Make sure to claim your *FREE* audiobook with a free trial of Audible 🎧📖 www.audibletrial.com/factorfantasyfellowship 👈🏼 Use my link to claim your book & support the channel at the same time!
@JBatGaming2
3 ай бұрын
As a Lord of the Rings book nerd I know most of Glorfindel’s story but I’d love to see a video on him for people who don’t know
@factorfantasyweekly
3 ай бұрын
I think I might have to do one 👀
@Tony4095
27 күн бұрын
Please more Glorfindel
@Niko-hi5my
3 ай бұрын
When I first watched Fellowship, I expected one hour of singing in Rivendell. Shocking omission
@Seriously_Unserious
Ай бұрын
The idea that Isildor had a chance to destroy the Ring and didn't is actually exclusive to the movies. In the books, he never took the Ring to Mt Doom, never stood with Elrond over the "fires" and never had to contemplate whether or not to destroy the Ring. Those familiar with the Ring may have known it could only be destroyed in Mt Doom, but as The One Ring had only ever been in the direct possession of Sauron up to this point, nobody would have any way of knowing of it's corruptive influence and treacherous nature. It was Isuldor who uncovered these during his time as a Ringbearer, and in the end, his decision was to bring the Ring to Rivendell and seek Elrond's council on what to do with it and where to safely store it until they could figure out what to do next. Then the ambush happened and he died before he could even make it there and the One Ring ended up resting at the bottom of the River Anduin in the Galaden Fields. The books Galdulf reads in LotR were written by Isildor himself, of his observations of the Ring and its effects on him. Isildor in the books was strong and wise enough to realize the Ring was corrupting him and take appropriate action. Sadly he just never reached his destination. Also even his reasoning for taking the Ring in the first place in the books is described as a Blood Price that Sauron owes Isildor for having slain so many of his kin. Nobody in the books bats an eye at him claiming this from Sauron as his right, as Isildor had lost his father, brother and several other kin to Sauron's crimes. It was only when Isildor started experiencing the corrupting influences of the Ring over time that he wrote his manuscripts as a warning to any other who might come across Sauron's Ring, and took the steps mentioned above to correct what he now saw as a mistake. That's one thing about the movie that I find annoying are the few characters that the movies assassinate, including Pippen, Lord Boramir, King Isildor, and Lord Denethor. In the books they're all a whole lot stronger and wiser then they're portrayed in the movies. Many changes are needed, but these changes were not, a simple dialgoe and flashback scene swap to present them more in the light of the books would have done the job just fine, and showing Denathor calling in the troops from the south, and bringing in the famous Prince Imrahil and his Winged Knights and how renounced they are and all the defensive palisades they've constructed around the Pelenor fields would actually have done far more to highlight the approaching threat then them just having one small squad of Faramir's Rangers holding the ruins of Osgiliath and leaving all other Gondorean forces where they garisson does. It shows the threat is so great Gondor must gather its strength and prepare for the war and battles to come. Create that sense of impending doom that a huge army is coming.
@TillionTirrion
3 ай бұрын
More on Glorfindel would be great.
@raimat66
Ай бұрын
Above all, we both see Arwen and have her described to us during the feast before they go to the Hall of Fire. "In the middle of the table, against the woven cloths upon the wall, there was a chair under a canopy, and there sat a lady fair to look upon, and so like was she in form of womanhood to Elrond that Frodo guessed that she was one of his close kindred."
@leedellmiller6917
3 ай бұрын
Why? WHY was I drinking soda during this video? "Next. After Boromir leaves to find a Band-Aid..."
@factorfantasyweekly
3 ай бұрын
👉🏼🗡️ = 🩹
@maisaparviainen3357
2 ай бұрын
😂😂😂
@SpiritLife
3 ай бұрын
I hated the Gen X "I've never wanted power" treatment of Aragorn. He was intentional in all his motives and actions
@jachyra9
3 ай бұрын
What does that have to do with Gen X?
@SpiritLife
3 ай бұрын
@@jachyra9 I feel like the writers were trying to appeal to a specific generational ethic of their day rather than the timeless character Tolkien wrote
@jachyra9
3 ай бұрын
@@SpiritLife - Yes. Team Jackson was trying to appeal to a specific generational ethic of the day. But that generation was the Millennials, not Gen X. That's why so many Millennials love these films and attack anyone who criticizes them. It's also the reason why Christopher Tolkien said, '“They eviscerated the book by making it an action movie for young people aged 15 to 25." That age range refers to Millennials, not Gen X. I'm Gen X and I was already in my thirties then.
@SpiritLife
3 ай бұрын
@@jachyra9 ahh then I stand corrected. My apologies
@jachyra9
3 ай бұрын
@@SpiritLife - No need to apologize. It's just a book and some movies. 🙂
@ladvargleinad7566
2 ай бұрын
Change 8: Frodo asked about Balin, Ori and Oin at the feast, and Gloin replied that he would tell everyone later at the council.
@factorfantasyweekly
2 ай бұрын
Good point! We’ll mention that more in next week’s episode. 👏🏼
@sameehkins5957
3 ай бұрын
Also, I dislike Elrond's overemphasism of the bloodline of men growing weak. He was a foster parent to Aragorn since he was 2 and raised him into a fine warrior... yet he then says "men are weak"? All these weird character opinions changed just for the sake of drama?
2 ай бұрын
Elrond himself was a half-elf, half man, as his parents, Eärendil and Elwing, were both half-elves, having both Men and Elves as ancestors.
@vincestapels2022
2 ай бұрын
True! Elrond's brother Elros was the first Numenorean as well. Elrond in a sense, was tied to the fate of Men in his heritage.
@franciswalsh8416
2 ай бұрын
Men ARE weak. The vast majority of men serve Sauron, and the bloodline of Numenor is disappearing. Aragorn, Denethor, and his son Faramir are among the last in whom there is any trace. Aragorn is a special case, and in the book he never "turns his back on his fate, but Elrond worries that the weakness of men will cause one of them to try to take the Ring.... And he is right!!
