LETS DEBATE: Tolkien Would HATE The LOTR Movies?
Vložit
- čas přidán 20. 05. 2020
- You drop spicey takes on the fantasy genre, I SMACK them down with the force of a thousand suns.
Merch: teespring.com/stores/fantasy-...
Patreon: / danielbgreene
Amazon: www.amazon.com/shop/danielgreene
Discord Server: / discord
Twitter: DanielBGreene?lan...
Twitch: / fantasynews
Instagram: / dgreene101
GoodReads: / daniel-greene
Subreddit: / danielgreene - Zábava
I very much so understand and do not dismiss the argument that his family has said they do not love the adaptations so therefore it is safe to say he might not as well. I very much so respect that argument. But I also know I personally disagree with my family on many issues. So I don’t necessarily want to put the opinions of the son on the father. Though I very much so understand and respect that approach.
Hi
Let's be honest, there are so many songs in the books, the movies would have had to be musicals to really bring Tolkien's vision to life.
You’re a moth that’s funny I’m a tree frog
Well said! The only thing (I think) Tolkien said himself was that he didn’t believe the books could ever be adapted into films. That’s a far cry from knowing how he would have felt about Jackson’s films. As a Tolkien fan, I was nervous and skeptical about the films before they came out, but I was more or less delighted with them.
Hey the rating videos are fun! Do them how you're doing them or change it if you like - they're fun! People need to chill.
I am totally on board with your “Flaws of Popular Authors” idea!
I'd watch the crap out of that. It'd really help to appreciate an author's growth and improvement even more
I would watch the hell out of it.
Big agree
So no video about Joe Abercrombie 😁
Sounds like a great way to never get another author interview lol
I think that if Tolkien could watch the films, he would write a 10 pages letter praising Peter Jackson for all the great work he did, and then a 30 pages letter explaining why he hates them.
I think he would have loved watching the world, parts of the story and be in love with the score which is still the best movie score ever created
@@Admire maybe if Titanic's score didn't exist
He would not like the lack of depth and violence in the movies
Question:
I’m looking for a high fantasy series that has these qualities:
-An epic mythology set on a different planet(like a space opera but set on only one planet instead of a whole solar system or galaxy)
-Characters that are different non-human races
-A variety of alien creatures
-Has science and technology but leans more towards magic, miracles, and mysticism.
-So many elements of the world screaming many different cultures, both ancient and recent, while other aspects surrounding the characters feel futuristic and otherworldly
-A world that feels somewhat familiar while still constantly reminding us how different it is(like Star Wars or the Stormlight Archives)
-Light and positive themes of love, honor, friendship, loyalty, sacrifice, and faith verses the dark and negative themes of tragedy, corruption, betrayal, and genocide
What are some recommendations that match all of these?
@@Dino23968 A Princess of Mars
Characters without arcs are like iconic characters like James Bond and they work fine
Exactly. :) Indiana Jones is another good example. I’m pretty sure there’s an entire episode of the “Writing Excuses” podcast dedicated to iconic characters.
Captain America to an extent, his personal philosophy remains unchanged he impacts the world, but the world doesn't impact him.
Yeah that's called a "static" character and can absolutely work, I usually see it in villains of a seris. Randal Flagg from the Dark Tower is a good example of this or Ned from Game of Thrones
I agree, but also think a lot of people see gradual shifts or smaller arcs and act like a character is stagnant if they're not wildly different at the end of a story than at the beginning.
Bond does have an arc. It is the flat arc
As Alfred Hitchcock said, suspense beats surprise every time.
It doesn't matter if we see the bomb under the desk, it matters that the character doesn't know
Someone let the Rings of Power writers know about that
I absolutely love that Daniel acknowledges when he sees that someone has called him on something and strives to do better. This is something that is missing from politics, religion, and society in general. This is one of the reasons I follow this channel. Good job staying humble amd always trying to improve Daniel.
@Atharva Deshpande I have never met anyone who, after a well reasoned critique of their political view, said "You have a point. Maybe I should look into this more."
Yeah mad respect
CastleBroknhed I absolutely agree with you. I have just recently started watching Daniel and his respect of opinions and answering honorable is epic. Daniel is also funny when he can be and I feel whenever he throws something funny in that it fits well. I also find it hilarious when he throws an opinion out the window to be funny but then treats it respectfully after
@@castlebroknhed8065 I get what you're saying but if you're talking about their overall political view, that's a very difficult thing to change. Like I lean pretty progressive now, more so than I used to be, and I have A LOT of different reasons for why that is. I could see changing a political position I have based on a good criticism (and I have done that in the past) but I think unless you present the best possible argument against my views I'm not going to change them based on one debate/argument. And if I did I probably had a superficial attachment to them in the first place
What makes a movie great? It certainly has nothing to do with the source material behind it. One can definitely argue that the LOTR movies have flaws, but not showcasing characters like Tom Bombadil or skipping Saruman's takeover of the Shire are NOT flaws. Just changes. Film is a different medium. It functions differently.
Taking away Frodo's agency against the Ringwraiths through resisting temptation and perserverance to instead have Eowyn just rescue him is a change that I thought was pretty bad though. Kinda destroyed the reasoning on why he was accepted as the ring bearer on the adventure by everyone.
