Comments | periantari: Ralph Bakshi versus Peter Jackson movies

periantari

Ralph Bakshi versus Peter Jackson movies

Feb 21, 2010 01:47

Thanks to speedyhobbit for linking this in her journal first! These videos made my day! :D

Bakshi versus Peter Jackson's movies =)

Part I

Click to view

Biggest points in my humble opinion ( Read more... )

ralph bakshi, peter jackson, lotr, movies

Comments 23

speedyhobbit February 21 2010, 07:09:22 UTC

I found a written comparison that pays close attention to the Frodo issue

periantari February 21 2010, 07:35:59 UTC

That is a great entry-- i have already commented. :)

shirebound February 21 2010, 14:38:58 UTC

Frodo is just utter beauty in PJ's version but still...PJ really should've made him much stronger to give him so much credit in everything.

Merry and Pippin's lines of adhering to Frodo and staying by him was mentioned in Bakshi as supposed to totally skipping the whole cousin dynamic in PJ's version which i know a bunch of us in here are very displeased at.

*totally agrees and applauds*

periantari February 22 2010, 06:38:34 UTC

Thanks dear SB!
PJ could've spent two minutes mentioning Merry and Pippin are related to Frodo and gave them a few lines at that but no.... :(

pokecharm February 21 2010, 17:06:17 UTC

I don't think I ever saw the other version in it's entirety...

periantari February 22 2010, 06:37:18 UTC

It's hard to bear, isn't it? :) I want to rewatch for the differences that "NostalgicFan" made about Frodo and Aragorn though. :)

labourslamp February 21 2010, 19:37:00 UTC

I think I mentioned these reviews in a post a little while back, but it was buried with my NaNoesque posts, so...

I, too, really liked the fact that in Bakshi Frodo actually had guts... but I still don't see why making Frodo an "utter beauty" is necessarily a positive aspect to the Jackson films, especially since they tied the "beauty" thing to the "weak" thing. But I've been on that high horse many a time, so no need to respond to it.

I do have to take you up on the "weakening Aragorn" defense, though. It seems like a good idea in theory, but:

1). He's 80 at this point. If you have a character who was running around for 60 years who still hasn't come to terms with his destiny, that doesn't speak well for his ability to eventually be a King of Kingliness. In fact I think that PJ et al. ended up realizing the full problems of this approach when they ditched the "sprequel" idea--the film that would have covered the 60-odd years in between TH and LotR. Aragorn was about the only character who would have worked well during this ( ... )

Thanks for this post! periantari February 22 2010, 06:36:08 UTC

So much to reply to and i'm so glad you have such opinions! So glad to hear from you regarding the comparisons. I definitely will have fun with this:

I, too, really liked the fact that in Bakshi Frodo actually had guts... but I still don't see why making Frodo an "utter beauty" is necessarily a positive aspect to the Jackson films, especially since they tied the "beauty" thing to the "weak" thing.
I know...i wish PJ would make Frodo stronger and worth the whole "hero" image. He really made Frodo somewhat reliant on the fangirls' image of him and banking on that to make him a attractive Frodo rather on the inherent qualities that Tolkien's Frodo had that makes him such a well respected character.
BooK! Frodo was stronger, more resilient, more loyal, had better lines, wiser, and just made a lot more sense.

That's why, if PJ et al. had decided to portray Aragorn as he was in the books, they would have been able to do a good Aragorn-biopic sprequel.Isn't that what the Hobbit Prequel is for? :P ( ... )

Re: Thanks for this post! labourslamp February 22 2010, 16:44:24 UTC

Thanks for your points!

"Somewhat reliant" doesn't even begin to cover it. Replace Elijah Wood with a plain-looking actor, but keep the characterization of the films, and who wouldn't want to punch that character in the face?

Sometime I'm going to have to do an analysis of the physical appearance of Frolijah and compare it to Victorian-era sentimentalism--specifically, how weak vs. strong characters (especially female ones, since Frolijah really does look like a girl) are made to appear. I know there are a lot of tropes out there but I'm not sure how he fits in. I know everyone but me is able to do this, but I honestly cannot separate that look from that characterization, which is why I'm so deeply disturbed whenever otherwise excellent fan fiction feels the need to tell me that Frodo, in this fic, looks exactly like a damsel in distress! Never mind that he doesn't act like Frolijah... as soon as the picture is in there the associations are made and I can't get it out of my head. *sigh* I'd be more okay with it if 1). only ( ... )

Re: Thanks for this post! periantari February 24 2010, 01:46:42 UTC

I do'nt really agree that i would punch Frolijah because i think there were some things he did really well like expressions and acting in general --if characteristics were the only factor, then maybe i would judge differently but since Frolijah did a great job in general, that still gave me many reasons for loving him and being fangirly as well. IN the point of characteristics, it's important but not the deciding factor for my love for Movie!Frodo. Did i want a stronger Frodo? yes, but it is'nt the only thing to make me like/dislike him and in my book, i still love movie Frodo despite the shortcomings.

In fanfiction, i don't agree that he could be portrayed as "damsel in distress" so therefore i tend to read more of the stronger portrayals of him. I didn't think Frolijah looked "girly" but i guess that is your point of view.

The problem with this line of defense is that it can be used to justify almost every change made in the films--f.ex. throwing away The Choices of Master Samwise for a cheap bit of suspense (see? It's more ( ... )

Thread 12

dreamflower02 February 22 2010, 15:55:34 UTC

I think the ONE over-arcing reason that PJ wins out over Bakshi hands-down is *follow-through"! Whatever good ideas Bakshi had are totally wiped out by the fact that he never finished what he was doing!

You have to realize-- I saw it when it came out, back in the '70s. I had been eagerly anticipating it! There was no hint at all when it was released that the movie stopped where it did, or that it would never be finished. To end at the Battle of Helm's Deep? And at that time Bakshi had already decided he would not be able to do a sequel.

Can you imagine the fans' outrage? No wonder it was a flop! At least when PJ released TTT, we knew ROTK was already in the can, just getting a bit of editing and tweaking, and that in one year, we'd get to see the end of the story! Guaranteed.

At any rate, that experience totally soured me on the Bakshi version.

speedyhobbit February 23 2010, 04:52:54 UTC

I'm sure Bakshi would have done much better in RotK than Rankin-Bass though... Rankin Bass RotK makes me want to vomit repeatedly/

dreamflower02 February 23 2010, 05:00:47 UTC

I can't abide R-B ROTK, but I do enjoy R-B's version of The Hobbit! They did fairly well with it-- not brilliantly, but nice! Loved Glen Yarborough's songs in it, and Bilbo was so sweet!

But ROTK? Er, it's really not ROTK at all-- it's just a kind of mish-mash, with a few characters that seem to have the same names...

periantari February 24 2010, 02:09:25 UTC

I don't think i've seen RotK by R-B--after Bakshi, i was scared of animated. :P

Thread 5