Try the Price of Milk

On the queue. Thanks!

It's an odd little film -- and you may recognize some other actors from LotR in it -- besides Karl.

I wish it would make clearer how hard it is for Frodo to live in the world he helped save

We went with a non-book reader, who didn't really like the first movie, wouldn't see the second in the theater and was won over by watching it on video. I was curious and asked what she to hought happened to Frodo and she looked ta me like I was kidding and said "He had seen too much to stay happy with the Hobbits so he went off to some heaven-like place." So she got it... and I didn't think she would.

I'm extremely aware of set decor in movies--I'll rewatch a movie just because I like the interior of the house or apartment--so perhaps my reaction wasn't "average". But I thought Jackson was marvelously subtle but also vividly illustrative in making Bag End so warm and cozy, cluttered and welcoming in the yellow glow of candle and firelight in FoTR, and then showing the same interior stripped, cold, blue with the lack of warmth and light at the end of RotK. I find it difficult to comprehend that anyone who'd seen both FotR and RotK could not be struck by the difference, and understand from that how deeply Frodo had been damaged, and why he couldn't adapt to life in the Shire.

My vote for what the movies did most successfully in translating the book to film is what Beverly said, but in all aspects. The art absolutely and completely conveyed Tolkein's Middle-Earth, supported and explained and enhanced the story and the characters, and did everything you need a visual medium to do when interpreting a print medium.

The least successful transition was in the characterization of some folks. Whether it was necessary or not, whether it was the right thing to do when making a movie for 21st-century audiences or not, whether it made better characters than Tolkein did or not, the interpretation of Aragorn and Faramir as doubting, conflicted, and uncertain was not Tolkein's intent for those characters. He was creating a mythology, and the Men of Numenor were not three-dimensional. They were stalwart, brave and true, or they were corrupted by an external evil.

Merry and Pippin suffered in the other direction. Again, I think a good decision for the movie in most respects, but you do lose Tolkein's intent of all four hobbits being capable and "in on it" and bridge characters into the mythology.

The movie just missed what would've been the worst possible transition, making Arwen a Warrior Princess, thanks to Liv Tyler's inability to carry it off. FOTR toed that line a little too closely for comfort, but it could've been so much worse.

Normally I would list the absence of The Scouring of the Shire as a big problem also, but I'm not sure it fits the thesis.

What, you didn't want to see Liv Tyler in a metal brassiere doing backflips and flinging a chakram at the nazgul?

Eomer also has charm on Xena.

And wings.

They're really taking liberties with the historical accuracy of Julius Caesar, aren't they?

Yes. Julius Caesar, son of Aphrodite.

I have a very hard time turning off my brain for Xena, especially when one episode features the Trojan War and the next features Caesar.