Current Events > I tried reading The Lord of the Rings a while back. Gave up fairly quickly.

(+) Yeah! (+)

I don't understand how such seemingly dull books spawned SUCH amazing films.

How are the books considered classics? I won't deny they basically started the fantasy genre, which is a big achievement, but...why do people ENJOY them so much?


---

You find them dull, others dont. Go figure.

I tried to read the books about 15 years ago and gave up about halfway through the first one.

About three years ago I was doing a road trip across the country and listed to audiobook versions of The Hobbit and LotR. The Hobbit was decent because it is fairly short. But even the audio versions of the books are kind of boring. I think I stopped listening at some point in the third book.

---

imagine you'd never heard of elves, dwarves, wizards etc before and it's 1950. Probably pretty cool

---

He can get a little too wordy about the scenery, but I like his style. It comes off like an old legend being read, which was the point.

---

I read The Hobbit, no problem. Got decent enjoyment out of it.

I read FotR, thought it was a bit wordy at times, but was still able to finish it.

I read the first half of TTT. I got to the second half with Sam, Frodo, and Gollum.

I couldn't. I got to some part where they were fucking around some cliff side and some rope and you'd think it'd be straight forward but Tolkien loves to take 20 pages to explain what you could explain in half a page and I was fucking done

---

It is admittedly a bit of a drag getting out of the Shire but it picks up pretty quickly after that.

It inspired a lot more than films, the brunt of high fantasy stems back to it in one way or another.

it's kind of impressive how many series follow the same trajectory of escalation that Lord of the Rings does. Everything from the Prydain novels to The Wheel of Time to The Witcher owes a certain amount to Tolkien

---

It took me probably about three months of reading ten or so pages and subsequently falling asleep to get through the first leg of Fellowship of the Ring. After the story got to Bree however I was hooked, and burned through the rest of the trilogy in no time.

---

Read The Hobbit, its actually a fun read.

---

Hobbit was good. Rest were boring. Blah blah blah

Hey im Tom Bombadil, lets bone.

always knew u were a busta
---

tag is still relevant...

---

Tolkien is a genius of world building. He's the father of modern fantasy, and his depictions of Elves, Orcs, ect basically became the standard.

But his prose is shit.. His personal friends couldn't finish the books.

---

Spooking posted...

We still don't have a good LOTR RPG game.

half of that is because of the licensing hell involved with the IP.

---

I tried to start it a whole bunch of times during mylife. it only finally clicked a couple of years ago.

Tbh the best part was that 1st book in the fellowship of the ring

I started reading it, but then I started thinking about how life is too short.

---

iPhone_7 posted...

I started reading it, but then I started thinking about how life is too short.

XD

I read it for the first time in 4th grade and have loved it ever since. However, like many things I enjoyed back then, who has the time for them these days

---

Maybe Im just a fast reader but I can burn through the whole trilogy in a week. If that

---

I remember trying to read them a few years back and just couldnt get into his writing style. Nothing wrong with it, but for some reason it just didnt click with me.

---

Then try The Silmarillion

<_<
>_>;

---

An English teacher in high school told me she thought this was the very rare case where the movie are better than the books.

I think I mostly agree. But I still like the trilogy.

---

it has been a long time since i read it, so my memory may be faulty.
but i got the impression that the Battle of Helms Deep for example was more like a conversation about a battle, than an actual battle scene

---

Total_Lost2 posted...

Then try The Silmarillion

<_<
>_>;

I'm a Tolkien fanboy and it took me a couple of reads to finally "get" it. Lots of going back and forth between the chapters and the index/glossary. After that, I loved it.

It does make LOTR read like a children's story in comparison, but I'm glad I stick through it.

---

it was the cover, the time, the size, and the smell of this lotr omnibus that intoxicated me https://i.pinimg.com/originals/4c/d2/d6/4cd2d6e96dde89920988001f61865ffc.jpg

---

breath of the wild trailer with that music and the opening scenes took me to the same place

---

They are still my favorite book series of all time but Fellowship of the Ring starts so slow. Like everything before they get to Bree is a bit of a slog.
I love the films, but there are some liberties they take that weren't necessary for the translation to the film, mostly in the 2nd film. Faramir's attempt to take Frodo and Sam to Gondor is the direct opposite of his character in the book. Faramir was completely the opposite of Boromir and smart enough to know that either himself or his father having possession of the ring was an awful idea.
Elves at Helm's deep is just....ugh. I also don't like the Army of the Dead at the Battle of Pelennor Fields. In the books the Army helps Aragorn take control of the ships they need to bring the army they've gathered from the south to come help Gondor. In the film they just deus ex machina the battle, which takes away from victory against all odds being achieved by the heros.

---

DarkChozoGhost posted...

