My View of the Lord of the Rings
And why I believe the Chronicles of Narnia are a bit better...
:stands up:
:opens mouth:
:sits down:
I am..........utterly amazed.
I.... guess it pays...to read each book. 
:bites tongue off:
Well, I...I don't know what to say. Except that my definition of R-rated movies is ones that have (highlight if you are old enough...gah, I know it's a kids' board!!) seduction, perversions, and wrong...things..., like Billy Boyd as Pippin being in Seed of Chucky.
And I do not judge the FILM by it, but the actors. I know, I jumped the gun there, I was disappointed in the actors because they did such a good job!!
:opens mouth:
:sits down:
I am..........utterly amazed.
I.... guess it pays...to read each book. :bites tongue off:
Well, I...I don't know what to say. Except that my definition of R-rated movies is ones that have (highlight if you are old enough...gah, I know it's a kids' board!!) seduction, perversions, and wrong...things..., like Billy Boyd as Pippin being in Seed of Chucky.
And I do not judge the FILM by it, but the actors. I know, I jumped the gun there, I was disappointed in the actors because they did such a good job!!
they may be copper,
annoying little coins! but,
they might be giants.
annoying little coins! but,
they might be giants.
-
Danadelfos
- Lounge Fanatic
- Posts: 6938
- Joined: November 2005
-
Lucy Pevensie
- sn33ky hobbitses
- Posts: 1937
- Joined: April 2005
- Location: Cair Paravel
I understand a lot of what forever_faithful was saying- I too prefer that the actors of my favorite movies would be ones that hadn't acted in R rated movies or stuff like that. It kind of bothers me, and I'm sorry if many of you disagree, but it sometimes keeps me from enjoying the entire movie as much as I would (especially if it were something like LotR - even though that IS my favorite movie, and I enjoy it a lot - or CoN) because I would constantly be bothered by the fact that those characters in my favorite stories always remind me of the faces of the actors of the movie (Since they're in it of course, and visual images tend to stick to you head) because the actors usually tend to remind me about those other movies they've acted in, and all that... I dunno.. I have no clue how to explain it, but in short, I do prefer that the actors of my favorite movies have not been in R rated ones. I'm very glad that the director of the Narnia movies said that he wouldn't be taking out any Christian content, though.Brian wrote:Okay, I'm curious about this one... I'm not sure what difference this makes, really. Many of the great men of God in the Bible led "R-rated" lives prior to their conversions, or during their lives in some cases. Peter Jackson himself made what is widely considered "the goriest movie ever" *points to my Peter Jackson film with lawn mower used as a weapon topic* So anyway, as long as their role in the film is decent, I don't see what their past roles has to do with it.forever_faithful wrote: B) 90% of the actors had been in at least 1 R-rated movie, in which they did things that were definitely against God's will.
Gah. I've rambled on and on, and I'm not quite sure I even made a point.
All I want to say is, I would be REALLY disappointed if they didn't do the CoN movie well (Not just the effects and stuff), being one of my top two favorite series and everything.
Need a nice signature/avatar set? Take a look at my shop!
All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. John 6:37
Lucy is my twin Laura Ingalls = l33t ~*Robin Baggins/Respectahobbit*~
-
The Top Crusader
- Hammer Bro
- Posts: 22646
- Joined: April 2005
- Location: A drawbridge over a lava pit with an axe conveniently off to the side
Indeed... it's rather sad to see movies like LOTR or X-Men knowing that Gandalf and Magneto are homosexuals. 
Well, let's count the instances. Keep in mind that this is a partial listing only (ie: what I can remember off the top of my head, and in no particular order).danadelfos wrote:I don't remeber gandalf using so much magic in the books. I'm not saying the bad guys. But hmm can somebody tell me. if I'm wrong well
Book uses:
1. Smoke rings
2. Added special fx to Bilbo's disppearance
3. Weathertop fight
4. Wolf fight before Moria (multiple times)
5. Fire on Caradhrass
6. Staff light in Moria
7. Balrog fight
8. Meeting with Aragorn, Legolass, and Gimly after he came back to life
9. Talking with Theoden
10. Deposing Saruman (breaking staff, etc)
11. Opening the doors of Moria
12. Witch King confrontation
13. Telepathic communication
14. Crossing the river to Rivendell
Movie uses:
1. Smoke rings
2. "you want it for yourself"
3. Wizard fight
4. opening the doors of Moria
5. staff light
6. balrog fight7. meeting with the 3 hunters
8. Talking with Theoden
9. Sarumon deposing
10. Warding off Nazgul
I've obviously forgotten stuff, but all the evidence (thus far) seems to point to there being more in the books.