@@Kadaspala Sure, and comparing things like that are fair game, but this is a "smaller" element. I think one has to look at the overall picture, and I think the trilogy exceeds in telling a compelling fantasy series. Remember: Making a film is so much more complicated. E.g. Tolkien can write "Frodo was confused", but showing this in a film is so much more complicated.
@Bosnium It's not that simple my friend. My point is that while the sentence "Gimli was sad" takes up 3 words of a large book, it could take up to a minute to visually execute it. Screen time is more valuable. There's just no time for irrelevant plots, unimportant characters and many side-quests in well-made films, whereas books have all the time in the world. Film is a more difficult medium to create.
@Bosnium oh yeah, I agree with that. I just wanted to showcase the difference between writing a book and making a film.
I love the movie ending and Tom Bombadil was redundant. Honestly LotR is one of the best book to movie adaptations
The quick cut after the lotr is scifi comment was great
LoTR... being sci-fi... HOW?!???
@@averongodoffire8098 don't you know? The palantir is just computers connected to satellites. There is no magic in LOTR. Gandalf carries a shield generator, which he uses against the balrog.
Joking aside, calling LOTR sci-fi is like calling My Little Pony grim dark horror. It's just so off :D
Anders Doktor
Lol don’t give them any ideas😂🤣🤣 but ya really weird to hear
@@And-ur6ol i dunno man, those ponies fill ME with existential dread anytime i see them
@@averongodoffire8098 Hi !
This is a very interesting idea, and i agree with the comment saying thet LoTR is actually Sci-fi.
First : I am a Sci-fi guy, and not really a Fantasy Guy.
Let me explain : It is all a matter of definition. The most accurate and satisfying definition of Sci-Fi i have ever came across was the one given by French Scholar Irène Langlet in her book : "Science-Fiction : Lecture et poétique d'un genre littéraire" (Reading and poetry of a genre).
She gives her definition of Sci-Fi : (I roughly translate it in English) Sci-Fi is a genre where the Author draws conclusion from a supernatural/technological postulate known and accepted by the characters in the book. in other words, the Sci-Fi author invents something that do not exist in real life (a machine, a robot, space travel, communication with the Aliens........) ans expands this idea to explain what these elements changes life of the characters.
From this définition, i cannot see how LoTR would not be Sci-Fi : it falls under the définition of Sci-Fi.
1- you disagree with the definition : Well, it is the best definition I have ever come across, because all the sci-fi I have ever read falls under the definition : maybe give me a better one ?
2- You disagree because Sci-Fi is technology and Fantasy is magic. I think this is a misunderstanding of what makes Sci-fi and fantasy what they are : The postulate in the beginning of the story is not important, it can be whatever you want, but it has to be not existing in real life, what is important is the conséquenses of the postulate. Plus, I think that magic in fantasy (I have not read a lot of fantasy !) is treated like science. The mages are scientists that study a natural phenomenon and start to use it… how different is it from scientists in Sci-Fi that try to understand the “magic” of hyperspace travel ? What is the fundamental difference between Alien Races and Fantasy Races ?
Maybe it is the Word “Science” that bothers you : replace it by the first word used to describe Sci-Fi : “Speculative Fiction”. Fantasy speculates around the idea of the existence of magic and fantasy races, just like what you think Sci-Fi does with tech and alien races.
Another proof : there are so many books that are “between” fantasy and Sci-fi :
- Star Wars : Fantasy races/Alien Races, The force treated like magic in classic trilogy and like a science in the prequels
- Grimnoir Chronicles : the magic is treated like science… and the powers are given by an Lovecraftian-like Creature !
- ……..
All that to say that Fantasy is Sci-Fi, and Sci-Fi is fantasy, due to the fact that the two are not different in nature.
I believe this so strongly that I am always shocked to see the reactions this statement provokes !
Brandon Sanderson has big plan on how the cosmere will end.
"The earth opens up and kills everyone and thats the ending."
"Damn, he figured it out, we gotta change!"
Nah, that wouldn't work. There would need to at least be a supernova to destroy the cosmere. Too many planets involved. What actually will happen is Cephandrius will collect all 16 shards and become a new Adonalsium. Then kill everyone.
@@reillywilloughby cephandrius is Hoid right? I'm not completely caught up on the cosmere yet.
@@moonisusman4072 yep! Cephandrius is one of Hoid's names. That is a bit of a cosmere deep lore fact, so don't feel weird that you didn't know it!
To the point of Tolkien's possible take on the LOTR: Professor Tolkien made it clear that his intention was to birth a true English mythology. The movies helped to accomplish that goal. His personal tastes aside, I think he would have been gratified that his books were made into movies.
Agree. It also should be pointed out that he sold the movie rights so if he didn't want a movie he shouldn't have done that.
@Salve to Cat Overlords especially since he wrote Hobbit for children. Like LotR was supposed to be a epic so the movies being an adventure epic makes sense. Hobbit was an adventure sure but it was not really supposed to be an epic on the level of LotR. And they tried to make the movies as such. Hobbit is a great story but it's not on the level of LotR. (Also Silmarillion>LotR or Hobbit, don't at me).
@Salve to Cat Overlords Can you, pretty please, elabore on your hypothesis that Bombadil molested the hobbits? I'm super intrigued (no irony).
@David Humphries You look like Review Bro (ReportOfTheWeek)
When did he say that? Can you provide a link?
