Cartoon vs. Movie

[Lily]

Now I thought the movie was better in technical wise. But the cartoon was better in story wise. The cartoon kept very very close to the book much better than the movie did. But the one thing the both messed up was the part when Frodo got stabed and Legolas didn't save him Arwen didn't save him Glorfindel did! Oh well! Anyway I would like to hear what you thought was better the cartoon or the movie??

[Finwe]

How can you possibly think that Ralph Bakshi's cartoon is comparable to PJ's movie?!?!?! I think PJ's LotR was wayyy much better than the cartoon.

[HCIsland]

A cartoon is what you watch Saturday Mornings. Bakshi made an animated movie.<P>Having said that, I feel Jackson's work is definately better than Bakshi's. There's a lot to be said for the animated LotR (Frodo's portrayal for one) but frankly, it should have been streemlined and changed more. For someone not familiar with the book it would be a dizzing stream of names and places. Even I found it began to drag and was releaved when it finally got to it's underwhelming conclusion, and I own the DVD.<P>Technically, I think Bakshi's goal outstretched his grasp, but I admire him for the effort.<P>H.C.

[Meela]

I really enjoyed the animated version. And yes, it did have more aspects of the book. Like, the fact that 17 years passed before Gandalf returned and Frodo set off. PJ pretty much left it so it looked as though it was a few weeks. There's nothing wrong with that, and personally I'm not bothered, but on a general scale, I'm sure book enthusiasts preferred the animated version's references to the time scale.

[Horse-Maiden of the Shire]

The live action movie was better. The animated one was just sort of "out there". In reference to the rescuing of Frodo, in the live action movie, Arwen was at least from Rivendell and so was Glorfindel (i hope, otherwise I'm making a fool of myself) so that made sense. But in the animated one, Legolas came. He's from Mirkwood! Leggy just sort of came from out of the blue. And the animated characters made such strange expressions. But the Orcs certainly did give me shivers:<BR>

[arianrod]

True, Bakshi was more loyal to the book, but it was fairly hard for me to focus on the dialogue and story line because I was laughing too hard at the terrible visual effect of the entire film. The only LotR animation that I enjoy is the one done on <I>The Hobbit</I>, but I'm not sure if that was still Bakshi's work or not.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Technically, I think Bakshi's goal outstretched his grasp, but I admire him for the effort.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Same here, HCIsland. You have to appreciate the masterpiece he wanted to create, but still know that he was far from achieving it.

[Meneltarmacil]

Yeah, the cartoon format works great for The Hobbit where things are more upbeat but for the more serious LOTR you really need something that draws you in, makes it seem more real. Cartoons don't do that.<P><note: ALL HAIL PETER JACKSON>

[Daisy Brambleburr]

I didn't like the animated movie. In fact, after watching it I fell down on my knees and thanked Peter Jackson for doing such a brilliant job. Compared to the animated movie, the more currant one is a work of genius, in my eyes. <P>I found this review that just about sums up my opinion on the whole thing.<P><BR><A HREF="http://www.flyingmoose.org/tolksarc/bakshi/bakshi.htm" TARGET=_blank>review of animated movie</A><P>Here are a few quotes.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Everybody in this movie has unspeakably big hair. Pounds and pounds and pounds of it. I swear, I keep waiting for Gandalf to fall over under the sheer weight of it. And Saruman... it's perhaps better not to even talk about Saruman. I mean, he shouldn't have even been able to stand up. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> In Bag End, Gandalf asks Frodo if he sees any inscription on the Ring. Finding none, they throw it into the fire. After a moment. Gandalf pulls the Ring back out of the fire. Frodo comments with surprise that it is still quite cool. But they never bother to look for the Ring-inscription, which makes the whole business of throwing the Ring into the fire kind of pointless. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> "What a pity that Bilbo didn't kill that vile creature when he had the chance!" Frodo says, curiously jumping up and throwing a rock to emphasize his point. They just can't sit still, for God's sake <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Inexplicably, for the first half of the scene the Black Riders seem completely unable to control their horses. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> The Lothlorien Junior High Children's Choir. Not only is the music unbearably nauseating, but in addition the Elves in the distance are exposed at least five F-stops too bright. Indeed, they're so bright it's hard to even tell they're people. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>A funny thing that I noticed but isn't listed was when Frodo is captured by the Watcher. Merry, who is sitting by him, screams for 'Strider!', but instead of then hacking away at the watcher with his sword or trying to save his dear friend he turns tail and runs away as fast as his legs can carry him.<P>And I understand that you didn't want a long rant about the movie, and I know that it was made a long time ago so it's kind of out of date, but I really didn't like it. Sorry if I offended anyone who does!