-
AioMan
- Catspaw Rocks!
- Posts: 996
- Joined: July 2005
- Location: The Imagination Station, Whit's End, Mcallister Park, Odyssey, Ohio, United States, North America
The magic is different. It was given to them by the One (God), not by themselves. And they don't do weird enchantments and spells, either.forever_faithful wrote:First of all, I want to say that LOTR is an AWESOME FILM! Peter Jackson, Fran something, and Philippa Something did excellent jobs at putting a Book into a Movie.
My only misgiving about the LOTR was the fact that
A) There is magic in it, and God specifically warns against magic, witchcraft, and wizardry and sorcery.
Whit: The Best is yet to come. (from "A Prayer for George Barclay" and "Gone.....")
Eugene: Impossible! Prepositions are not words that I end sentences with! (from "Poor Loser")
Arthur Dent: Operation: Thinktank will enslave the human race. Would you like a muffin? (from "Box of Miracles")
FF Wrote:
My only misgiving about the LOTR was the fact that
A) There is magic in it, and God specifically warns against magic, witchcraft, and wizardry and sorcery.
There is no magic in the LOTR series. All uses "magic" is to explain that something odd happened. Also if you STILL think there is "magic" in it, consider that it is only borrowing the term magic and is not actually the same kind of magic that witchcraft and wizardry and all that is. It is something completely different, only borrowing the term "magic" to explain that it is godly or other-wordly. Also, Narnia has "Deep Magic" reffered almost every chapter. You might say this is refferring to christain morales, well even if it is, what makes you assume LOTR's "magic" isn't? Another point is that the movie's magic cannot be held against it. It portrays the magic bad, and witches and such do exsist in real life. So LOTR really is portraying real life in a fantasy world.
B) 90% of the actors had been in at least 1 R-rated movie, in which they did things that were definitely against God's will.
And your point? Many of the actors in Narnia have been in R-rated movies. You should not judge a movie off of the personal sins of the individual actors. This is very un-christian like in my opinion.
Now, I have to say that I developed a VERY high liking for the LOTR. The above are the only reasons LOTR is my favorite movie, but that the Chronicles of Narnia: Lion Witch and the Wardrobe is going to be my FIRST favorite, once it comes out.
You never know anything for sure, it may be your favorite and it may not, you can't tell unless you've seen it.
The LOTR is a rich, deep, and meaningful film that made me want to cry at the end...(I miss Frodo!! honestly, just the character of Frodo [not Elijah Wood, who has been in 2 R-rated movies] made me be happy!) and has MANY themes that made me think over my beliefs.
Once again the use of "Who has been in 2 R-rated movies" is extremely bothering. He might not have even DONE anything in those movies. It could have been other actors that made it rated "R". The movie could have been rated "R" for violence. You just can't judge people like that.
Sam's loyalty, Arwen's love, Frodo's struggle, and Gollum's obsession with the Ring were only a few of the genuine and classic characters that made me want to watch the movie over and over. I found many parallels to our Christian life, in this movie, despite Tolkien's insistence it was NOT an allegory.
A) the Ring. The Ring, I believe, wasn't necessarily MADE to represent Sin. But you can see it. It's evil wrapped in a seductive cloak... Sin. People are obsessed with it. They want to do it, and yet HATE what it does to them.
C) the Hobbit. I think that Frodo is somehow tied with mankind, and yet how Jesus came, chose the Cross, and carried it all the way to Calvary. Frodo didn't WANT to, but Someone had to. So he did. I admired his determination, yet the struggle of carrying the Ring. But unlike Jesus, he found himself unconsciously 'playing with the Ring'. In the end, though, something had to 'jolt' him from taking the Ring for himself.
