expectations met, surpassed or totally missed.
There's a reason for that, tho. Tolkien's prose didn't always fire up my imagination. The strongest impressions were about specific scenes, places, situations and 'atmospheres', rather than how the characters actually looked - let alone how they 'sounded'. I could rarely 'hear' the voices, since the direct speech doesn't really drip off one's tongue. Dialogue isn't exactly Tolkien's strong point, or wasn't supposed to be, I don't know.
Anyways, of the charcaters the Hobbits met my imagination the most, just that I don't think Tolkien's Hobbits rate quite as high on the 'cute' scale. Casting Ian Holm as Bilbo, tho, was nothing less than a stroke of bloody genius. He now IS Bilbo for me.
The humans were no surprise, apart from Boromir, who struck me as something like "Of course! Why didn't I think of that before! That's him!" He surpassed my expectations greatly.
Aragorn's looks were a bit too influenced by the 90's jeans commercial hunk style for my taste, but I could deal with that. He didn't blot out the old image, tho.
Gandalf was a perfect fusion. Perfect.
The Elves were the greatest diversion. I didn't imagine them half as human looking. None have changed how I imagined them before.
*
Schogger13
Truth is only a day long. Tomorrow you'll have to ask again.
|
|
|
 Oog make mission statement.
|
|
|
Not idly do the leaves of Lorien fall
|
| |
| | |
company.
Advertise on IMDb.
License our content.