[The Saucepan Man]

You have to remember that the Bakshi version was made in the late 1970s (I think). At that time, although the original Star Wars had broken new ground in terms of SFX, a live action version of LotR would have been unthinkable. Believe it or not, the way in which the animated film used real action overlaid with drawing (for the horse-riding and battle scenes, for example) was in itself state of the art for the time.<P>As a 12 year old who had just read LotR for the first time and been captivated by it, I was terribly excited about the prospect of the animated film. I saw it at the cinema and loved it. It was wonderful to see what had recently become my favourite book brought to life on the screen. I recall being terribly disappointed that it finished at the end of Helm's Deep, and that the sequel was never made.<P>Now, I have not seen it again since, but I do of course recognise, looking back, that it had its flaws. The visualisation of the characters certainly leaves a lot to be desired (Aragorn the Red Indian, Gimli the Yokel, Boromir the Viking, Legolas the Cross-Eyed etc). And I am sure that it now looks terribly dated. <P>But, as someone who saw this film when it was first released, I cannot but harbour fond memories of it. <P>I think that HC (as always) put it very well when he said:<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Technically, I think Bakshi's goal outstretched his grasp, but I admire him for the effort. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[MLD-Grounds-Keeper-Willie]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Technically, I think Bakshi's goal outstretched his grasp, but I admire him for the effort. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I agree also. I don't think that he realized the difficulty of the task he attempted until he actually attempted it. If he had known before, I think that he wouldn't have done it. But he couldn't just quit, even if he knew it wasn't going to be as great as he imagined, at least he tried, and I respect him for it.<P>Bakshi did not have the outstanding technology that we have today, as The Saucepan Man pointed out. And he was going for animation which would not capture the realism of live action that PJ's films could. Not only that, you have to look at the money issue. PJ had plenty of funding for his films, yet he was stretched for it, and had to use it wisely. Bakshi did not have that much funding. With the funding he had, he could only produce half of what he intended. He couldn't even finish the rest because he ran out of funding. I'm sure he could have done a much better job if he had sufficient funding. And PJ's film was allowed for three three hour films, whereas Bakshi was only allowed for one film under 2 1/2 hours (not sure on time allotted for Bakshi's film, but it's something close to that). With that said, Bakshi had serious time constraints and couldn't put as much detail and quality into his work. He had to squish all of it together and leave out some parts, which PJ witfully picked up on (All four hobbits hiding under the road from the Black rider, Tom Bombadil, and Glorfindel). Besides that, Bakshi was the first to attempt to bring LotR to film. There was no one before him to follow at all or to learn from. PJ had Bakshi before him. PJ could learn from Bakshi's mistakes and pick up on things that worked. Not only that, PJ knew the pressure that he would go through.<P>I enjoyed the film. It was Bakshi's film that introduced me to Tolkien and it was Bakshi's film that filled me awe from Middle-earth. I've watched it over and over and still do. I do not mind the thousands of flaws. I saw it in the early 90's when my mom bought me the video in a grocery store (I think it was Lucky's because they used to sell video's in the store, it's not Lucky's anymore though, Albertson's bought it out). I did not have any expectations of it at all. I was not around when it first came out. I did not read LotR before I watched it. It was completely new to me and I watched and enjoyed it as a movie. I do feel very differently about PJ's film since that was a different experience. I had expectations for that. I can excuse FotR, but as for TTT, they butchered that too much. The think that dissapoints me about PJ's film is that he had the chance to make it excellent, but he didn't take it. I'm talking about Arwen, elves at Helms Deep, and Faramir (and more too). It was things like that that just dissapointed me.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> How can you possibly think that Ralph Bakshi's cartoon is comparable to PJ's movie?!?!?! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Finwe, as Amanaduial the archer so kindly put it in another thread, each to his own. Please respect other people's opinions.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> In reference to the rescuing of Frodo, in the live action movie, Arwen was at least from Rivendell and so was Glorfindel (i hope, otherwise I'm making a fool of myself) so that made sense. But in the animated one, Legolas came. He's from Mirkwood! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Actually Legolas made more sense. Arwen may have been from Rivendell, but she was only supposed to be at Rivendell. Legolas was at Rivendell anyways. He went there to bring news of Gollum's escape from Mirkwood. And Legolas would be seen throughout the rest of the film, in both Bakshi's and PJ's.<P>Daisy Brambleburr, that's an interesting review, however, I refuse to argue with it. Sarcasm is something that is not very arguable. If the review was serious, then I probably would. Some of it is actually quite funny.