C) the King. Aragorn must choose to be the King, even though it was hard. He knew that he was weak as a human, but realized that it was most important to Middle Earth to be the King.
D) Sam's loyalty!! I AM SUCH A FAN OF SAM! My favorite line is always 'I can't carry the Ring, Mr. Frodo, but I CAN carry you!' His sheer bravery in the face of danger and harm is my hero.
E) I hesitate to talk about Legolas...he was played by Orlando Bloom, who is famous now. I don't like famous celebrities!!!! :great big sigh: But I know that the friendship forged between Legolas and Gimli is very admirable. Instead of the prejudice and pride shown in the Fellowship, their friendship turns into a strong one through all that had happened.
Once again you should not be bothered by who is played by who. The actors are simply a means of getting to portraying the characters. Also the "I don't like famous celebrities" point...really wasn't a point at all. You can't dislike him because he's famous, that's not his fault.
Finally, I would like to mention that I do defend the presence of 'magic' in the Movies. in the LOTR, there is no central 'God-figure'. There is an Evil-figure, Sauron, and two 'Savior-figures' (Frodo as the struggling humble person, and Aragorn as the Returning King) But NO good God-figure. All the questions about this made my head spin, especially when Frodo asked (while in ...um...that city where Frodo almost gives the Ring to the ''WitchKing'' on the Nazgul, after that deep, personal struggle after Sam saves Middle Earth by knocking him to the ground):
(something to this element, I can't remember EXACTLY)
There is a central God Figure. Eru (As brought up before). Who do you think brought Gandalf back from the dead? He said that he "was not finished yet". I also think that when he almost gives it to the witch king, that is similar to the unbearable temptation of the Devil when he adressess Jesus.
F: I can't do it, Sam, I can't.
S: (talks about how the stories and the tales were most important when they couldn't, but they did)
F: Well then, what ARE we fighting for?
That was the most thought-provoking scene about WHY they did that, that I saw. I really realized that since they didn't have a God-figure, they had to have some way of showing that there was a lot of power on both sides. The evil power was in the Ring and in Sauron, but the good power seemed to be in Gandalf and whoever HE answered to. so the magic (''good'' magic) was how they portrayed the POWER of Good.
All in all, I give it a 98%, A + !! Rock on, LOTR people! \:D
Post 2:
First...I just want to say that no mention of 'Eru' at all, is in the movie. I haven't read the books in a long time, but I do not specifically remember an 'Eru'. As far as I could see, there was no specific God-figure. The closest to one, I saw, was Gandalf. Even he was weaker than Saruman.
I will not adress the thing about "Eru" because it has already been discussed. However when you said "even he was weaker then Saruman" I got thinking. Saruman did appear stronger, yes, and he thought he had one, but he lost in the end. This is extremely similar to the devil and the crucifiction.
Magic..when you start talking about magic, it is important to have the same definition. My definition of magic is the use of spiritual forces, be they good or evil, to do certain things such as defend yourself, fight someone else, or to have strength, power, and victory in some case. The LOTR uses that. Galadriel has a 'seeing pool', and that 'power' is helped by 'Nenya', one of the 3 Elven Rings. Gandalf has his staff. Saruman has his crystal ball (portrayed as evil, fortunately), and on the swords of Sting, Glamdhring, and Hadhafang have Elven inscriptions, explained as 'magical' incantations to make the bearer of those swords powerful.
LOTR uses that, true, but so does the Bible. Think about it. Satan and God are spiritual forces (good and evil), and in the Bible they do certain things such as make warriors stronger, up the defences of religious cities, attempt to bring down god, etc. The Seeing pool and the power are like satanists or witches. They truely do have powers that are spiritual, and they really do exist. They use the spiritual powers of the demonic forces that exist to do things to their advantage (or so they think). This is like what is happening with the "seeing pool".