@sameehkins5957
2 ай бұрын
@franciswalsh8416 no where does it say in the book "men are weak". Elrond didn't think men were weak. His own brother chose to be a man instead of an Elf, does he then think less of his brother for choosing a weak race? This idea of men are weak is a movie invention only. Elrond only said he suspects someone might take the ring as foreshadowing (many examples of foreshadowing happens throughout the story, that doesn't mean there is some underlying message to it). The people of Gondor had recovered from a plague and constant attacks from sauron's forces, yet they still held their ground. The whole purpose of Men winning Helms Deep (by themselves) and winning Pellanor Fields (by themselves) is a turning point in the history of Men. It comes as Aragorn makes effort to stand as a leader of men. There is a theme in the books that is lost in the movies, which is the 'passing of the torch' from Elves to Men (as the Elves are leaving these lands). The victories of Men at Helms Deep and Pelanor Fields was proof that the race of men was worthy of taking up that torch. They showed that they can achieve things by themselves if they have the right leader. We also see glimpses of great men: Aragorn being one and even Faramir, who is said, in the books, to be as good of a fighter as Boromir but less reckless and more wise. Something Gondor really needed but was disallowed by his father.
@Welverin
2 ай бұрын
@@franciswalsh8416 The notion that someone might try and take the Ring shows that all men are weak is ridiculous. The Ring can corrupt anyone, so someone trying to take it is not indicative of anything more. Secondly, Saruman was trying to get it for himself, and no would make the claim all Maiar are weak because of it.
@BrettWMcCoy
2 ай бұрын
Frodo also sees Arwen at the feast and we get a very solid description of her, although she has no actual spoken lines until Return of the King. Bilbo also hints at Aragorn's & Arwen's relationship when he asks why Aragorn wasn't at the feast and adds that Arwen was there. And then of course we see Arwen and Aragorn standing together in The Hall of Fire when Frodo leaves.
@Son-of-Gondor
3 ай бұрын
“Saruman is bullying Gandalf.” I would refer to that as torture, but whatever. In all honesty, loved the video (as usual); and the bit I referenced made me chuckle.
@factorfantasyweekly
3 ай бұрын
😂😂
@maisaparviainen3357
2 ай бұрын
😂
@footrot17
3 ай бұрын
Still sharp Im guessing is a nod to Sean beans best roll, Richard Sharpe of the 95th. The whole series is on yt and definitely worth a watch
@MatthewCaunsfield
3 ай бұрын
I love the scenes with Bilbo and that he did get to return to Erebor. Even my favourite adaptation (R4) cuts this out sadly
@CynthiaWarren
2 ай бұрын
One change that bugged me was Elrond's utter contempt of Men. "Men are weak," he tells Gandalf when he says that Men need to carry on the Elves' burden of caring for Middle-earth. This? From Elrond Half-elven? A descendant of Beren and Tuor, Men who were great heroes even to Elves? The brother of Elros, the first King of Numenor? I've been told they stuck that in because Elrond was played by Hugo Weaving, who also played Agent Smith in the Matrix movies.
@jachyra9
Ай бұрын
The egregiousness begins even before that during Galadriel's(!) opening monologue, where she claims that the race of Men( obviously referring to the gender and not the actual race ) desire power above all else. I’m sure Galadriel’s brother Finrod, the Friend of Men, would have been really appreciative of that. I bet Barahir sacrificed his life for Finrod precisely because he was so power-hungry.
@saberhamlinconmaverickknud4821
16 күн бұрын
@CynthiaWarren You’re 100% correct, and he played another Drag Queen, just like Elrond, named ‘The Adventures of Priscilla: Queen of the Desert’! Who wouldn’t want Christopher Gerard playing the Lord of Rivendell? I’m very sorry to say this because you have your profile picture as the ugly Xena (code name for lesbian ) warrior princess who threatens to decapitate Aragorn because all men suck, and rides Asfolaf for 4 days straight, without any rest, because “ShE’s A wOMeN!” And, ironically, the same people who made the Baldur’s Gate Rivendell set helped make the Xena-Warrior Princess show! 🤣 Milla Jovovich, Mia Kirshner, or Jennifer Connelly would have probably also have won an Oscar for their performance for playing Arwen if they created superb English accents, and if the script was brilliantly written!
@MycketTuff
2 ай бұрын
Jackson added things to the books, like fully replacing my mental world of it with the movies. I can no longer go back to my own Lord of the Rings version I had built over a long time. My Aragorn was so much cooler.
@circedelune
2 ай бұрын
I don’t mind having Jackson’s visuals in my mind, even though I disagree with a lot of the changes. But your comment reminds me why I don’t like images from ROP in these videos. Those are not characters I want to picture while reading TLOTR. They are not characters who have any relationship to Tolkien’s characters. They aren’t believable or likeable.
@heatherqualy9143
2 ай бұрын
I am so appreciative of the time and effort you are putting in to make this series. I am LOVING it! I was so excited when the movies came out, because they were so well done, and because it brought so many new people to my favourite story. I watched the movies over and over and really thought Peter Jackson did a phenomenal job. I understand that written stories are a different entity than film. You HAVE to make changes to condense it to a reasonable film length, and to explain, but not overwhelm those who aren’t familiar with the books. Somehow, over the last 20 years, though, I lost my own personal love of the movies. All these little differences your series is pointing out wormed their way under my skin. Now when I try and watch the movies, I more often stop halfway through and pick up the books instead. Great movies! Love that people love them! But the books are simply tell a better, more complete, more engaging story for me. Especially since my favorite character was always Frodo, and I don’t really love how he was portrayed in the films. 😕
@factorfantasyweekly
2 ай бұрын
I’m glad you’re enjoying the series! Yes, if Frodo is your favorite, it is hard to get past that change in the movies… but like you said, I still enjoy the movies and they hold a nostalgic place in my heart! Great pieces of cinema. I am just a mega nerd and like to dive deep into the lore. I hope you continue to stick with me as I go through all 3 movies! 🙏🏼
@pierQRzt180
2 ай бұрын
it is remarkable that no one so far had a similar idea of comparing book vs movie (whatever the book and movie couple). I mean the sources (movie and book) aren't exactly new. If someone would do that on Dune, then I could understand that it pops up only now because a successful Dune movie was done only recently, but with LOTR no one tried this (as far as I could check) though youtube is almost two decades old.