[Daisy Brambleburr]

I don't really think the review that I posted before was meant to be taken very seriously. I posted it because I found it very funny, and does express some valid points, under the sarcasm.<P>Because I am just 16 and am used to all these amazing special effects my viewpoint on this animated movie has probably been affected. If I'd have seen the animated movie when it had first come out (had I been born) I probably would have liked it more. The reason I didn't like it is because I had seen Peter Jacksons version first, and perhaps had higher expectations that I should have. But if I'd have seen it when it first came out I'm not garunteeing that I would have liked it even then, basically because of some of the things I said before. <P>Cheers my dears!

[Tinuviel of Denton]

Actually, the only thing that really bothered me about that movie was the animation. The story was followed well (when we watched it, my sister squealed "They have the conspiracy!" I must admit that I did the same ) and things were...righter, somehow, but the animation made me dizzy. Especially the orcs. Things like Saruman's coat being red, and that his name was pronounced "Aruman" drove me crazy, but then I'm well-known for being overly picky. I actually felt nauseous when the big battle scenes took place, because they switched from live action overlaid with drawing to cartoon-type animation so much.<P>The live action LotR movie is better visually, but the plot holes leave quite a bit to be desired. (Faramir, etc.)<p>[ July 02, 2003: Message edited by: Tinuviel of Denton ]

[Iarwain]

My memory will hold that the cartoon was incomparably better than the live-action film. Unfortunately, after a recent reviewing of the Return of the King (I was utterly disturbed), I fear that my memory of the cartoons is tainted by the fact that I hadn't read the books yet when I saw them. <P>Iarwain

[Feanor of the Peredhil]

You guys should really check out the thread <I>The Other Movies</I>. It's truly frightening, but not so much as the animated movies themselves. I've watched ROTK quite a few times for various reasons: it annoys my brother and he likes to call it a travesty, it makes me laugh until my ribs hurt, and I get to sing along to the music:<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Frodooooo, of the nine fingerssssss... and the Ring of Dooooooooooom!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Where there's a whip (*whip crack*), there's a way... we don't wanna go to war today, hey hey!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>If you never say helloooooo, you don't have to say goodbye...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I've never seen the Hobbit, but I hear Smaug looks like a cat... And I got about 15 minutes into Animated LOTR before me and my brother turned it off. Someday I'll watch it in whole, but some of the scenes are downright scary. Example: in ROTK, the Wraiths sound oddly enough, like a dial tone. Boromir is a Viking, Aragorn is an Indian, Pippin gets to say (in a very yokelish voice): "Gandalf, Gandalf, come quick, Denathor's gone plum loony!" Frightening.<P>Fea

[Tinuviel of Denton]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> I've never seen the Hobbit, but I hear Smaug looks like a cat <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Actually, he looks like a dog.

[Aragost]

I saw the animated hobbit and I couldn't stand it there were too many songs for two year olds and three year olds. Two year olds do not read Lord of the Rings. The animation sucked. In my opinion Disney did a better job with dwarves in Snow White.<P>I also saw the animated Return of the King. I hated that so much I didn't even watch thirty minuites of it. there was too much variety in the metabolism of the orcs. You have one the size of a twig and right next to it there is one the size of a riding lawnmower.<P>The part that really made me mad was the "SEErith Ungol" this and "SEErith Ungol that" I was yelling at the television saying its Cirith Ungol with a K sound a K for Kirith.<P>The people were too dumb to realize this if they looked at a map it would say Kirith Ungol, not Seerith. They could have checked their pronunciation in the apennndacies. <P>PJ's movie was way better.

[mollecon]

I saw the Bakshi movie way back in late 70ties ('79 perhaps?), in the cinema. I was already then a fan of the books, & frankly, I was disappointed. While it did try & follow the storyline as faithfully as possible, it failed miserably in conveying the greatness of Tolkiens universe. I've seen it again recently on DVD, which only confirmed my original thoughts.<P>HCI hit it on the spot - Bakshi was brave, but too early out for the technique to follow. I think that was what he tried to make up for by chosing to make an animated film upon live action footage. I think he failed, sorry. <P>Though PJ's live action movie may not be as faithfull to the story line as Bakshi's, it does a <I>FAR</I> better job when it comes to depicting the greatness of Tolkiens story & the universe it takes place in. & yes, PJ is in the fortunate position of being able to take full advantage of modern technique - & even then, he has to stretch it to it's full capacity to get the movies working. OK, enough rant...