However, I think the reason magic had to be introduced into the LOTR was because there was no God-figure portrayed. There was no BEING personifying absolute good, absolute power. So that's my only problem with the LOTR. Despite all that, I say that it is an AWESOME Trilogy, and has awesome and wonderful messages.
Already discussed, so I won't comment on Eru.
Just some points I thought of. I apologize if I've been to critical, but these points are not even close to the amount I have to say about this subject, so I'll leave it at this.
My only misgiving about the LOTR was the fact that
A) There is magic in it, and God specifically warns against magic, witchcraft, and wizardry and sorcery.
There is no magic in the LOTR series. All uses "magic" is to explain that something odd happened. Also if you STILL think there is "magic" in it, consider that it is only borrowing the term magic and is not actually the same kind of magic that witchcraft and wizardry and all that is. It is something completely different, only borrowing the term "magic" to explain that it is godly or other-wordly. Also, Narnia has "Deep Magic" reffered almost every chapter. You might say this is refferring to christain morales, well even if it is, what makes you assume LOTR's "magic" isn't? Another point is that the movie's magic cannot be held against it. It portrays the magic bad, and witches and such do exsist in real life. So LOTR really is portraying real life in a fantasy world.
B) 90% of the actors had been in at least 1 R-rated movie, in which they did things that were definitely against God's will.
And your point? Many of the actors in Narnia have been in R-rated movies. You should not judge a movie off of the personal sins of the individual actors. This is very un-christian like in my opinion.
Now, I have to say that I developed a VERY high liking for the LOTR. The above are the only reasons LOTR is my favorite movie, but that the Chronicles of Narnia: Lion Witch and the Wardrobe is going to be my FIRST favorite, once it comes out.
You never know anything for sure, it may be your favorite and it may not, you can't tell unless you've seen it.
The LOTR is a rich, deep, and meaningful film that made me want to cry at the end...(I miss Frodo!! honestly, just the character of Frodo [not Elijah Wood, who has been in 2 R-rated movies] made me be happy!) and has MANY themes that made me think over my beliefs.
Once again the use of "Who has been in 2 R-rated movies" is extremely bothering. He might not have even DONE anything in those movies. It could have been other actors that made it rated "R". The movie could have been rated "R" for violence. You just can't judge people like that.
Sam's loyalty, Arwen's love, Frodo's struggle, and Gollum's obsession with the Ring were only a few of the genuine and classic characters that made me want to watch the movie over and over. I found many parallels to our Christian life, in this movie, despite Tolkien's insistence it was NOT an allegory.
A) the Ring. The Ring, I believe, wasn't necessarily MADE to represent Sin. But you can see it. It's evil wrapped in a seductive cloak... Sin. People are obsessed with it. They want to do it, and yet HATE what it does to them.
C) the Hobbit. I think that Frodo is somehow tied with mankind, and yet how Jesus came, chose the Cross, and carried it all the way to Calvary. Frodo didn't WANT to, but Someone had to. So he did. I admired his determination, yet the struggle of carrying the Ring. But unlike Jesus, he found himself unconsciously 'playing with the Ring'. In the end, though, something had to 'jolt' him from taking the Ring for himself.
C) the King. Aragorn must choose to be the King, even though it was hard. He knew that he was weak as a human, but realized that it was most important to Middle Earth to be the King.
D) Sam's loyalty!! I AM SUCH A FAN OF SAM! My favorite line is always 'I can't carry the Ring, Mr. Frodo, but I CAN carry you!' His sheer bravery in the face of danger and harm is my hero.
E) I hesitate to talk about Legolas...he was played by Orlando Bloom, who is famous now. I don't like famous celebrities!!!! :great big sigh: But I know that the friendship forged between Legolas and Gimli is very admirable. Instead of the prejudice and pride shown in the Fellowship, their friendship turns into a strong one through all that had happened.
Once again you should not be bothered by who is played by who. The actors are simply a means of getting to portraying the characters. Also the "I don't like famous celebrities" point...really wasn't a point at all. You can't dislike him because he's famous, that's not his fault.