In the bit about a character not needing an arc... Totally true! Back in university, my writing lecturer called them "The travelling angel" archetype. He argued their purpose was to improve the lives of other characters, often having an impact on their arcs. Examples he gave were Mary Poppins, Ferris Bueller and Gandalf.
... Or Xavier, Renegade Angel for a literal yet also fipped version of the trope.
Um... *Uncle Iroh*
I think of Prince Ashitaka from Princess Mononoke in this context. He’s a genuinely good person all throughout and consistently badass, but the interesting part is how he helps others and how they change as a result of him throughout the story.
Static Characters are fine. Especially if you are not following their life story. It makes total sense for not every character featured in a book to have arcs and changes during the limited time our story shows them.
Agreed. Although (and I understand that's not what you were trying to say) Gandalf has an arc.
A creator that would rather surprise the audience over having a fully consistent story is basically saying "I only expect people to read/watch/etc my product just once."
>my product
Consoooooooooom
And then be remembered forever
Thank you! I swear when I found out certain authors tweaked their stories that way it seriously irked me! I get it IF an author finds a better way to tell the same story, but don't sacrifice plain sense for "shock and awe." Bottom Line: the integrity of the story matters more than trying to outsmart your audience 💯
Yeah, also, if your audience has figured out the ending, doesn't that mean that the ending is a logical follow up to the first part of the story? It should mean the author has done the work of making the ending make sense, and has foreshadowed appropriately.
Yeah this is something that always annoys me, besides if a story works even while knowing/predicting the twists, then that is the best testament to the twists actually being good.
Also the irony with authors changing their plans in order to surprise the fans is that it might get to a point where not doing so would be the real surprise.
If there is any fans left by then.
I figure writers like that are writing for the sake of making money, not for the sake of serving the story.
6:06 Best example I can think of right now is Uncle Iroh from Avatar. He definitely seems like the kind of person who has had his character arc long before the events of the series. He doesn't really undergo a lot of change as a person during the events of Avatar, but remains my favorite character in the series (and one of my favorite characters of all time).
Okay already seeing the difference between these episodes. Last one was like, bad world building is bad and here we already have Brandon Sanderson is overhyped. If that isn’t a spicy comment in the book community I don’t know what is
Maybe, maybe not. "Sanderson has been over-hyped" might get some folks going, but there are some really spicy takes out there that Daniel has already waded in on. For example, "Modern YA is lazy, formulaic writing that panders to the least admirable parts of teen culture today" is a nice, spicy take that I've seen on some channels. I don't necessarily agree with it, but I can see how it has just enough merit to spark an entertainingly heated debate.
@@pavelowjohn9167 In general modern YA is lazy, formulaic writing. You do have a few gems in the dirt, just like most modern movies are lazy, formulaic drivel but again you have a few gems in the rough... There are always exceptions which is why it is not always good to argue using generic terms and lumping everyone into a group. Are all Americans rich, greedy, self centered jerks? Are all Canadians the most polite, respectful people? Are all Chinese ..... Are all Africans....? You get what I mean?
He is overhyped, there is so much hype around him that no matter how good he actually is there is proportionally more hype around him than he really should have. Just being more reasonable about him would seem like hate, even if it is positive because of how much hype he has, like he's the only writer in the world.
Singing a song in an audiobook would be impractical for an obvious reason. Someone needs to write the tune. They would then need to convey this to the narrator who may not have training in music theory, even if they CAN sing. Often a writer doesn't hear the tune in their head, rather the rhythm and poetry of the prose.
I still think that the songs of the Lord of the rings audiobooks are SO well done
Especially considering that not all authors will be musical. And they'd maybe even need to hire a seperate singer to sing them, if the narrator cannot, and someone to compose a melody. And there's the posibility that the composer could do a bad job of that. It would be interesting to see musicians adapt songs in books, though, but I don't think the audiobooks are the place to do that.
I fully agree, that is if Robert Plant and Ann Wilson aren't going to do the singing. Also, who is going to be the backing band?
Depends on the narrator, a lot of them are very talented. Hunger Games I thought they did great incorporating the songs in the audio.
A lot of audiobooks do include music.
Not really a hot take: Just because someone is overrated doesn't mean he/she is bad
Very much agreed here. I don't know how many times I've seen an author dismissed as "overrated" as if that's the same thing as saying "not worth reading". Like, on a list of "top 25 best fantasy series" I saw, someone objected to the Harry Potter and His Dark Materials series being on the list, and the only reason why was that they're "overrated". The thing about being "overrated" is that it's purely a subjective word. If 100 people love an author/book/series and 1 person doesn't, that 1 person might call it "overrated" but it's clearly just his opinion and not mainstream. If I take a look at Goodreads and note that a book has thousands of four-star reviews and hundreds of five-star reviews, and only twenty or thirty 1-star reviews, I'm probably still gonna read it and decide whether or not I find it "overrated". But if I do, that's just my opinion. I've been known to recommend books I didn't personally like that much just because the person asking for recommendations clearly has different tastes than me.
Yes. I liked the Kingkiller Chronicles. Didn't love them, didn't hate them, just thought it was a competently done work of fantasy. I'm afraid that for awhile I lost this sense based upon the way the fandom treats the books, both in a positive and (nowadays an increasingly) negative way.