[Iarwain]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> there were too many songs for two year olds and three year olds <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Hm. That must be why I liked it so much, 3-4 was my prime in Hobbit cartoon watching. PJ wins the award for effort and earthly "realism" (not middle-earthly so much), but the animated films are great for reminiscing, as long as one steers clear of reality.<P>Ever Wandering,<BR>Iarwain

[The_Hand]

I thought the Bakshi movie was absolutely terrible but it was a "good" try. But even though it did follow the story line more that doen't make up for the horrible moria scene... I hated the "orcs" if you can call them that. The Hobbit was a much better animated movie. When I was little I would watch it over and over and Gollum would freak me out every time. No I thank PJ every day for the real and the only true lotr movie.

[Tinuviel of Denton]

Except for the fact that PJ mauled the storyline...<P>I watched the Bakshi movie and I have to say that the only thing keeping me in the room was my three year old sister who fell asleep on my lap. I really don't like the way he did the live action/animation. It made me nauseous.<P>Wait, I think I said this already.<p>[ July 13, 2003: Message edited by: Tinuviel of Denton ]

I think Peter Jackson's film was definitely more respectable to Tolkien but there are nice aspects of the Bashki movie also. I own both of the movies on DVD and have watched both many times. I think Bashki's would be amazing if it wasn't for all the annoying rotoscope effects. For me it just seems like lazy animation. About the Arwen and Legolas taking place of Glorfindel (Elf of Rivendell), I think it was mainly for the audiences these days with short attention spans. People don't like too many characters. I know some who can't even name the entire fellowship! All the characters certainly are more "real" in Jackson's film because of the strange costumes that they rotoscoped in Bashki's. Both of the movies are great and I recommend people see both. I am looking forward to "The Return of the King".

[Silmiel of Imladris]

I thought the cartoon was like watching grass grow. Though my friends and I made fun of the 80's animation by saying how ugly the characters looked. But poor Glorfindel was cut out again and replaced by Legolas.

[Aredhel Ar-Feiniel]

PJ's is better, by a longshot. I own the animated version & watch it for kicks. It kills me how Frodo, Merry, & Pippin all look somewhat normal, but Sam...Poor Sam looks like a potato!

[Silmiel of Imladris]

I concur. I also hated how they put the fellowship and TTT in one movie because it confussed me because I hadn't finished reading the books at the time.

[Lily]

Now I don't know if any of you saw this but, in Moria Merry had brown hair and Pippin had blonde hair ok. Well when Pippin through that stone down the well he had brown hair. And when Merry said to Gandalf earlier:<P>"I don't like this place Gandalf" <P>He had blonde hair they switched!! But it was really funny. Me and my friend watched it together we were laughing and making funny of it like every min.! But I was nice that we could do that! You know have a good sence of humor about the whole thing! I still liked the movie yes! But there were just some parts that cracked me up!

[Aredhel Ar-Feiniel]

Mmm, the animation is sketchy.<BR>I especially laugh at the orcs. <p>[ July 14, 2003: Message edited by: Aredhel Ar Feiniel ]

[Daisy Brambleburr]

When I was watching the cartoon I got to the part when Glorfindle is supposed to enter. Well, I saw a blonde elf on a white horse approaching and thought: 'Yes! At last something good has happened! It's Glorfindle!' But then I hear Aragorn go 'Legolas! Mae Govannen' and my heart somewhat sinks. <BR>Poor Glorfindle! I have a mental image of him sitting somewhere (maybe a phsyciatrists couch) saying: 'Why me?? First Legolas kicks steals my fame, and then it's Arwen who thieves my horse. What's wrong with me? Why can't I be in just one measly movie?' Honestly, this elf is in pieces!<BR>

[Aredhel Ar-Feiniel]

*pictures Glorfindel in a shrink's office* <BR>That's so sad! Hah, there should be a sort of "behind the movies" about all the characters who've been left out & scarred for life...

[Silmiel of Imladris]

Poor Glorfindel. Hey there is still a chance for him yet because he does come to Aragorn and Arwen's wedding so maybe PJ stuck him in there. Ok.. so I doubt it. Whatever PJ does he better not cut out Elladan and Elrohir or I am going to be very ticked.

[Meneltarmacil]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Whatever PJ does he better not cut out Elladan and Elrohir or I am going to be very ticked.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Sorry, but he probably will , since you know how he is about "unnecessary characters".<P>Please don't kill me, since I'm not the one who is making the movie, I'm just warning you about it.

[Aredhel Ar-Feiniel]

Awww man! Somehow, the so called "unnecessary" characters always rank high on my favorites list. It's all a conspiracy, I tell you!...

[Silmiel of Imladris]

But I want to see Elladan and Elrohir! *sobs* Ok fine, so who is PJ going to replace them with to give Elrond's message "use the pathes of the dead"? Or is Aragorn just going to remember them on his own?