Just watching Lord of the rings!fellowship of rings

The thing about books/novels/comic books turned to movies is that directors can have the freedom to do changes on it. They can have this by paying the real owner to give them a go. Of course, the owner has to give permission to such changes so it's obvious that the LOTR author gave Peter Jackson a go for it.

It is extremely frustrating. The books always have so much more details than the movie... I don't quiet understand why they can't follow the storyline... fair enough its too long to convert into movie, but still they tend to change the story which is frustrating.

The movie is excellent. They are 3 of the most successful movies ever produced. I am sure you wanted something even better compared to the book, but the script writers and director did all they could to capture the essence of the book into 3 movies. If you wanted the series of LOTR to be 10 movies long, then it would have been nothing more than a soap. For me it was just about perfect, so I strongly disagree with your opinion. Have a nice day!

I think Peter Jackson did a good job with the movies but there was a lot left out but that is the nature of movies. I was just happy to see it on screen in my lifetime.

It's adjustable, no way to do the same as the book some in the book is not applicable or way to expensive to do in the movie and it shortened. Right ??

I have read all the LOTR books (and even the prequel book, The Hobbit) and watched the movies. And I personally think that Peter Jackson did a marvelous job of directing all 3 LOTR movies and capturing the imagination of movie-goers (regardless of whther they have read the series or not). As with any movie adaptation, one cannot possibly put ALL elements of the book to the big screen. That's why they are called movie adaptations. You can't expect to squeeze all elements from the book to the big screen as this is not practical. First, it would take 3 or so movies to make a single book. Second, it would already be too dragging to watch, as not everything in the book is action-packed. The books, in fact, have too many songs in there that I feel are unnecessary. But just like any of you here, I am only expressing my own personal opinion. To eah his own, as they say.

Well, I loved the LOTR movies, especially Fellowship of the Rings, which I think was the best part of the trilogy. But, I can sympathize with you. It's different when you're already a fan of the book. I've never read the books, just The Hobbit. I know being a fan of a book often colors my perception of the film version. So, I liked it, but I'm coming from the perspective of someone who didn't have the experience of reading the books, so I didn't miss anything or saw any of the changes that you must have.

Stop watching it! the second is worse than the first, and the third is a bllic movie that has nothing to do with the book. I don't know why Peter Jackson took away some of the best moments and then invented some silly situation (like Elrond complaining to his daughter about what his own mother Tinhuviel did)...

Words pale before these demonstrations of magic. Tolkien is the greatest writer of the last century because hierarchies have been established by critics literally. The movie is not the best movie to date because there are film critics. What we care? We, he met JRR Tolkien and cherish it as it should. We have seen the film and I lived in far greater intensity than those who ignore the Tolkien. Beyond these arguments, will always remain close to our heart: Legolas and Gimli son of Gloin, Aragorn and Faramir, Galadriel and Celeborn, Gandalf and Elrond ... even language can of worms or Smeagol ... I think the movie an excellent complement to the book. Even if some characters do not appear (Tom Bombaldil) and some are more developed than was the case narrative (Arwen, Sauron), the film emphasizes the characters and effects are brilliant audio-video. You can say many things, but better watch movies again!