@jachyra9
2 ай бұрын
There are quite a lot of videos comparing the book to the films. But virtually all of them are pro-Jackson videos and they are hardly in-depth or critical.
@factorfantasyweekly
2 ай бұрын
Ikr! I was pretty surprised as well that there wasn’t a series of quality on the topic. Obviously there are a lot of one off videos. But none that go scene by scene. I strive to be as detailed as possible. Thanks for tuning in!
@vincestapels2022
2 ай бұрын
Exactly! TolkienUntangled did do a pretty good job, to be honest! I just think he never finished! These videos are exactly what I've been wanting to watch, and hoping Jackson-film fans watch, to get them to experience the Books!!
@MycketTuff
2 ай бұрын
I was looking forward to Tom Bombadil only to be saddened by the short feeling of the movies
@alesiabradley5399
2 ай бұрын
Me too Tom Bombadill fighting oldmanwillo the barrow wrights and beautiful GoldBerry I love these characters. And at the end of all adventure the shire is took over by Sharkey where Merry and Pippin are heroes of the shire.
@jenniedarling3710
Ай бұрын
@@alesiabradley5399I was so disappointed with the omission of Tom Bombadil and the scouring of the shire.
@AMan7595
3 ай бұрын
Aragorn's reluctance just really bugs me. In the books he was this man with great power and destiny and controls it. He wants it, but he is wise in pursueing it. This whole reluctance thing really takes away from his granduer as a descendant of Isuldir and the Numenoreans.
@frederikkfoglfrey8664
3 ай бұрын
Personally, it doesn’t bother me as much as everyone else. They couldn’t give his whole Backstory in the Movies, so by making him grow into the role of king they could give him a more interesting character arc, without it, movie Aragorn would have been kind of flat i think
@jachyra9
3 ай бұрын
@@frederikkfoglfrey8664 - But he didn't grow into the role of king. All he did was take a bath and change his clothes. The irony is that Jackson's unnecessary change in characterization resulted in Aragorn not actually having an arc.
@kingkwon8002
2 ай бұрын
How would that not make him a Mary Sue though? The perfect character from the start of his journey to the end.
@jachyra9
2 ай бұрын
@@kingkwon8002 - You don't know what a Mary Sue is. Aragorn has an incredible task to accomplish and many challenges to face and overcome as a result. He isn't a female power fantasy or self-insertion character.
@frederikkfoglfrey8664
2 ай бұрын
@@jachyra9 i am just re-reading the books… i just read “the riders of rohan” and tbh i think book Aragorn is completely full of himself! The way he presents himself to eomer in eomers homeland! Learn some humility man, even if you think you are supposed to be a king!!! I like movie Aragorn much better!
@senseiAR
3 ай бұрын
You really uploaded this video at the perfect time🔥
@iraelliott8936
2 ай бұрын
Glorfindel was fantastic. It was a shame he was left out of the movie. Why they didn't have Aragorn leave with his sword reforged made no sense to me
@iasimov5960
Ай бұрын
The three most egregious and unnecessary changes Jackson made to the books: 1. The manner in which Bilbo gets rid of the Ring. 2. Aragorn's motivation. 3. Killing Saruman and Wormtongue. They could have been kept prisoner at Isengard as in the book. However, Jackson's LOTR is the best movie version so far.
@georgep7373
29 күн бұрын
We should probably mention here (although this is described in the book in the Council of Elrond) that since the movie shows Gandalf's escape from Orthanc, there is a plot and location change since we do not see him going to Rohan and speaking to Theoden and riding Shadowfax for the first time
@shoff29
2 ай бұрын
I was shocked to learn about Aragorn wanting to be King in the books. Because I think one of the most endearing and great things about his character in the movies is his reluctance to be King. There is something truly powerful, and that says a lot about a character when they do not desire power. And that makes me nervous to read about the book version because I fear his character will be tainted for me.
@jachyra9
Ай бұрын
There is absolutely nothing "powerful" about the heir to the throne of Gondor and the realm of Arnor, who spends his every waking moment preparing himself to inherit his birthright, inexplicably professing that he doesn't want it. It makes no sense, which is just one aspect among dozens that make no sense in Team Jackson's adaptation. Aragorn fulfilling his character trajectory and becoming king isn't the same thing as him desiring power, because he explicitly doesn't desire it. The films only resemble the book in the most superficial ways. And turning Aragorn from a noble, decent man of honor into the weak, indecisive thug we see in the films is just one example of many.
@Chocolatnave123
15 күн бұрын
@@jachyra9 cope harder lmao
@barneyhall2753
Күн бұрын
But what is his motivation for wanting to become king? Arwen. It was the only way they could be together.
@TPFB129
3 ай бұрын
I like both versions of Aragorn. In the books he was ready and willing to take control, and in the films he was self aware to understand he had severe flaws in his character that made him hesitant to take control. Both versions are excellent in their respectives, and I appreciate both versions of such an awesome character.
@jachyra9
3 ай бұрын
Aragorn didn't have severe flaws in his character. That's nonsense intimated by the amateur screenwriters for their adaptation.
@emperorkane317
3 ай бұрын
@@jachyra9 It's okay to like both portrayals of the character.
@jachyra9
3 ай бұрын
@@emperorkane317 - It's okay to like anything. It's not okay to claim that both versions are excellent when one of them isn't.
@frederikkfoglfrey8664
3 ай бұрын
@@jachyra9well, movie Aragorn is excellent though, and the writers certainly were no amateurs😂
@jachyra9
3 ай бұрын
@@frederikkfoglfrey8664 - The three screenwriters had never written a screenplay for a major motion picture prior to this. Fran Walsh only worked on her husband's stupid horror movies, and Philippa Boyens had never written a single screenplay. Not one. So, yes, they were amateurs and it shows.