Well, overrated doesn't even really work as a term without a point of reference anyway.
A bad story rated mediocre would be just as much overrated as a good one rated great, and that is even aside of the whole can of worms that is subjective opinion.
@@thelasthandbook6704 I actually really recommend Kingkiller on audiobook, the way the story is set-up, I think it's meant to be listened to.
Not to mention the fact that "overrated" is an extremely subjective judgment.
Totally agree with you take at the end of the video. "Subverting expectations" has become a dirty term because so many writers have sacrificed the integrity of their story for cheap shock and to "beat" fan theories. A well-laid out path or twist in a story should be predictable to some degree, otherwise it may feel unearned or out of left field. The onus is on the author to then either deliver on that in a way that can still surprise the audience while remaining consistent with the story or to deliver a twist that, while predictable with respect to the high level concepts, surpasses the audience's own theories. Subversion can still be done well, but the key is in delivering something that people didn't realize they wanted and that makes the most sense within the bounds of the story.
Side-note on this topic, because you mentioned Attack on Titan earlier in the video. Isayama (the author of the manga that the anime is based off of) is fantastic at setting up and delivering on plot twists.
To the point with the singing of songs in audio books: i think they should be read in rithmic musical way. No need for singing but a clear distinction in the reading rythm.
Tolkien tried a few times to get the movies made before he died but he failed to do so. He also had some connection with Christopher Lee, and spoke to him about being Gandalf if ever he had control of the movie.
Really must have stung for Lee to get Sauroman instead...
Rereading a book to better understand is a negative? We've been analyzing the Illiad & Odyssey for millennia!
The sound and the fury is a great example of that. You can't fully understand in just one reading
Hell, rereading the Wheel of Time and spotting things I didn't see in my previous 5 reads of the series is a pretty great experience.
Or their offspring Ulysses. I still find stuff in therr.
About great characters not needing arcs: Toph Beifong. She's a fan favorite, and she's a very static character.
True, she might be a fan fav, but it still does not make her a well written character. For example, doom guy is a total badass, a fan fav, but not a well written or deep character.
I would actually disagree. Her arc isn’t as intense as many of the other characters, but it exists. Throughout the series, she has to come to terms with the fact that she’s no longer alone and has to work with the team. She learns to rely on her friends and accept help from them. In my opinion, the best character in atla who doesn’t have an arc is Uncle Iroh.
'Depth', besides being a hilariously overused buzzword, isn't really inherent to art. At least in my view. I can experience a piece of media and see nothing of value there, while another person can interpret it in a completely different way and take away some life-changing lessons from it. That's why I love to consume art.
@@elenamarceline273 Iroh's arc has already happened prior to the story, it seems. Being a fierce warlord until losing his son, turning down the position of Fire Lord and then later finding peace with himself and a second 'son' in Prince Zuko.
El Chourico more than Iro, I think the Fire Lord is the one without a character arc. Now, that’s not necessarily a bad thing, but he doesn’t really undergo any changes from what we can see, and we don’t see him much anymore once his powers are taken away (which would’ve been perfect breeding ground for introspection and development, having to come to terms with the fact that his powers can no longer do justice to his ambitions)
This man just threw the Joker under the bus. Damn Daniel.
I think you mean Damniel
I would love to see a video examining the weaknesses in the writing of various authors.
I remember reading that Christopher (in particular) was not going to see the movies; I wonder if he changed his mind. I think JRR would have liked some parts of the movies; but would have hated other parts - Faramir having Gollum beat up and his treatment of Frodo; a burning Denethor taking the dive off of Minas Tirith and the extended editions the death of Sauraman.
[edit added here] And of course JRR would have hated Hobbit movies (yes, that is reading into an authors dead mind, which is unfair), but a simple episodic children's book was turned into a bloated, bombastic, including a "man of the people" character arc would probably be despised.
The change to Faramir was probably my single biggest complaint of the movies, largely because it didn't even seem necessary in any way to butcher the character that way.
The Hobbit movies weren't really even The Hobbit. At best they were inspired by.
@@mattpfarr6129 The hobbit movies were horrible; they are tonally disjoint from the books and bloated in the dumbest ways imaginable. I was referring to theLOTR. movies.
For what it’s worth, Tolkien’s grandson Simon Tolkien has given interviews in which he says his grandfather likely would not have liked the movies. Hard to say for sure, of course. Personally, I love the movies, but not nearly as much as the books!
He had higher aspirations for his books.The religious angle has been watered down, for instance. As well as the historical angle.
Thug Life Bear I agree with you, though, to be fair, it would be hard in a film to duplicate the reverence and historical depth Tolkien put into LOTR.
Additionally, Christopher Tolkien hated the movies, and J.R.R.'s letter in which he critiques a script he was sent for a potential animated adaptation of LotR contains many disparaging comments that seem, in hindsight, to apply to the Peter Jackson movies as well.
ThomasAnderson1111 I’ll have to check out that letter. Tolkien’s letters are so illuminating and, in general, a pleasure to read.
@@PhilipChaseTheBestofFantasy Indeed! The letter in question is #210 in the book of his collected letters.
Mistborn is one of my favourite trilogies but in Stormlight I really see the mechanical nature of Sanderson's writing coming through, I will always read his stuff but it stops me from really investing in his stuff.