Tolkien is a genius of world building. He's the father of modern fantasy, and his depictions of Elves, Orcs, ect basically became the standard.

But his prose is shit.. His personal friends couldn't finish the books.

This

---

ScazarMeltex posted...

Faramir was completely the opposite of Boromir and smart enough to know that either himself or his father having possession of the ring was an awful idea.

It's not about being smart, but yeah

---

Just wanted to say that I liked the change to Sauron in the Hobbit trilogy. In the the Lord of the Rings trilogy hes literally a flaming eyeball. In the Hobbit its him standing that resembles an iris with the flames radiating outward to form the eye.

---

iPhone_7 posted...

Just wanted to say that I liked the change to Sauron in the Hobbit trilogy. In the the Lord of the Rings trilogy hes literally a flaming eyeball. In the Hobbit its him standing that resembles an iris with the flames radiating outward to form the eye.

That was somewhat better even if the Hobbit movies weren't. Don't know why Jackson had a hard time understanding metaphors and symbolism with "the eye of Sauron" thing.

ScazarMeltex posted...

Faramir's attempt to take Frodo and Sam to Gondor is the direct opposite of his character in the book. Faramir was completely the opposite of Boromir and smart enough to know that either himself or his father having possession of the ring was an awful idea.
Changing Theoden's choice to go to Helm's Deep from the right choice to the wrong choice weakens Theoden in the eyes of the audience. Elves at Helm's deep is just....ugh. I also don't like the Army of the Dead at the Battle of Pelennor Fields. In the books the Army helps Aragorn take control of the ships they need to bring the army they've gathered from the south to come help Gondor. In the film they just deus ex machina the battle, which takes away from victory against all odds being achieved by the heros.

After becoming more of a fan of the books, stuff like that knocks points off my liking of the movies. Plus smaller stuff like making Elrond a douchebag self hating racist and making Wormtongue into a caricature that nobody should have ever trusted. Jackson doesn't know what subtlety is it seems, but what should one expect from the guy who made Braindead/Dead Alive.

---

Balrog0 posted...

It's not about being smart, but yeah

Smart, wise, emotionally intelligent with a knowledge of history whichever. You know what I'm getting at ;p

---

Colorahdo posted...

imagine you'd never heard of elves, dwarves, wizards etc before and it's 1950. Probably pretty cool

His books didn't get a mainstream audience until the Vietnam War or some shit. Was picked up by the hippies as a form of protest.

---

Was the eye just a metaphor in the books?

And Im also curious about whether the original Mouth of Sauron had his face completely covered except for his mouth.

---

iPhone_7 posted...

Was the eye just a metaphor in the books?

Sauron has a body. It's even missing a finger. The "eye" was Sauron's symbol. Him seeing all was due to him having areas under his control and the ubiquitous of his symbol not him literally being a giant eye. Plus having powers to see and manipulate things from afar. It was him and not Saruman who impeded the Fellowship at the mountain pass that forced them to go into Moria.

iPhone_7 posted...

And Im also curious about whether the original Mouth of Sauron had his face completely covered except for his mouth.

It's been a while, but he wasn't as evil and disgusting looking if I remember right. Aragorn also doesn't behead him in rage because murdering a messenger/envoy is considered uncivil and wrong. Aragorn just scares him by looking/being a badass.

---

Southernfatman posted...

That was somewhat better even if the Hobbit movies weren't. Don't know why Jackson had a hard time understanding metaphors and symbolism with "the eye of Sauron" thing.

After becoming more of a fan of the books, stuff like that knocks points off my liking of the movies. Plus smaller stuff like making Elrond a douchebag self hating racist and making Wormtongue into a caricature that nobody should have ever trusted. Jackson doesn't know what subtlety is it seems, but what should one expect from the guy who made Braindead/Dead Alive.

Some of it I think is just that Jackson had to balance the needs of making the fanbase happy while making things obvious for the average movie-goer. Subtlety is lost on a chunk of people who just want to show up and be entertained (and there is nothing wrong with that).

---

"his arm has grown long" is a great line

---

ScazarMeltex posted...

Some of it I think is just that Jackson had to balance the needs of making the fanbase happy while making things obvious for the average movie-goer. Subtlety is lost on a chunk of people who just want to show up and be entertained (and there is nothing wrong with that).

That's understandable and there are lots of changes from the books to the movies I'm totally fine with because of that or pacing issues, but he still didn't have to make Sauron a literal giant eye nor make certain characters into kid show villains like Wormtongue or Denethor.

Balrog0 posted...

"his arm has grown long" is a great line

Yes!


---

ScazarMeltex posted...