@AlexCrean
Ай бұрын
I discovered the channel today and am binging all the content. Fantastic work so far! definitelylooking forward to the rest! I came to the comments of this video specifically to say that I'm definitely interested in the deep dive on Glorfindel video you mentioned as a follow up ! definitely want to engage to encourage that haha Thanks so much for all of these!! it's been a wonderful experience going through this video series, which has been en excellent vehicle for appreciating both Tolkien's original work and the PJ trilogy (both favorites of mine)
@bjorneriksson2404
2 ай бұрын
The reluctance and self-doubt they added to Aragorn, together with the changes they made to Faramir (e.g. his initial decision to take Frodo to Gondor) was, to me, some of the biggest differences the movies had compared to the books. I guess it was to make them more two-dimensional, and also to make their journey less "easy" (as in, are the choices you make as "heroic" if you don't harbor an ounce of self-doubt or fear?)... I think that Jackson added this type of ambivalence to several of the characters (e.g. Elronds "men are weak") in an attempt to make it less obvious that they would always make the "right decision", and that when the right decision was made, it was a result of overcoming their fear, which - again - made the decision more "heroic".
@rebeuhsin6410
Ай бұрын
I sure noticed this one. Aragorn was a crazy in the book. He carried the broken sword aroun with him.
@raimat66
Ай бұрын
Well, Gandalf in the book refuses to tell Frodo why he was late, when Frodo asks in his bed. It is first during Elrond's council that Gandalf tells his whole story, from when he leaves the Shire and meets Radagast, to Orthanc, the capture, the escape, the hunt for Frodo and how Gandlaf came to Rivendell about three days before Frodo. Gloin comes to Elrond for two reasons. Not only what you mention - that he is worried because of the silence from Balin for many years - but also because a messenger from Mordor has come to the dwarves at Erebor and demanded information about Bilbo who is said to have stolen an admittedly insignificant ring from Sauron, but which still seems so important to the enemy that they both promise three rings of power (the rings of the dwarves) and eternal ownership to Moria, if they hand over Bilbo to Sauron.
@christosvoskresye
Ай бұрын
You do a good job going through the differences. And, to balance things out, I'm ambivalent about the movies. They're a little more faithful than Disney's version of Alice in Wonderland was to the book, but only because that is a very low bar.
@toddjackson3136
2 ай бұрын
I understood why they made some changes to adapt it to the movie. Other changes i was disappointed in. Overall, I enjoy the movies. They are much better adaptations than ROP or WOT. They both did exactly what you said, changed characters' motivations which started a snowball. Over the course of the seasons, they have had to continuously change more things because of the first few changes.
@factorfantasyweekly
2 ай бұрын
Totally agree!
@davidwright7193
Ай бұрын
“Still Sharpe!” Yes Sean we all know you were type cast here. no need to drive it home like that.
@ZarlanTheGreen
Ай бұрын
The comments about Boromir are generally correct ...but there is one exception! The notion that he wouldn't let Narsil fall, is just plain crazy! There is a saying, among cooks: A dropped knife has no handle. If a knife (or sword) falls, you should *_absolutely NEVER_* try to grab it! You are almost guaranteed to grab the edge, and badly cut yourself!
@sameehkins5957
3 ай бұрын
They basically turned Aragorn into Jon Snow. "I DUN WANT IT". I know they tried to be nuanced by taking the conflicted hero angle, but conflicted hero is just as generic as confident hero. At least confident hero fits with the type of story that LOTR is: an epic, akin to Odyssey or Ulyssys. Like a fantasy romance.
@simonsalgueiro6217
3 ай бұрын
Problem is, every male in Tolkien's books is basically the same: heroic and stoic. The biggest example fo this being Faramir, who jsut casually dismissed the ring. The same ring Tolkien had spent 2 books warning us about how it can corrupt even the mightiest. But nah, every "stoic hero" can just ignore the ring when it's needed. Tolkien was an extraordinary world builder, and his characters drank from the world he created to become interesting. But in the character development part, Tolkien was mediocre at best. You've got the hobbits and Eowyn. The rest are as plain as a brick. And I say this as someone who has Tolkien in his top 5. His world building was the bread and butter for most fantasy authors. The movies gave much humane inetrpretations of the characters. Check the aniamted version of the LOTR. It's more faithbull to the book. And Aragorn (and basically every character) is pretty boring. Things don't always translate well from books to movies. Another great example being David Lynch's Dune, which tried to be faithfull in some aprts that made no sense, like the constant character narration. The newer ones make more changes, but also manage to be much better movies while still keeping the spirit of the books, just like the LOTR movies.
@sameehkins5957
3 ай бұрын
@simonsalgueiro6217 what and Faramir in Jackson's version is better? The guy is one sided personality: he cries every time his father says something mean to him. At least in the books you see Faramir stand up for himself in front of his father, you see examples of him being noble, you see examples of him being wise (one of those moments is with the ring, and no. He didn't casually reject the ring. He refused to even look at the ring because he knew how dangerous it is). You think the ring being dangerous has to show its immediate effect instantly? Clearly, subtlety is wasted upon you. The ring, in the books, still IS dangerous and can corrupt all, but for some, it can take time for the corruption to take hold (as with Frodo). There is a trait called wisdom, which determines how strong a pull the ring has to that person. Faramir is said to be wise enough that Gandalf became close friends with him (this angered Denethor). Even Tolkien says that Faramir is more wise than noth Denathor and Boromir put together. The funny thing is, that even in the movie, as overpowered as they made the ring, even they didn't always abide by the rule that the ring must affect everyone instantly (e.g. if you're next to it, that means you 100% have to be desperate to take it because we don't understand subtlety here). What about Legolas or Gimli, who casually felt nothing as they were with the ring all that time. Of course, you will make up some head canon to make sense of the nonsensical changes the movies invent because that is all you can do. So each fan has their own headcanons and explanations. Meanwhile, at least in the books, it's a solid one explanation. The ring corrupts everyone but some individuals will be corrupted sooner than others, the ring is not a homing device, it doesn't always 'connect' to Sauron's vision, just sometimes (which is the risk Gandalf warns about). And if you want to talk about good characters? What, you think Frodo in the movies is a good character, lol? The character who Peter Jackson, who single handedly created a whole audience of people who think Frodo's weak or lesser of a hero than the other fellowship members? No one used to think anything negative of Frodo before the movies came out (we have letters from fans of Tolkien to corroborate that). After the movies, there are tons of people who complain about Frodo, which you can see pages and pages of on Google search. People complaining about Frodo character and how he's weak or mean to Sam... funnily enough, in all these complaints they all reference actions Frodo only does in the movies. So no wonder the character is so F'd up and people have to either come up with headcanons as to why this is acceptable in the movies or simply put Frodo at the back of the mind. Jackson made one of the best trilogies, but let's not be silly and portray him as some jesus figure. He still made a lot of mistakes and there are plenty of flaws in characters (that he changed) and events (which you have to create your own headcanons to cope with the mistake).