One of my favourite audiobooks growing up was a fully dramatised The Hobbit with music and singing and it's the reason I love LotR, by I think that singing etc should be reserved for dramatisations rather than unabridged versions. Really recommend that 1968 BBC dramatisation!
Just looking to provide a twist totally ruined season 8 of GoT
I think I had that on tape, the hobbit I mean. There was lots of singing and depending on who it was changed if it was good or not. I really did love to listen to it.
I will have to look that up. I love dramtizations.
@@revan0890 I have it on cassette tape but it's on audible too!
@@h.walker1332 I really love a dramatisation
2:32 Daniel: Itchy eye itchy eye itchy eye
CC's: HEI HEI HEI!
Me:....Yeah that's about right.
Ever watched One Piece? It’s still ongoing (930+ episodes in) the Manga is also fantastic. I absolutely enjoy it, but I also loves pirates.
I’m a big Tolkien fan and believe a person can enjoy classic literature, modern fantasy, cinema, manga/anime, etc.. we don’t have to label ourselves so strictly as a fan of just one genre/medium/etc, we can be fans of multiple.
Loved the vid!
About changing the ending I couldn't agree more! I even think that if the story's ending is supposed to be surprising but the reader isn't at all supposed to be able to figure it our by reading the rest of the book/series it's just an empty twist, imo the best surprises are the ones that are set up and/or make you go back and see how "it was here all along"
I would love to see more spoiler filled reviews. I strongly believe that knowing the way something ends doesn't mean that you can`t enjoy it when you read/watch it. Any story it's not only plot and character arc, it's also how it comes alive with every word.
"People say you need to read it twice to fully understand it"
I recently made this point when discussing Elliott Brooks short review of "Hyperion" (I argued that describing "Hyperion" as a collection of short stories was a little too obvious and missing the grand scheme of things in the overall story). There is a lot going on in that book and you're not going to get it all on the first read. But it's a great work and is well worth the time spent fully understanding all the concepts that Simmons presents the reader.
Well, she's pretty basic, so it doesn't surprise me.
Also, she's a devote christian, so Simmons views and sometimes critics of religion would have displeased her quite a great deal, and skewed her review of the serie.
Not nearly enough singing or poetry for Tolkien to have appreciated the movies!
That's the one thing the Hobbit movies did better than the old ones.
I think you can only judge Tolkien's appreciation for the movies in a speculative sense. If he was a modern man, he would see everything in a modern light...if he was still alive, like 120 or whatever, he would see the fluff and humor as unnecessary...and he would have issues with movie goers not understanding the themes and meanings behind his work
Julian Henderson Fluff and humour? The book has about five hundred pages of fluff and plenty of humour, not all of which made it to the screen.
@@chocolatebunnies6376 five hundred pages of fluff?? Are you serious?? Haha, you must not be a Tolkien fan...haha...to each their own...
Julian Henderson I do exaggerate, but wouldn’t you rather adress my point, instead of drawing premature conclusions about my literary preferences?
@@chocolatebunnies6376 I've just run into the whole "fluff" argument so many times ..it's tedious. I don't find a single page of LoTR or the Silmarillion to be fluffy...it's all worldbuilding to me...as far as your point...I find the humorous aspects of Tolkien's work to be on a level separate from the movies...like, for instance. In the movies, pipe smoking is always followed by boisterous laughter, making it look more like pot than pipe weed...when, in actuality, pipe smoking was just a hobby of the Professor's, thus giving smoking a large role in the story...I love the movies, don't get me wrong...though I do feel that the movies were made out to be more humorous than it should have been...similar to the MCU...though, I do think Tolkien would have enjoyed the films
Julian Henderson But how are the movies fluffed? There’s maybe the Arwen-additions, but at least they grant some elvish. Though only a tiny bit. But would you have the movies be shorter, or just focus on other elements of the material?
Daniel should put the title question at the front like fantano does. Putting it near the end for watch time is understandable, but most people would watch the whole thing anyway and are eager to get the answer to the title question right away
Daniel does tend to do a lot of clickbait cliche CZcams nonos. It's the only issue with his channel.
@@MR-CZcamsChangedMyHandle It's not clickbait if it's not misleading and/or false
I highly doubt Tolkien would be upset about the lotr books becoming movies as he actually gave Christopher Lee his blessing to play Gandalf if there ever were to be movies. I more so think he would be upset about things like Tom Bombadil being left out.
isn't that a myth tho? cus in an interview by Christopher Lee ,Lee by his own admission said that he only met Tolkien once by chance when he was in Tolkien's local pub and Lee being starstruck could only say the most British "how do you do" to tolkien
I think it's great to have ranking videos based on different criteria (respect, vs enjoyment, etc) as long as it's clear and consistent throughout the individual video
On the retconning subject I'd like to add that writers who do this do a great disservice to their readers (who figured it out). Sitting with a theory for years or months to see it come true feels so great, I don't get why a writer would want to deny their readers that feeling.
I just wish the movies portrayed the elves more accurately to the books.
I would love to see a video were you break down popular authors' strengths and weaknesses. That would make for a super interesting conversation I think
OMG I laughed so much with the beaver part xD Thanks Daniel for your videos :D
16:03 Do you wanna know something messed up? The ending where the Earth opened up and killed everyone is literally the ending to "The Cabin in the Woods," and it was magnificent!