Finally, I would like to mention that I do defend the presence of 'magic' in the Movies. in the LOTR, there is no central 'God-figure'. There is an Evil-figure, Sauron, and two 'Savior-figures' (Frodo as the struggling humble person, and Aragorn as the Returning King) But NO good God-figure. All the questions about this made my head spin, especially when Frodo asked (while in ...um...that city where Frodo almost gives the Ring to the ''WitchKing'' on the Nazgul, after that deep, personal struggle after Sam saves Middle Earth by knocking him to the ground):
(something to this element, I can't remember EXACTLY)
There is a central God Figure. Eru (As brought up before). Who do you think brought Gandalf back from the dead? He said that he "was not finished yet". I also think that when he almost gives it to the witch king, that is similar to the unbearable temptation of the Devil when he adressess Jesus.
F: I can't do it, Sam, I can't.
S: (talks about how the stories and the tales were most important when they couldn't, but they did)
F: Well then, what ARE we fighting for?
That was the most thought-provoking scene about WHY they did that, that I saw. I really realized that since they didn't have a God-figure, they had to have some way of showing that there was a lot of power on both sides. The evil power was in the Ring and in Sauron, but the good power seemed to be in Gandalf and whoever HE answered to. so the magic (''good'' magic) was how they portrayed the POWER of Good.
All in all, I give it a 98%, A + !! Rock on, LOTR people! \:D
Post 2:
First...I just want to say that no mention of 'Eru' at all, is in the movie. I haven't read the books in a long time, but I do not specifically remember an 'Eru'. As far as I could see, there was no specific God-figure. The closest to one, I saw, was Gandalf. Even he was weaker than Saruman.
I will not adress the thing about "Eru" because it has already been discussed. However when you said "even he was weaker then Saruman" I got thinking. Saruman did appear stronger, yes, and he thought he had one, but he lost in the end. This is extremely similar to the devil and the crucifiction.
Magic..when you start talking about magic, it is important to have the same definition. My definition of magic is the use of spiritual forces, be they good or evil, to do certain things such as defend yourself, fight someone else, or to have strength, power, and victory in some case. The LOTR uses that. Galadriel has a 'seeing pool', and that 'power' is helped by 'Nenya', one of the 3 Elven Rings. Gandalf has his staff. Saruman has his crystal ball (portrayed as evil, fortunately), and on the swords of Sting, Glamdhring, and Hadhafang have Elven inscriptions, explained as 'magical' incantations to make the bearer of those swords powerful.
LOTR uses that, true, but so does the Bible. Think about it. Satan and God are spiritual forces (good and evil), and in the Bible they do certain things such as make warriors stronger, up the defences of religious cities, attempt to bring down god, etc. The Seeing pool and the power are like satanists or witches. They truely do have powers that are spiritual, and they really do exist. They use the spiritual powers of the demonic forces that exist to do things to their advantage (or so they think). This is like what is happening with the "seeing pool".
However, I think the reason magic had to be introduced into the LOTR was because there was no God-figure portrayed. There was no BEING personifying absolute good, absolute power. So that's my only problem with the LOTR. Despite all that, I say that it is an AWESOME Trilogy, and has awesome and wonderful messages.
Already discussed, so I won't comment on Eru.
Just some points I thought of. I apologize if I've been to critical, but these points are not even close to the amount I have to say about this subject, so I'll leave it at this.
Again, I have already said that my view HAS changed. However, I still do not like the Lord of the Rings as much as I like the LWW, and the CoN.
I do not judge the movie by the actors' lives. I know that without God, we make decisions just as foolish. I have researched and looked up the movies they are in. Each one has been in at least one R-rated movie, and I simply view them as people who make decisions that aren't good.
(I still don't like Orlando Bloom and Elijah Wood and all them...)
I like Frodo. He's an awesome character. But when you state that you like the actor just because of the deep character he/she portrays, then that's where people get mixed up. I have seen Orlando Bloom on TV, and he's (IMHO) very prideful. (Then again, a lot of people in this world are)
(Number one bias: I don't like famous celebrities, because a lot of them are famous for acting in objectionable movies/singing objectionable songs/ETC)
^^
I don't like famous celebrities, as you know now ^^
Since posting that, I've researched more on Middle Earth and the Silmarillion and the Histories and the Lost Tales, etc...I have learned that "Eru" is the central God-figure (in Elvish, which I am learning, it means "The One God"). In the beginning, Eru created the Valar, or 'angelic beings', and one of them, Morgoth, went bad and was henceforth evil.
