The Worse Movie You Have Ever Seen

[Nick22]

Gollum was a sympathetic character, Malte, at least I had sympathy for him. His murder of Deagol, along with his long posssession of the Ring, haunted him for the rest of his life. Whether or not Gandalf could have cured him after the destruction of his precious is debatable, Gandalf said himself that there was little hope that Gollum could be freed from his addiction to the Ring. I havbe read all three of the books and I loved all 3 films. TTT was the middle film, and middle films sometimes seem to lose thier way. Take Matrix Revelations, for example.
Nick

[Malte279]

^ You noticed that it was not my list of criticism Nick, didn't you?

I do agree with some of your points Drew, not with all of them though.

I'm sorry, but a guy who murders his own cousin for a piece of gold is not worthy of my sympathies.

The point is that the ring is NOT just a piece of gold, and I think many of the scenes you were not too fond of were made to show just that. I for my part do pity Smaegol same as Gandalf.

How they tried to make Grima Wormtongue a sympathetic character.

Did they try to make him sympathetic? I found him just nasty!
Concerning Theoden, I think that they might have done better if they had shown Gandalf's cure of him the way it appeared in the books rather than the way they made it in the movie. But a majority prefers the effects over the rhetoric of the book, so I may be overruled here.

The fact that Frodo held a sword to Sam's throat. Something he, in the books, never even dreamed of doing, even when he was, more or less, the Ring's.

I agree on that one. It was even more extreme in ROTK where Frodo even sent Sam away. I would have prefered the book version there, but this was certainly another attempt to make the horrible powers of the ring visible to the audience. So everyone realizes that it is not just a piece of gold with the funny habbit to make its wearer invisible.

The retardation of Treebeard. (The Ents were slow to speak, but not slow of mind.)

I agree that it was not necessary to make the Ents first decide against attacking Saruman and then let them change their mind at the sight of what they already knew (Treebeard was aware of what Saruman was doing). I can only speculate that the idea was to give Merry and Pipin a somewhat more active role than they had in the book (after all it is them who change the Ents' mind, while in the book their role is comperatively passive).

[Nick22]

I was refering to Drew's list Malte. Drew, the Ring was far more than just a piece of gold. The film showed its ability to corrupt all who came in contact with it.
Nick

[Littlefoot1616]

Sorry but LOTR really didn't do it for me! Im massive fan of fantasy and much of the sort but LOTR was just TOO much! I literally fell asleep watching "The Fellowship of the Ring" in the cinema. It just didn't grab me at all...Sorry to say it people but LOTR is definitely one of my lower rated films! <_<

[WeirdRaptor]

To Littlefoot: No problem, Littlefoot. I might suggest you try the books, at least, they're better than the movies.

To Nick: Sam didn't murder Frodo to get the Ring. Gandalf didn't murder Bilbo to get the Ring. Faramir didn't murder Frodo to get the Ring. So what excuse does Gollum have? Neither does Boromir, but he, at least, redeemed himself.

[Nick22]

So did Gollum, by falling into Mount Doom. Gollum had given into lust when he murdered his friend. The others were tempted to do the same, Boromir even wavered, but as you said, redeemed himself. Gandalf knew the powers of the Ring,  he was well aware that it eventually corrupted its users.
Nick

[WeirdRaptor]

No, Gullom never redeemed himself. He was jumping around, congraduating himself for getting the Ring back, then he accidently fell into the lake of fire. If things would have gone his way, he would have out it on and made off with it, until the wraiths got him.

Boromir did redeem himself by deliberately putting himself in danger for the sake of Merry and Pippin.

[Malte279]

You have a good point Drew about stating that the ring did not seem to have the same effect on everyone. Maybe it depended on how powerful Sauron was by the time the ring was found, but this, I admit, is no plausible explanation as Sauron was not as powerful by the time Smeagol found the ring, as he was by the time Frodo got it. However, he was very close to the ring by the time Smeagol found it. Sauron's spirit was in Dol Guldur, his fortress in Mirkwood by the time Smeagol found the ring, and it is not far from the Gladden Fields where Smeagol found the ring. Moreover Frodo and the others, unlike Smeagol, knew about the fatal powers of the ring. Perhaps this made it easier for them to resist its powers.

[WeirdRaptor]

What kind of a creature could so easily be corupted into murdering his own cousin, though? And right on the spot! Surely things like common sense, family loyalty, self-control, and natural family love would have stopped a decent being for doing such a thing.