The Sirius question, Daniel had it pretty on point. Harry saw him as a father figure, but Sirius saw Harry as a friend, like getting James back. (Sorry I dont remember if its quoted directly in the book) but the movie atleast clearly shows this when hes fighting in book 5 and calls Harry James.
He was never supposed to be a father figure, I believe that was the intention. (Lupin actually came off more as a father figure than James. I think he's underrated in this role.)
Sirius never was serious.
Buh-dum-CHHHH! 🥁
Yep that last question defines the new Star Wars movies
Including the prequels.
💯 agree on all Daniel’s remarks about the Sanderson comment. Great to see a resonant voice in the reading community addressing exactly what’s troubled me about the Sanderson hype for the last year or two.
Daniel keep the debates going
Let me just say that I love your channel, and you're generally the first thing I want to watch every morning. With that said... I don't know if it's CZcams being evil, something about channel popularity, or what, but in a 17-minute video it popped up to interrupt you with commercials four times! I just find it interesting because I watched the recording of The Dusty Wheel's livecast late last night and got no commercials in an hour and a half. Why does CZcams hate you and want to interrupt you? :D
Pretty sure he determines how many adbreaks there are during a video. Its not evil youtube interrupting him, its him making money from his work.
Wow, I'm early recently. I'd just like to say I love your videos.
On the topic of graphic novels, i love them and i think they're beautiful and super creative, but I think they are different from just reading a book, and you can get different things out of these different mediums. Ex:you really don't get a lot of description in a graphic novel because it's visual. What bothers me is that while there are some books that would work really well as graphic novels, not all books work in that form. I feel like having a graphic novel of The Giver ruins how well the twist about color was done, and A Wrinkle in Time graphic novel takes away some of the imagination involved in reading it.
Tolkien had stated that he would want Christopher Lee to play Saruman. Christopher Lee played Saruman. Tolkien's shade in the halls of Mandos is satisfied.
The idea that Tolkien wouldn’t like the LotR movies because he didn’t like plays seems a bit presumptive. I mean, can you imagine what a LotR stage play would be like?? (I’m picturing the Fire Nation theatre from A:tLA.😂) The experience of watching of movie is significantly different even without considering what VFX can offer.
Anyway, I would hope Tolkien would judge the LotR movies on their execution rather than the fact that they’re movies. He might not have liked them for other completely valid reasons, but I’d hope the medium wouldn’t be at the top of that list.
One of my biggest nightmares is that you'll lose some of your books in the move somehow or they'll get damaged. I've heard about that happening so many times before :( But I know you'll be careful with them!
Yes, video on authors' weaknesses! That would be awesome!
I think Tolkien would appreciate the amount a passion that was put into the movies regardless of his opinion of them as a whole.
Hey there Daniel. Thanks for another great video. Is Grapic Audio a really good quality app. I am legally blind, and the print quality on a few of the graphic novels that I have tried to read was way too small. I was wondering if this app will make that process easier. Thanks. Also, I started listening to the Shadow Rising by Robert Jordan today.
Generally, the older a work is the more times you will need to read or watch it to understand and appreciate it. IMHO
3:20 - That is a good point, thanks for making it Daniel! 😃
This is totally unrelated to this video. Upon your recommendation I went and bought a pint of Graeter's black raspberry chocolate chip ice cream and THANK YOU. It is one great flavor ice cream. Though I can enjoy it without the chocolate chips they do not take away from that rich black raspberry flavor. Again thanks it is awesome.
what are the star wars esk huge list of names about at the end of the video?
As someone with a Master's Degree in English Literature, the dude who made the comment about having to read a book twice could not have been more wrong. The greatest literary works are gifts that keep giving long after the initial read. Yikes.
I'm always disheartened when I see things about "My lit/English teacher said x isn't real literature." Reading a story is reading a story, regardless of medium! My despair at those comments is probably why I became a lit/English teacher myself - so I could encourage the reading of stories of any genre/medium within my classroom unlike I was as a student. Granted, I do enjoy the classics alongside fantasy so, there's that. But, I got into arguments with my English teachers and even literature professors that fantasy stories aren't 'good' stories. For some of them that included LOTR - like I was discouraged from continuing the trilogy after reading The Fellowship of the Ring and that is still a bit of a mental block for me - she put a lense on the remainder of the series in a way that I have yet to finish it (it's on the list, along with thousands of others). Anywho, there are few fantasy stories I DNR'd (Inheritance cycle being one, and SoT extended...) and MANY classics that I DNR'd because....ooph.
that's relatable
Any English teacher who advised against reading the Lord of the Rings is a fraud. Tolkien is literally a master of English and languages in general. That makes me so mad for you.
Well... With graphic novels I can somewhat agree with 'it's not literature' as in 'it is a different medium that use different technique to tell a story'. there has been novels and short stories adapted to graphic novels, and I think vice-versa? I don't know any instances, so I can't be sure. Which would be pointles if they were the same medium. But as 'it's inferior because of it's form' I don't agree at all.
I think Rob Ingles sort of proves that singing in audio books can be done well. He’s not a fantastic singer, but he does give it his best. There’s a “realness” that makes it feel special, like a father reading to his kids.
Another good point against singing in audiobooks is the lack of notes for the songs. Most authors probably don't have a tune in their had when writing the songs in their books, so you additionally need someone composing a melody that works for the text.