So yes, there was a central God-figure in Middle Earth. The movies certainly did not portray that, and they portrayed the Elves as deities, etc... I believe that in the books (which I haven't read in a long time) Eru was referenced to a number of times...but then again, I haven't read them in a long time.
Now, back to magic. The Bible did NOT use magic. Whatever happened, the power always came from God, and it was never mystical or magical. No one needed special incantations or spells or charms or whatnot to be powerful. The power ALWAYS came from God.
I found a great parallel between Tolkien's Catholicism and Eru. He portrayed Eru somewhat distant, somewhat impersonal, somehow uninvolved. In Catholicism, there seems to be a distance between God and man. Yet, through Jesus, God was accessible and personal and close.
If that made a point, good. 
I do not judge the movie by the actors' lives. I know that without God, we make decisions just as foolish. I have researched and looked up the movies they are in. Each one has been in at least one R-rated movie, and I simply view them as people who make decisions that aren't good.
(I still don't like Orlando Bloom and Elijah Wood and all them...)
It all comes down to magic, doesn't it? I believe that magic is wrong. Magic = the use of a power beyond oneself to advance a plan/defend oneself/etc, and in some cases (New Age alert) the 'power within'. I know that God has the power, but we can not manipulate Him. He is sovereign, Holy, and righteous. His power will win in the end, whether we like it or not.Xiao wrote:There is no magic in the LOTR series. All uses "magic" is to explain that something odd happened. Also if you STILL think there is "magic" in it, consider that it is only borrowing the term magic and is not actually the same kind of magic that witchcraft and wizardry and all that is. It is something completely different, only borrowing the term "magic" to explain that it is godly or other-wordly. Also, Narnia has "Deep Magic" reffered almost every chapter. You might say this is refferring to christain morales, well even if it is, what makes you assume LOTR's "magic" isn't?
I like Frodo. He's an awesome character. But when you state that you like the actor just because of the deep character he/she portrays, then that's where people get mixed up. I have seen Orlando Bloom on TV, and he's (IMHO) very prideful. (Then again, a lot of people in this world are)
(Number one bias: I don't like famous celebrities, because a lot of them are famous for acting in objectionable movies/singing objectionable songs/ETC)
^^
I don't like famous celebrities, as you know now ^^Since posting that, I've researched more on Middle Earth and the Silmarillion and the Histories and the Lost Tales, etc...I have learned that "Eru" is the central God-figure (in Elvish, which I am learning, it means "The One God"). In the beginning, Eru created the Valar, or 'angelic beings', and one of them, Morgoth, went bad and was henceforth evil.
So yes, there was a central God-figure in Middle Earth. The movies certainly did not portray that, and they portrayed the Elves as deities, etc... I believe that in the books (which I haven't read in a long time) Eru was referenced to a number of times...but then again, I haven't read them in a long time.
Now, back to magic. The Bible did NOT use magic. Whatever happened, the power always came from God, and it was never mystical or magical. No one needed special incantations or spells or charms or whatnot to be powerful. The power ALWAYS came from God.
I found a great parallel between Tolkien's Catholicism and Eru. He portrayed Eru somewhat distant, somewhat impersonal, somehow uninvolved. In Catholicism, there seems to be a distance between God and man. Yet, through Jesus, God was accessible and personal and close.
If that made a point, good. they may be copper,
annoying little coins! but,
they might be giants.
annoying little coins! but,
they might be giants.
-
shasta
- My posts are revolutionary
- Posts: 379
- Joined: April 2005
- Location: Narnia and the North
- Contact:
There's a good series of articles on The Lord of the Rings and how Christianity can be seen in the works. It's: http://cmusicweb.com/features/meanderings/index.shtml
And: is this "magic" similar to how witchcraft works in the real world? If not, then it could easily be a plot device, an allegorical way of the author telling his/her story.