Even Boromir was not corrupted that fast, and he thought of it as a weapon that would save his people. And Bilbo, also being completely ignorant of its powers did not try to kill Gandalf to keep it.

Please forgive the blunt and almost harsh nature of the above writing.

[Malte279]

I don't mean to say that Gollum is a lovable character. He certainly isn't and probably wasn't even before he got the ring. Still I think that most of what he is, is what the ring made of him. I do think it was a good thing not to present only the monster (he still came across as a nasty guy in the movie). But I wonder if things could have taken a different turn if it hadn't been for that incidence with Faramir at the Forbidden pool. I don't think Gollum ever understood that Frodo had saved his life.

[Petrie]

It would be hard to understand how anyone can do anything good when your mind is corrupted by evil thoughts....hence Gollum's demise.

[Nick22]

Gandalf said that the Ring had nearly devoured him. I say nearly, because there was a little corner in his mind that was still his own, a corner not totally consumed by evil. Smeagol wasn't perfect before he got the ring, but the fact that even after 500 years of being consumed by the ring, he still retained a part of himself, speaks volumes. Bilbo was not corrupted by the ring, because of his innocence, the ring did not begin to really affect him until his Farewell birthday party. The ring stripped away Gollum's innocence, and corrupted him. There were times when he was his old self, not lovable, but pitiable. He knew what had happened to him, and he hated himself for it. Malte is right, the Ring created Gollum, and banished Smeagol into the back of his mind. there is not much written about Gollum's family, there is no mention of a father, but he did live with his grandmother. I view Deagol's murder as an irrational act, a spur of the moment thing, that defied common sense. With the Ring, he became a thief and a liar, he abused its powers, and eventually was kicked out by his grandmother for his misdeeds.
Nick

[Malte279]

Maybe a great deal has been written about this matter. While I did a bibliography for my Anglism studies (a bibliography about secondary literature on American drama writing) I came across one entry of a book with the title:
"Gollum, a misunderstood hero."
Though at first thight I would certainly NOT underline that title I'm sure that if somebody bothers to write a book about it, the author must've been thinking about it for longer a while than any of us has so far.

[Nick22]

Well if you read the  book a certain way, you could come to that conclusion. Had Gollum survived, Frodo and Sam would have taken him to Minas Tirith, and there they would have tried to cure him. Without the Ring, Smeagol would have gradually regained control of himself, though he would always remain tainted by his long possession of the Ring.
Nick

[Malte279]

I doubt that Smeagol could've ever become himself again. With the terrible effect the ring had on Bilbo and Frodo in the few years they had the ring I think the effect of more than 500 years with the ring must be devastating. The much the more if one considers the way Smeagol obtained the ring. What if Bilbo had slain Gollum? He probably would've turned into something similar. The thought of what would've happened if Gollum had survived is quite interesting. I think there would have been many possible variants, though I doubt any of them would have been a pleasant one for Gollum. In the book Frodo asks same to forgive him after Gollum died, because the task would've failed without him. I'm not sure if Frodo would've been of the same mind if Gollum had survived. Either variant seems possible.

[Nick22]

bilbo had it for 60 years, Frodo had it for about 30 years, most of which he kept it secret. Had Gollum survived(lets say in his celebration he slips and falls down and the Ring falls over the side) , first he would have been distraught over the loss of his preciouss, then Sam would have tried to hurt him for biting Frodos finger off, Frodo would likely have had pity for Gollum and stopped Sam from hurting him. The eagles would have rescued them and taken them to Minas Tirith. There Gandalf could have mended Frodo's finger and tried to heal Gollum. Gollum would not like the treatments Gandalf would perform on him, so surving would not have been a pleasant experience for Gollum.
Nick

[Malte279]

Gollum might have as well turned absolutely mad and could have attacked Frodo and Sam. Maybe he would have wanted them to kill him.

[WeirdRaptor]

Yeah, it is probably for the better that Gollum perished more quickly like that, as if he had survived, he would have been in major agony and continual suffering for the rest of his life.

[Nick22]

We could open a Lord of the Rings thread here. Here's another really bad film. The Cat in the Hat. My sister saw it and she said it was horrible. I went to see it and wish I hadn't. Mike Myers( who I really like in Austin Powers) was hamming up every scene. I left halfway through, it was that bad.
 Nick

[WeirdRaptor]

"The Cat in the Hat": I didn't even bother. I liked "The Grinch", though.