@simonsalgueiro6217
2 ай бұрын
@@sameehkins5957 Denethor was a super wise leader and was corrupted still by Sauron, and not even with the ring, which exerts a much stronger influence (this according to Tolkien, although as I said, he changed how the ring worked sometimes to move the "stoic hero" trope). Isildur, also a great ruler, brave, fearless, etc, was subdued by the ring. Even Gandalf was scared. What happened in the book with Faramir totally defeats the purpose of the ring. Also, like that other Tolkien simp in the comments, you have to exaggerate things to make a point. Faramir isn't weak in the movies, you alpha wannabes. Neither is Frodo or Aragorn. Anyone who says that has the mental maturity of a child and, therefore, his points should be looked with contempt. They are more realistic and less fictional. Which is ok, you still have the books if you want Tolkien's way of handling characters, which is more akeen the Nordic Sagas he so much loved. But now you've got also the film's interpretation, which works MUCH better for that type pf media. You peeps just have absolutely no clue on how cinema works. Gimli and Legolas are 1) not human, who are canonically drawn to the ring much more, 2) are never alone with Frodo in a way we could see if the ring tempts them, 3) have less responsibilities and worries than Faramir, Aragorn or Boromir. Points 1 and 2 beings key. Boromir gets lured by the ring not because he is weak, but because he is desperate to save Gondor. Aragorn also fears the ring as he has the responsibility of his ancestors, and he knows the ring can tempt him through that. And Faramir is looking to prove himself while also having the same qualms as Boromir. Yea, he may be wiser. But he still should be affected by the rules Tolkien set. And he isn't. As I said, Tolkien was a great world builder, but a mediocre character writter. Funny you say I'm treating PJ as a deity when you are simping extremely hard for Tolkien. I agree some parts should have been left like in the book, f.e, the way Sauron is defeated in the movie at the beginning, and that some parts of the movie felt a bit off (mainly Legolas doing weird action stuff). But it's undeniable PJ managed to make movies that were masterpieces of cinema while also retaining Tolkien's message and world. I can assure you that, if he did what people like you wanted, the movies would be much worse. I guarantee that.
@somersault1123
2 ай бұрын
It's a self-fulfilling prophecy they're trying to make. They make heroes in media try to turn down power. So that their masters in real life can simply feign disinterest in power and make out that power is being thrust upon them unwillingly. Then all on-lookers will be awed because it's just like a scene in their favorite movie. When the reality is all parties were in on the scam and they real life hero actually does want power. Just how like Trump claimed he never wanted to be president years ago.
@somersault1123
2 ай бұрын
@@simonsalgueiro6217 Tolkien was not a professional author. You hear simpletons make that noise all the time; "Some things don't work on screen." The Lord of the Rings, didn't work on the page either. But it was there and I enjoyed it in spite of it's flaws. I enjoyed Peter Jackson's Fantasy Hour too. But only because it was cleverly designed to trigger endorphin releases in my system like a common fiction book is. And not because it was actually meaningful. Also, you should know that most of the things that they tell you don't work on the screen are actually things that they just don't want to go through the trouble to make happen either because doing so would be too much work, take too long, cost too much or irk modern/stupid members of the audience. Like Tom Bombadil. He was left out so that Scumbag Steve wouldn't immediately hate the film and mock Jolly old Tom which is also why all the songs were left out. I don't blame them. It most certainly does date the story to a different era in time and they need to make their money back so they can be forgiven. But personally, I'd prefer if Scumbag Steve didn't enjoy the same things I do.
@barneyhall2753
Күн бұрын
Yes, Jackson removed the corrupting influence of the ring in the evolution of Boromir in the movie, but if you think that was a character assassination I look forward to your take on Faramir's treatment.
@poria1990
15 күн бұрын
Possible fun fact, Aragorn was a 90 year old virgin when he got married.
@fr.andygutierrez5356
3 ай бұрын
Definitely would love a Glorfindel video!
@barneyhall2753
Күн бұрын
For me, the change to the Aragon - Arwen story was one of the worst changes in the movie. Arwen was his driving motivation to succeed.
@Rick_King
3 ай бұрын
This is very interesting, but one thing is irritating. You keep showing the same scenes, over and over again, and while the sometimes match the narration, other times they are entirely irrelevant to what the speaker is describing. But yes, there are many differences between the films and the books, and I would encourage anyone who has seen only the films, to read the masterful books, as well.
@knghtbrd
5 күн бұрын
Boromir WAS the victim of vicious character assassination! But that's really a topic for the next video and the Council. But the changes to Elrond and Aragorn are just massive here-Elrond was Isildur's FRIEND, and was grieved that Isildur was killed while coming to ask advice of Elrond how best to ensure the ring's destruction. "Men are weak." Are they, Elrond? I mentioned Isildur before, but it bears repeating: He tried to turn the ring from evil, something Elrond didn't dare attempt, and while he wasn't able to do it, neither was the ring able to control or influence him. He was traveling to Elrond to ask how best to ensure the thing was destroyed, and obviously he had it with him because you do not just leave the one ring in a box back in Gondor! But Elrond would be wary of the ring. As Treebeard would say, they are hasty creatures, and he knows full well that few men have anything approaching Isildur's strength. And once the events of the story get moving, instead of quiet moodiness and self-doubt, his heir is going around practically bellowing, "BEHOLD! I AM ARAGORN, SON OF ARATHORN, HEIR TO ISILDUR!" Boromir asks him to return with him to Gondor because Gondor DOES need its king. The battle against Mordor has not been going well, and the people need hope. The return of the king would give them that hope, and Aragorn would not be bad in a fight either…
@robertochiang8057
Ай бұрын
I love all your videos. As a fan of the books and ALSO of the movies, most of your comments can also be mine. I remember my first time seeing the movie when, Arwen appears while Aragorn was looking for "Athelas" my reaction was WTF! I think LOTR, like most classic novels are really "boy books". They almost don't have feminine characters (adventures were not for girls) and when someone makes a film from them, is frequent that film directors chose to add one or two "girls" to the plot. Sometimes it is awful (like Tauriel in "The Hobbit"), but I think here it is a correct option. Tolkien chose to leave Arwen as a surprise for the end of the story. (When he told us of she in the party, nothing make us think of she as Aragorn's couple). The difference between that and a 21st century film, is that now most public "needs" a woman in the plot, so . . . Please keep giving us more of this videos.
