Would Tolkien like the Lord of the Rings Movies?

People bring up whether Tolkien would have liked the Lord of the Rings movies a LOT. So, would he like them, and why does it matter?

[nicholasbrouillette]

“Man I loved when Legolas surfed a shield down those stairs like a badass.” - Tolkien (if he was alive today)(probably)

[ArchLars]

Fun fact, though, Tolkien actually *did* adore a different artist's take on his work, namely the illustrations of his characters and world done by _Pauline Baynes._ Baynes was the artist responsible for creating so many of the iconic illustrations for the books of Tolkien and C.S. Lewis’s Chronicles of Narnia, and her work served as a base of some sorts for many designs in the movies adapted from both works as well. Her illustrations first caught Tolkien’s eye whilst he was visiting his publisher in 1948. She was a completely unknown artist at the time and had sent various 'on spec' drawings to different publishers hoping to break into the industry as an illustrator after putting her career on hold volunteering for the Army and Navy map-making department during World War II. Interestingly enough, it was during her service that she acquired the skills for drawing the maps of Narnia for Lewis and Middle-earth for Tolkien that fans know and love today.

On viewing just a few of her drawings that day, Tolkien at once demanded that the artist behind them be set to work illustrating his books. When she first showed him her finished artwork featuring Frodo and Bilbo Baggins, the author nodded approvingly and murmured quietly: _“There they are, there they are.”_ Tolkien would go on to say that her work illustrating his books had _'reduced my text to a commentary on her drawings‘, _ which is extremely high praise coming from a gifted author such as Tolkien.

[zugabdu]

It sounds like Tolkien liked the idea of an adaptation of his work more than he could possibly have like any actual adaptation.

[Valdagast]

I don't think he'd like them, although he would love individual sequences. Especially Boromir's death.

[bwalker]

What is important to mention is that Tolkien died before Star Wars was released. Whether you like Lucas' films or not, they are the absolute watershed of fantasy on film, and the number one reason why the Jackson movies were possible. I don't know if Tolkien would have liked Star Wars or not, but if anything could have convinced him that a LOTR film could be made, this was it. As it is, he died without having all the information.

[KerouacandRimbaud]

I think Tolkien would have appreciated things like the score, certain sets/locations (especially with Edoras), and things along those lines; and he probably wouldn't have been too upset about axing Tom or Glorfindel; but I bet he would find the removal of the Scouring of the Shire to be unforgivable. It's the actual climax of the story and the part of the tale that grounds the Quest in a genuine psychological place for Frodo.

[Fionalah]

The Professor was pretty exacting as to his vision, but he wasn't without nuance and was happy for fans to write their own fanfiction stories. I'd guess he'd have disliked what they did to Faramir and Denethor, but may have been impressed with Sir Ian's Gandalf and other performances (the death of Boromir in particular).

He actually used to attend readings of his books, incognito, and would frequently get up and read it himself if he thought the hapless reader was doing a poor job.

For what it's worth though, I think he'd have HATED Rings of Power.

[rogeriopenna]

Tolkien watches the LOTR movies:
"I didn't like them"

Then watches The Hobbit
"Well, actually the LOTR adaptation was not so bad"

Watches Rings of Power
"Actually, LOTR movies were a masterpiece"

[ejd]

Tolkien once commented that he hoped that a movie version would be faithful, but recognized that it would be problematic due to the scope of the books. He then added that if it couldn't be faithful, he hoped that it would at least be successful. From that point of view, I think he might have been ok with them.

[jeffsnyder]

I first read the books in the 70s and was disappointed in all the various adaptations over the years. When Jackson's films were in production I followed all the news out of New Zealand with cautious optimism. When they finally came out I was overjoyed and it rekindled my appreciation of the books. Since then I watch the movies and reread all the books every year. I forgive and ignore the changes in the films, knowing the truth is in the words.
As for the good professor, he might have appreciated the care, dedication, and love that went into creating the sets, costumes, weapons. And the music. Maybe.

[darkblades]

I think he'd like seeing his friend Christopher Lee play Sauroman :)

[Mreffs]

I think Tolkien would have appreciated some very subtle things (knowing when to remind the audience that the Hobbits are quite small) but more obviously I think he would have appreciated how much of the original writing was used in the script and that the languages he created were spoken but not only spoken, sometimes with or without translation, like the books.