Brandon Sanderson's writing style sometimes drives me nuts. I just started reading the Well of Ascension and realized that on the first page of the third chapter, 7/8 sentences began with the word "he". Five of those were in a row
I always read Sirius as seeing Harry as a replacement for James in a weird mentor way.
I haven't watched the video yet but Sir Christopher Lee actually met Tolkien in person told him that he would have loved to see him as Gandalf in an adaptation of his books only when auditioning the role of Gandalf had already been taken so he instead played Saruman(Although I may be wrong).
I believe the reason Christopher Lee played Saruman instead was because Gandalf had more physical stuff in the role (sword fighting and horse riding, etc) that he was a bit too old to be able to do well enough.
What are some good Audiobooks to listen to in order to get into them?
Please, did Daniel made some review/reaction/comments on the Tolkien movie (2019), the one about his life, played by Nicholas Hoult and Lily Collins?
Dang, does one else enjoy it when they figure out what's going to happen in a story before it does? It feels like a story has achieved its narrative destiny. If knowing the ending of the story was a detriment to the enjoyment of a text for most people, the entire multi-million dollar romance publishing industry would not exist.
As an artist, graphic novels and their illustrations are a great inspiration and a source of new ideas for me. So not only the story can be really good, the artwork also deserves a lot of respect.
I hit two birds with one stone whenever I read a graphic novel.
Specifically to Dresden spoiler reviews. You can put it into 5 book arc chunks. Dresden has 4 arcs each 5 books long. That would work.
Roy Dotrice sings all the ASOIAF songs as Christmas carols and it kills me
Books that motivate me to read them many times, and learn something new everytime i do that is very unique trait
i mean in eny medium not just books .. lol
Even in games, having replay value is sooo important
That’s makes a lot of sense. I agree that people do in fact change, in fact I change my favorite day to day. Thanks for the response. Love the vids.
Regardless of whether Tolkien was a fan of the film industry or not, I believe that he would have been amazed with how well they executed not only the adaptation, but also the kind of feel and tone he intended the series to have. The only criticism I could see him having off-hand would be how they executed Gollum's character from book to screen being that his story was supposed to not be primarily about his selfish lust for the Ring, but be a lot more tragic than how the films put it out to be like the amount of conflict he had within him from the books. Other than that though, I think he would have been very amazed and pleased with how it turned out. That would be what I'd call my educated guess on how he'd feel based on what I've read and for what it may be worth, the movie about the author.
Love that you call this a "debate". I've learned that arguing a creator never works no matter how right or pervasive you are because on person has a keyboard and the other has a microphone
I spent 70+ episodes setting up a twist villain for my podcast. A few people were suspicious of the character before the reveal, and that made me really happy. Because it meant that they were picking up on the little narrative crumbs I'd been so careful to drop. A lot of people were both surprised and devastated. But I wasn't about to change who the character really was because some had guessed that they weren't who they said they were. It's GOOD storytelling if readers/listeners who are paying attention can guess the ending or the twist. A twist that comes out of nowhere is lazy.
There are book, that when you read them the second time, you go: "Oooooooh! I didn't realize that was hinted at already heeere!" And such things. I think that's pretty cool.
ya to fully appreciate my novels you got to read each at least 15 times...and purchase a brand new copy each time. its the only way.
I really appreciate your thoughts on not hate keeping Fantasy with required readings, like I love the genre but I actually hatted reading LOTR, I just couldn’t get into Tolkien’s writing. I think I may have a different opinion if I tried read them again now I’m older bu t just the obligation to do so sours me on the prospect. Nothing can so easily make a person hate a book as forcing them to read it’s if you love a book the worst thing you can do is force it on someone and ruin their chances for liking it…
I think audiobooks should have multiple "narrators." A main narrator and others that voice the different characters. Pending the amount they want to spend on creating the recording, of course.
Full cast audiobooks. It's a thing.
Singing in audio books: you also didn’t mention that songs in books rarely come with sheet music. What’s the tune? How do you know? Which instruments are used? If any? There’s a lot more to music than just words, and words is usually all you get.
As much as I can enjoy a cool magic system, that's never been in the same stratosphere as my favorite things about any of his books. That person just doesn't like him, which is fine, but it's not because they're not frothing over the magic systems. I didn't care for allomancy at all but Mistborn is amazing.
I just read an article about how Tolkien detested Walt Disney. He went to see 'Snow White' with C.S. Lewis and apparently came away determined never to let Disney anywhere near any of his own creations. What's significant about his comments about Disney, though, is that he praised many aspects of the movie, and talked about how Disney *could* have been a great artist if only he'd had more integrity and respect for the source material. The implication would seem to be that Tolkien wasn't categorically opposed to film as a medium.
The question is, would Tolien think of the movies as a respectful adaptation?
Congrats on the move!
The first book I learned that you must read over and over was the Bible. To reach better levels of understanding re-reading is a must.
Re:Tolkien vs the movies. I agree with the point that we cannot know absolutely for sure how someone who is dead would actually feel. However, I do think that we know enough about Tolkien to make an educated guess to his reaction to some of the changes. It is almost certain that Tolkien would have HATED the changes to the deaths of Smaug, Fili, Kili, Thorin, and the Witch King. He would have probably been ok with Legolas existing in the Hobbit, but would have probably not liked much of the added content related to the character. Personally, I think he would have liked some things but hated others, with a net negative result.