@inspector_beyond
3 ай бұрын
Honestly, idk why Boromir behaved like that with Anduril. Because from my memory and POV, in the rest of the film he's accurate to the book version, especially the flashback Faramir has when Boromir was sent to Osgiliath. My theory is that Boromir was curious and in disbelief that this sword is finally in front of him and never thought that a 2-3 thousand year shard of a sword could cut him that easily. As for his disrespectfull placement back on the pedestal and going for a band aid, I also dont really know why is it there, so the only thing I can think of is that Boromir was just angered at the cut, hence the behavior. Like come on, we irl would be grumpy and angry by just hitting an elbow, meanwhile Boromir cut his entire finger falangie by the shards of the 3k year old sword. But yeah, the scene is weird.
@factorfantasyweekly
3 ай бұрын
Funny you mention the flashback to Osgiliath in the Two Towers, because I mention that briefly in next week’s episode… also a couple things inaccurate with that whole thing. But I will also cover it more once I’m to that specific scene. I definitely understand Peter Jackson’s direction. He was making it clear from the start that Boromir is a conflicted human, dealing with many emotions that elves and dwarves don’t really deal with. Kind of giving us the view of the race of men that makes us understand their struggle. But in the book he’s a lot more put together in the beginning like Aragorn. Only after some time does he get corrupted. But as for his reaction to Aragorn seeing him cut himself, it’s more so to foreshadow the plot point of Denethor resisting a king in Gondor. “No more than a broken heirloom…” is pretty much Boromir saying “we are strong enough on our own, we don’t need help!” Which is opposite to book Boromir who actually comes to Rivendell based on a prophetic dream about the sword that was broken, and he even tells Aragorn in the book that it would help his people if the king (and the sword) returned to Gondor. It’s pretty interesting! Again, this is all stuff I cover next week. 👀
@michaelnewsham1412
2 ай бұрын
-When I first read LotR. long before the movies, Arwen played such a small role in Rivendell that when she showed up in Gondor to get married at the end, my first thought was "Who the hell is she" - When Bilbo asks to see the Ring, and is transformed, either in Frodo's viewpoint or reality. in the movie he goes into a hug with Frodo, whereas in the book he turns around to swallow his emotion, and slaps him on the back and makes a joke. English stiff-upper-lip versus Hollywood touchy-feely? (Reappears in the scene where Frodo and Sam are abandoning the boats at Amon Hen.) - Worst of all is movie Sam's whining about wanting to go home, whereas in the book he says he has a feeling that their mission was not yet done. It completely undoes Sam's character transformation (partially made up in his final words at the end of Fellowship: “Frodo: Mordor. I hope the others find a safer route. Sam: Strider will look after them. Frodo: I don’t suppose we’ll ever see them again. Sam: We may yet, Mr. Frodo. We may.”
@doctornova3015
3 ай бұрын
i dont mind as much what they left out for time. what i do mind is adding shit that never belonged. ya think you're a better writer than Tolkien?
@Welverin
2 ай бұрын
I do feel that they did believe that.
@doctornova3015
2 ай бұрын
@@Welverin there were times it seemed a bit disrespectful
@Welverin
2 ай бұрын
@@doctornova3015 I have general impression that many people involved in the movie industry ('Hollywood') think they're the pinnacle of storytelling and thus know better than anyone else. One example being Phillipa talking about a change they made and saying it was necessary because if you following it back it was because these other things. And doing that it all started because of some unnecessary change they made because they apparently think they were better storytellers. Tolkien had reasons for pretty much everything and timed them to line up appropriately that gave cohesion and logic to the book as a whole. PJ and crew didn't grasp any of that and were making changes because 'it's a movie and this is how it needs to be!' and I feel a lot of that wasn't actually necessary and undermined a lot of the characters and story.
@doctornova3015
2 ай бұрын
@@Welverin yes i have to agree. And the most irritating part of it , is that sometimes it seemed to contradict the actual nature of personality or even personal convictions of the character themselves. i especially did not like Frodo getting angry and mistrusting Sam. i also don't see the need to send Aragorn over the cliff. All that it did was waste a considerable amount of time, instead of following the actual story line. there are a few other instances of this throughout.
@Welverin
2 ай бұрын
@@doctornova3015 The one I dislike the most is Faramir. The changes they made to him make him no better than Boromir, when he's clearly the wiser of the two, and that leads to a nonsensical detour far off the path.
@あのにます-o1h
29 күн бұрын
In the movie Boromir arrived on horse back. But in the book he had lost his horse on the road and walked a looong way. Where did he find a saddled horse?
@somersault1123
2 ай бұрын
The Book: They were lifelong friends who were always fond of one another. The Movie: They get mad at each other for no reason until the threat of a greater evil forces them to work together- Stop glaring at me! My audience has the attention span of toddlers! Constant and needless conflict is a necessary evil in my line of work. The Book: Couldn't you at least have a reason? The Movie: Nope. Audience will get mad if there's too much backstory to cover. Have you seen how childishly angry people get at our prequels?
@drachefly
2 ай бұрын
Who are 'they', here?
@bryanrumwell8753
Ай бұрын
I would like to see a series made true to the books. Peter Jackson said he had no choice on the Hobbit films. He could have walked away. He did not so now we wait for the real films, made by someone with integrity.
@richjageman3976
13 күн бұрын
Jackson had to make Arwen more important in the movies.
@jacobleetaylor
29 күн бұрын
Farmer Maggot was done dirty in the films
@mypeeps1965
3 ай бұрын
Well done!