They are still my favorite book series of all time but Fellowship of the Ring starts so slow. Like everything before they get to Bree is a bit of a slog.
I love the films, but there are some liberties they take that weren't necessary for the translation to the film, mostly in the 2nd film. Faramir's attempt to take Frodo and Sam to Gondor is the direct opposite of his character in the book. Faramir was completely the opposite of Boromir and smart enough to know that either himself or his father having possession of the ring was an awful idea.
Changing Theoden's choice to go to Helm's Deep from the right choice to the wrong choice weakens Theoden in the eyes of the audience. Elves at Helm's deep is just....ugh. I also don't like the Army of the Dead at the Battle of Pelennor Fields. In the books the Army helps Aragorn take control of the ships they need to bring the army they've gathered from the south to come help Gondor. In the film they just deus ex machina the battle, which takes away from victory against all odds being achieved by the heros.

Refresh my memory - what did Theoden do incorrectly at Helm's Deep?

Spooking posted...

We still don't have a good LOTR RPG game.

The third age is pretty decent

---

Ruvan22 posted...

Refresh my memory - what did Theoden do incorrectly at Helm's Deep?

So in the book he's like "we'll go to Helm's Deep" and everyone is like "it's not great but it's the best we can do for now with the situation being what it is". In the movie he's like "Helm's Deep is our only option" and everyone shits on him like "no that's a horrible idea" and Theoden is like "tough shit i'm the King and that's what we are going to do".

In the book he goes there with all the troops he can gather from the surrounding lands and the troops that were already there fighting (along with the people of the city). In the movies he goes there with very few troops a ton of refugees, and along they way they get ambushed by mounted orcs and a bunch of people get killed (just like the heroes said they would) and then he has to conscript a bunch of the old and children from the refugees to man the walls.

Later when shit goes bad in the book Theoden is the one to suggest the final charge in hopes of breaking the enemy or going out on horseback like a true man of Rohan. In the movie Theoden admits to Aragorn that he fucked up by bringing them there and Aragorn suggests the final heroic charge.

The one cool moment they gave Theoden in the movie was taken from Eomer in the book, which was the second half of his speech when they arrive at Gondor.

---

None of the changes alone are a deal breaker, but together they seriously undercut a large theme of the books about the importance of 'ordinary' Men and their choices

---

The films were watered down versions of the books.

ScazarMeltex posted...

So in the book he's like "we'll go to Helm's Deep" and everyone is like "it's not great but it's the best we can do for now with the situation being what it is". In the movie he's like "Helm's Deep is our only option" and everyone shits on him like "no that's a horrible idea" and Theoden is like "tough shit i'm the King and that's what we are going to do".

In the book he goes there with all the troops he can gather from the surrounding lands and the troops that were already there fighting (along with the people of the city). In the movies he goes there with very few troops a ton of refugees, and along they way they get ambushed by mounted orcs and a bunch of people get killed (just like the heroes said they would) and then he has to conscript a bunch of the old and children from the refugees to man the walls.

Later when shit goes bad in the book Theoden is the one to suggest the final charge in hopes of breaking the enemy or going out on horseback like a true man of Rohan. In the movie Theoden admits to Aragorn that he fucked up by bringing them there and Aragorn suggests the final heroic charge.

The one cool moment they gave Theoden in the movie was taken from Eomer in the book, which was the second half of his speech when they arrive at Gondor.

Thanks - I think I stopped reading TtT when Frodo and Sam got into the marshes so never actually read the book description. Does the book describe why Helm's Deep's gate was right on the first wall? Iirc in the movie they have a long primary wall (that gets blown up) and a secondary wall they fall back to. The (only) gate was right on the first wall, where as if they had a second gate to the keep it would have slowed them down

The books can definitely be hard to get into because Tolkien goes way overboard when it comes to world-building, but that's also what made the series so beloved by ubernerds back in the day

also, Tom Bombadil grinds every scene he's in to a screeching halt. there's a reason he was cut from the films

---

Ruvan22 posted...

Thanks - I think I stopped reading TtT when Frodo and Sam got into the marshes so never actually read the book description. Does the book describe why Helm's Deep's gate was right on the first wall? Iirc in the movie they have a long primary wall (that gets blown up) and a secondary wall they fall back to. The (only) gate was right on the first wall, where as if they had a second gate to the keep it would have slowed them down

So they don't talk about it in the movie but there is actually a third wall further out. Helm's deep was Helm's Dike, The deeping wall, and The Hornburg. Helm's Dike was first wall, it was the longest and furthest out and they didn't have enough men to properly defend it so they didn't really bother. It had a gate in it. The Deeping Wall was the one you see get blown up in the movie. It did not have a gate in it. Then The Hornburg which was the keep portion of it. I believe the Deeping Wall was built later than the dike or the hornburg.
EDIT: Here is a map of the whole thing.
https://tinyurl.com/yazgrpwx

---