Sorry what changed in regards to the death of the witch-king?
@@chillpengeru in the film he was able to be killed by a mortal, while in the book, only the barrow blade could kill him.
Two years late, this is the first of your videos I've ever seen.
I was impressed at "because I took it in good faith that people would vote the hottest of takes and the things they wanted to see me respond to because it says to do that in the post and not just what they agreed with but I should have realized that".
I got to "when people say you need to read it twice to fully enjoy it and understand it that's a negative criticism of a book absolutely not this is completely and utterly wrong" and smacked the Like.
I got to "to the eight people that agreed with you you rot in hell and you die" and even though you followed it immediately with "no", I smacked the Subscribe and wished there was a "Love and I hope you have an awesome weekend" button.
... but there is no "e" in the word "spicy". Dang, I hope the remaining 15m24s of this video is this good.
EDIT:
> when I don't think there is anyone who is required reading for modern fantasy
Whoop. Nope. No no no no no.
I'm not going to specify a name, because that's not the point here, but the last 20 years have taught us that this is a harmful incorrect statement.
> I won't put anything for it as that because it's not fair because it implies that a person who picks up this required thing and doesn't like and appreciate it they're not like good at fantasy which is there's a level of gatekeeping I'm not ever gonna be in
Then you are harming fantasy.
I will take this explanation OUTSIDE fantasy to even take the sting out of it. I read Isaac Asimov's "Foundation" over 35 years ago while I was still high school. I watched David Goyer's AppleTV "Foundation". The two are diametrically opposed in everything that mattered.
The book was a landmark classic not only using historical themes, but the book was a historical event of itself talking about the interplay of social forces, the rush of history, changes in the human condition and the magnifying influence of science and technology. The author earned a Bachelor's in Science, a Master's and a PhD in Chemistry, while learning French and German, working during WWII in a Naval air experiments station, worked as an associate professor of biochemistry.
The television series had a room full of scientists debating a point and the choice was made on the basis of "what if you decide to settle a planet where there's no water". Something which I believe even you Americans are taught in the what, third grade? The critical necessity of water for human existence. And the actors, camera crew, stage crew, directors, editors, producers, executives and let me say it explicitly: stupid retarded braindead writers undeserving of payment or oxygen... let this line through.
If you don't gatekeep, boundaries and standards drift until you end up standing for the very opposite of everything it all originally meant. Don't give me "change and evolution are important" because even so, you don't end up letting value-drifters destroy the very basis of everything you hold dear.
You have foundational classic works, especially in fantasy. To not use them as AT LEAST an origin point, a defining MINIMUM QUALITY standard...
I've seen "Doctor Who", "Star Trek", "Star Wars", the settings that made D&D beloved, Asimov and TOLKIEN destroyed. No damn more.
If people are willing to step up and learn about, let's say, Fantasy, properly? Then they can explore and love it and develop it. If they're going to walk in, up-end it, set it on fire, *they* need to be set on fire. The people who complain the most about gatekeepers are INVADERS.
I'm going to go look at a few more of your videos to take in more of your debate opinions but until I get a better picture, please consider my over-eager instant subscription ended.
Just wanna add that sometimes it's also not possible for songs to be sung in audiobooks due to copyright issues. So they have to be read instead.
While I don't know what Tolkien would think of the LOTR movies, O do know he was approached about filming it in his lifetime and didn't just toss it out because he didn't like movies/plays. So, "he dodn't like plays" would not be a good justification for saying he would have hated the movies.
I think ruining the thematic climax by removing the Scouring of the Shire would be a bigger contender than an alleged dislike of the medium.
Well, if you want a narrator with an amazing voice who can sing - it's James Marsters of the Dresden Files.
I wonder if an author has ever used fan theories to determine where a story is going. Like they had no idea where to go with a plot point so they surf Reddit and CZcams for ideas.
Pretty sure Rothfuss does it at this point!😜
2:19 had me in tears hahahaha crack up
I hope you do a DF one after Battle Grounds! That would be an awesome hour video!
Fantasy Power Ranking Ep. 3
Good luck with the move Daniel!
Daniel: "Well, the earth opened up and killed everyone." You can't do that.
Drew Goddard and Joss Whedon: Hold our beers.
It's hard to say whether Tolkien would have liked the films, because yes, on the one hand, he probably wouldn't have liked any cuts made to his work. He himself in his lifetime said that he believed the books to be unfilmable. Now, whether that relates to the subject matter of such a complex story, or simply he didn't think it could be done with the kind of production value of films from his day, we can't know. But Tolkien never lived in a world with things like computer animation, and I'd say Peter Jackson was, by and large, as faithful as one could be to such a voluminous text. So, at the end of the day, the answer is.... who the hell knows?
I can't wait for the Discworld videos!
But it seems I must [= good luck with the move!
Discworld is a favorite series of mine and I've reread all of them a few times at least so I eagerly await any and all videos you may do on them! Terry Pratchett was a treasure. Pretty much every one of his books I have read has made me laugh and think. The best ones can make me cry.
I hope you dive all the way down the Disc's rabbit hole because much like the Dresden Files one of the best parts is enjoying seeing the series grow into itself and watch an author really grow.
Keep up the good work!