@hawgryder13
Ай бұрын
While I love the locations that Jackson used for the scenes of Middle Earth and the people he chose to play the roles I have a real problem with a lot of the changes he made. I can see cutting Bombadil and many of the other things but adding Arwen in so many scenes in all the movies and cutting Glorfindel and making Frodo look like a wuss really bothered me (and still does) as unnecessary changes.
@DontrplytoMycomments
6 күн бұрын
Yes I was right this is exactly what I was expecting so now you need to compete the big three. GoT, HP and LoTR. Maybe dune but idc so much about dune. You can even casually mention how cirque du freak was ruined in one fell swoop
@nicholasbestevaar6064
6 күн бұрын
I was definitely disappointed with the added romantic arc of Arwen and Aragorn in the films. I get that’s what studios want because it sells tickets, but I felt it was unnecessary and detracted from the primary themes of the tale. It also upstaged the romantic story of Eowyn & Faramir, which I thought was far more interesting.
@sdpc9182
15 күн бұрын
I think "character assassination" is a bit extreme of a word choice. It's not like Boromir's unrecognizable (Frodo is distrustful of him the whole time in the books also, if memory serves) I definitely wasn't remotely surprised by his ending while reading it. I get the oddness of some of the choices in the scene with Aragorn that you talk about, but I disagree that there's a fundamental undermining of his character. Hell one could easily argue he's the best character in the Fellowship of the Ring with all he goes through and how well he goes out.
@cynthiadegerness5622
3 ай бұрын
The best Audible version is done by Andy Serkis! I love it!!
@factorfantasyweekly
3 ай бұрын
Agreed!
@dstarling61
2 ай бұрын
Agreed. But, Treebeard just goes on and on…😮
@Kynokefalos
3 ай бұрын
Would be nice a remake of the movies being faithful to the books.
@frederikkfoglfrey8664
3 ай бұрын
Impossible! Maybe a show with each episode covering one chapter. But even then it would be hard, maybe with a narrator…
@Kynokefalos
3 ай бұрын
@@frederikkfoglfrey8664 I just want my damn Tom Bombadil chapter :P
@frederikkfoglfrey8664
2 ай бұрын
@@Kynokefalos yeah I wouldn’t mind that either
@AJ0223
6 күн бұрын
Why can't people just enjoy reading anymore though
@Kynokefalos
6 күн бұрын
@@AJ0223 Because twitter.
@marknieuweboer8099
2 ай бұрын
I understand that the movie has to make cuts. But I can't forgive the two character assassinations. They go right against Tolkien's deeply catholic worldview. Another change I dislike is the Introduction of Aragorn in Bree. In the books Aragorn starts out enigmatic, menacing and quite dark. Sam initially doesn't trust him. In the movie his character from the beginning is way more superficial.
@Timat-s4n
2 ай бұрын
I've always been annoyed at some of the changes the films made but film is a very different medium than a book or books so it's difficult to compare the two. I still wonder if JRR Tolkien himself would have approved of a film version of LOTR at all.
@dereksanderson3305
10 күн бұрын
An after party you say was Diddy invited..😅😅😅lolll..I heard he really got down in middle earth..😅😅😅
@craigyoung9321
6 күн бұрын
I feel bad for you if you ever attempt to do this for the Hobbit trilogy. Like the viewers of this channel, I am a stickler for the books and it took me a while before I could really enjoy the LOTR trilogy but the Hobbit kills me. I can't watch it without my blood pressure rising
@barbarossarotbart
3 ай бұрын
In my opinion Boromir was not the only victim of character assassination by Peter Jackson.
@factorfantasyweekly
3 ай бұрын
Oh definitely, but thus far into the story his is the most severe. Once we get to Faramir in the next movie, that’s more severe.
@barbarossarotbart
3 ай бұрын
@@factorfantasyweekly And what about Frodo, Merry, Pippin, Gimli, Eomer, ...
@jachyra9
3 ай бұрын
It's not your opinion. Jackson assassinated every single character in one way or another, to one degree or another. I submit the reason why virtually no one cares is down to the actors portraying the characters doing such a great job. It's all part of the toxic goulash that is fans of the movies conflating what they see with what they believe Tolkien wrote, and why they're so threatened by the reality of what Tolkien wrote: it doesn't align with the movies. I really like the movies, especially Fellowship. But my affection can't fix what's broken.
@Kynokefalos
3 ай бұрын
@@jachyra9 I think a lot of people live in a Mandela's effect believing that the Jackson movies are flawless and perfect, extreme faithful to the books, they adore them. But when you say to them that the Tolkien father and son wouldn't approve the movies, their minds break. It's very hypocrisy, and this people is the same that says like a broken disc that Rings of Power is an ugly product.
@circedelune
2 ай бұрын
@@KynokefalosI disagree. I don’t like a lot of the changes Jackson made, but I still like the movies because they were still good. I despise ROP because it changes pretty much everything about the lore, and because what they replaced it with is absolute crap.
@teemusid
2 ай бұрын
I think he's ignoring the red flags in Boromir 's behavior in the book. Faramir has the dream, yet Boromir claims the errand. He was quite petulant in the moments before Gandalf opened the door to Moria, and disturbed the watcher. If I were to play armchair psychiatrist, I would suspect he had PTSD, from the years of battles and skirmishes against the forces of Sauron.
@jachyra9
3 ай бұрын
NEW LINE CINEMA: "So how much of the book are you actually going to change?" PETER JACKSON: "Yes."
@factorfantasyweekly
3 ай бұрын
💀
@Choomp_VT
3 ай бұрын
Jacksons adaptation was and will always be the best adaptation of the books. Just look at the abomination amazon released, or the inferior hobbit movies.
@factorfantasyweekly
3 ай бұрын
Yes, Amazon’s version of things make you really appreciate Jackson’s films. 💀 Even without RoP though, I still love Jackson’s trilogy!
@jachyra9
3 ай бұрын
"Jacksons adaptation was and will always be the best adaptation of the books." Are you a fortune teller? Cool. Can you do me a solid and predict the winning lottery numbers?
@paulsmith3966
2 ай бұрын
I positively disliked what Amazon has done... But those liberties were prefigured in the free range Jackson gave himself.