[sybaritic]

I think Tolkien would have been particularly unhappy with some of the character distortions (e.g. Faramir), power-dynamic alterations (e.g. Gandalf vs the Witch King), invincible hero cliches (e.g. Aragorn vs hordes of Uruk Hai, or Legolas), and deus ex machina moments (e.g. the dead at Minas Tirith). But hopefully the score, and the scenery, would have helped cool his ire!

[Pixis]

I think you're probably right. Tolkien was an English professor who lived in the early to mid-20th Century. Big, loud action adventure movies would probably not have been his thing (his son Christopher certainly didn't care for them). If anything, Tolkien might have appreciated the visuals of the movies - the beautiful New Zealand landscapes and the special effects which had come so much further than in his day. These might have added the extra layer of suspension of disbelief that Tolkien felt was needed for fantasy in a visual medium. He likely would have hated the violent action sequences and changes to plot and characters though.

[hiramvidal]

I think part of humanity's wonder at storytelling is what even an attempt to be as accurate as possible to an adaptation ultimately becomes an interpretation by the creative minds behind it. Some capture the essences better than others but it's probably why Tolkien is among those who spearheaded modern fantasy, because he like many others opened the road for continuous interpretation. Having heard his comments on secondary creation were particularly heartwarming.

[Nodimer]

I have this conversation with my girlfriend quite often. My answer, to put it shortly, is no; however sometimes while watching a bit, we pause and say: "He'd like this song", or "this piece of music" or a specific story beat.

[mattewald]

I hard a musician talk about the meaning of their music once and they said that the intended meaning doesn’t matter for multiple people the same song can mean many different things. A song that makes you think of your partner, a song that reminds you of when you were younger, a song that helps you though loss, a song that makes you think of your favorite vacation spot. When an artist puts their work out into the world that art now belongs to the people that interact with it. Lord of the rings is something that means something to each of us and we all interact with the franchise in different ways and in different levels. The original artists intent is only important to a certain extent. It’s really up to us to determine what these stories mean to us.

[robertdobie]

I've thought about this topic A LOT. Some of the changes Peter Jackson made in his adaptations still don't sit right with me even after almost 20 years (the two most notable being the radical changing of Faramir's character and the omitting of the Scouring of the Shire). And yet, I still absolutely love the movies - for these three reasons: 1) PJ's love and respect for Tolkien's story and vision come out in every frame of the movies - as a viewer you really do feel as if you are stepping into Middle-earth and that is a thrill that I've experienced with no other film adaptation; 2) the casting of the movies is absolutely perfect: just before the movies came out, I, as a Tolkien geek, had strong reservations about how faithful PJ's adaption was going to be; but when I went to see the Fellowship, I was absolutely blown away: the cast looked EXACTLY as I had imagined them in my mind when I first read the books many years before (this is particularly true of Viggo Mortensen's Aragorn and Ian McKellen's Gandalf); this is again something that I rarely experience in other film adaptations; 3) and perhaps most importantly, Peter Jackson's LOTR moves zeroed in with almost uncanny precision on the heart of the story (something that cannot be said of his Hobbit movies) - by focusing on the power of the Ring, PJ was able to give his LOTR movies a unity and cohesion that renders many of the other questionable changes forgivable. That is why I and my family now have the tradition of re-watching the LOTR movies every year during the week between Christmas and New Year's!

[OrchestrationOnline]

I don't think we can boil this down to a simple "yes" or "no." Tolkien was famous for his nuanced assessments of things. He might well like certain aspects of the film - like the opening with Bilbo reading from his book concerning Hobbits - or some of the portrayals of the Rohirrim. But of course he'd probably be shocked and horrified by some of the graphic violence, not to mention Jackson's occasionally brutal character-arc building (Frodo kicking Sam out of the quest, a-HEM!). But the thing we must remember is that Tolkien wrote his book for all time, and it remains because its lessons and perspectives continue to shape our time and culture. Peter Jackson's LOTR trilogy, on the other hand, is a reflection of our time as it is today - which Tolkien would find difficult to comprehend or appreciate. But that doesn't make the film trilogy bad - any more so than Maeterlinck's inability to comprehend Debussy's Pelleas et Melisande would have made it a bad opera. Sometimes the content moves beyond the author.

[samgamgee]

I wrote to the Tolkien estate some years back, thanking them, and Particularly Christopher for their hard work in preserving and publishing Tolkien's original work. I haven't yet, but have thought about, writing again now that Christopher has passed to than them again, but also include the idea that "Mythology " lives on and tends to grow newer, more popular versions. I'm sad that we don't have the earliest versions of Greek Myths. Wish they were preserved. But I'm also fascinated at how they've changed and grown over the ages