@teemusid
2 ай бұрын
The BBC radio play from 1980 cut the same bits from Fellowship that Jackson did. The only part the movie did better than the radio play was when Aragorn made the decision to follow the orcs, instead of Frodo and Sam. BBC: Forth the three hunters! Jackson: Let's hunt some orc. That might be my favorite line from the movies.
@Wonkothenormal
2 ай бұрын
So yeah that Aragorn guy. Suppose he really was a virgin until age 88 or so, not physical with a woman before marriage seems his thing ;)
@factorfantasyweekly
2 ай бұрын
He was too busy killing orcs!
@lockpickingparamedic2136
Ай бұрын
I love the Movies but ever since I first read the books I cannot enjoy them as much as before. Why was it necessary to make week fools out of the Hobbits. Even Frodo seems to be weak in the movies and Sam is a whiny little guy whilst in the books he is a bright and loyal companion with a great character development.
@helenwalter6830
2 ай бұрын
Most of the changes to the source material I will accept as necessary for the medium but I actually love that they give Arwen more screen time in the movies There’s far too few women in the books in my opinion
@jachyra9
2 ай бұрын
How were any of the changes necessary for the medium? And as far as there being too few women in the book( The Lord of the Rings is a novel ) or books( comprising Tolkien's legendarium ): what number constitutes an adequate amount of women? Because I didn't realize there was a quota. Is this applicable to Little Women in regards to men? How would increasing the number of women in The Lord of the Rings improve the story and the experience of reading it? Color me confused.
@vincestapels2022
2 ай бұрын
There aren't AS many women per-se in the Books, but each woman in the Books have profound importance to the world's history and narrative. Arwen for example, being an anchor to Aragorns acceptance to belive in himself and another notable Elf to choose the "bitter and the sweet" mortality (just like Luthien).
@RayMccall-h5v
3 ай бұрын
I think he was poison
@bascodelagamma
14 күн бұрын
👍
@arlenesobhani8739
2 ай бұрын
First time I watched the Fellowship of the Ring in the theater, I just kept thinking, "that didn't happen! They left this out!" over and over and over. The next time I watched it I could just relax and accept that the story was told differently in the movies.
@brandoncheney2815
Ай бұрын
books are not good just because they are books. lets be honest you ever actually read the hobbit ? its a B adventure book at best
@drachefly
2 ай бұрын
I'd avoid the word 'inaccuracy' in this context because changes are not necessarily bad, and this word choice seems to assume that they are. Not that they can't be bad - they often were.
@factorfantasyweekly
2 ай бұрын
Inaccuracy invokes no emotion. It’s a logical word simply saying that there is an original, and something based on the original. It makes no subjective judgement on the quality of the change. It simply points out the objective truth of if there was a change. If there was a change, then it is inaccurate. A word like “inadequate” would invoke a subjective judgement. Regardless, like I say in the video, I love the movies and the books!
@drachefly
2 ай бұрын
@@factorfantasyweekly Fine, I'll be slightly more precise - 'Inaccuracy' seems to mean that they were aiming for something and missed it. None of these changes could possibly have been accidental. We can note where their target was different than what was in the book (a difference), or whether it was a poor choice of target (bad idea). These are separate ideas. The idea that they were actually aiming at the book and somehow MISSED is silly. It's just not the right word. EDIT: I saw an apparently deleted reply that they were trying to be faithful. They marketed it as faithful, etc. What is there even to say about that? If they were trying to be faithful, they could have… not done something wildly different. Given the efforts made, the differences could not be accidents.
@jkinze
3 ай бұрын
All three Hobbit movies are excellent!
@mstash5
3 ай бұрын
Are you joking?
@Welverin
2 ай бұрын
@@mstash5 Maybe high?
@mstash5
Ай бұрын
@@Welverin maybe.
@martykitson3442
17 күн бұрын
🤠👍👍
@ladvargleinad7566
2 ай бұрын
The Lord of the Rings should have been a musical.
@eimanb3887
3 ай бұрын
Honestly, Lord of the Rings and maybe even The Hobbit (yes I know what you're going to say) are the 2 film adaptations that didn't piss me off when it came to faithfulness to the source material. If you're a book purist they probably bothered you a lot, and that's definitely my stance on most adaptations, but here it didn't seem as bad. Nowadays adaptations just cut out or change large parts of the story that make it flimsy and unrecognisable. Here, they so try remained quite strong and some changes (like switching Glorfindel out for Arwen) were actually appreciated by some of the fandom (although I would've loved to have seen Glorfindel on the big screen).
@factorfantasyweekly
3 ай бұрын
Yes, I do believe the changes they made still held in tact the quality of the film. Good writing, good acting, good storytelling. You’re correct, most adaptations that change stuff often butcher the quality. Rings of Power for example. 💀 Jackson still did a great job keeping quality. 🙏🏼
@jachyra9
3 ай бұрын
Whether it doesn't seem as bad doesn't mean it isn't bad. Maybe it didn't piss you off because you don't understand The Lord of the Rings.
@jachyra9
3 ай бұрын
@@factorfantasyweekly - Nope. You are seriously hallucinating.
@emperorkane317
3 ай бұрын
@@jachyra9 You seem to assume that just because someone likes the movies means they have some apathy or lack misunderstanding of the books and Tolkien. There are millions of diehard Tolkien fans who are probably bigger and more dedicated fans than you who love both the films and the books.
@darkeyeze
3 ай бұрын
How did The Hobbit not piss you off. I found the scenes with Radagast just horrific. The orcs chasing the Gandalf and the dwarves, along withe the troll cave scenes were way too cartoonish and childish. A lot of the added sequences, the river ride fight, dwarves fighting the dragon, and others, were totally unnecessary.
@CAPTDILLIGAF
Ай бұрын
These movies suck as an adaptation. I wasted my time watching them once and never will again.
@Niko-hi5my
3 ай бұрын
For film Boromir I think there was just not enough screen time to give him a character arc, hence they made him more selfish, short-fused and arrogant from the beginning.
@dstarling61
2 ай бұрын
It’s just about the same character as he played in Ronin😀
Пікірлер: 216