Even reading something truly dark (like His Dark Materials trilogy, written by atheist Philip Pullman), the real danger is being "pulled into it" or entranced by it. I don't think I'd read it cos it's not edifying and there's plenty of good things to read.
But if we're not kids anymore and can distinguish between fantasy and reality, well, "God didn't give us a spirit of fear but of love, power and a sound mind" (II Tim 1:7). Some Christian reviewers, for instance, are obviouly called to read such books to inform others... and we'll need to be informed, thanks to Disney making a movie out of His Dark Materials.
Like the themes you pulled out, Tolkien's work was more about telling a good story and letting his redeemed imagination speak for itself. (see http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2003/110/54.0.html )
Food for thought, I hope. Merry Christmas!
-king shasta
Both series are excellent, and I certainly lose no respect for those who prefer Narnia. (Obviously, my profile is from Horse and His Boy!) And the first Narnia film was excellent, hooray for Andrew Adamson and Walden Media.forever_faithful wrote:I still do not like the Lord of the Rings as much as I like the LWW, and the CoN.
We're all at different places in how we deal with movies and media. Not watching R-rated movies is an honorable stand that fellow Christians should encourage rather than tease...forever_faithful wrote:I do not judge the movie by the actors' lives. I know that without God, we make decisions just as foolish. I have researched and looked up the movies they are in. Each one has been in at least one R-rated movie, and I simply view them as people who make decisions that aren't good.
It's good to believe and discuss your beliefs. When we're talking about "magic" used in literature and films -- which even McCusker's Passages books do -- I ask a couple questions to determine if this is "witchcraft" in the Biblical sense. First, what is the source of the magic? If not mentioned, then we're probably not talking about an author who is sinisterly trying to introduce readers to the demonic.It all comes down to magic, doesn't it? I believe that magic is wrong.
And: is this "magic" similar to how witchcraft works in the real world? If not, then it could easily be a plot device, an allegorical way of the author telling his/her story.
Even reading something truly dark (like His Dark Materials trilogy, written by atheist Philip Pullman), the real danger is being "pulled into it" or entranced by it. I don't think I'd read it cos it's not edifying and there's plenty of good things to read.
But if we're not kids anymore and can distinguish between fantasy and reality, well, "God didn't give us a spirit of fear but of love, power and a sound mind" (II Tim 1:7). Some Christian reviewers, for instance, are obviouly called to read such books to inform others... and we'll need to be informed, thanks to Disney making a movie out of His Dark Materials.
But the character on-screen wouldn't have been "awesome" without the actor. Elijah gave a lot to the part. He's no saint and not someone I look to as a role model, but a good actor -- especially under the direction of Peter Jackson.I like Frodo. He's an awesome character. But when you state that you like the actor just because of the deep character he/she portrays, then that's where people get mixed up.
I'd say more like angels.So yes, there was a central God-figure in Middle Earth. The movies certainly did not portray that, and they portrayed the Elves as deities, etc...
But magic can be used as a literary device. You see it in Narnia -- Middle-earth is not much different. Wasn't there a good wizard in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader?Now, back to magic. The Bible did NOT use magic. Whatever happened, the power always came from God, and it was never mystical or magical. No one needed special incantations or spells or charms or what not to be powerful. The power ALWAYS came from God.
That's an interesting interpretation. Though a "God figure" does not seem to be as close -- like Aslan -- salvation is always near in Middle-earth. God is the One who directs events that Gandalf is always talking about, "the board is set, the pieces are moving" (a line created for the film, but it captures the spirit of what Tolkien wrote.)I found a great parallel between Tolkien's Catholicism and Eru. He portrayed Eru somewhat distant, somewhat impersonal, somehow uninvolved. In Catholicism, there seems to be a distance between God and man. Yet, through Jesus, God was accessible and personal and close.
Like the themes you pulled out, Tolkien's work was more about telling a good story and letting his redeemed imagination speak for itself. (see http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2003/110/54.0.html )
Food for thought, I hope. Merry Christmas!
-king shasta
It's a complicated issue.
Should we see movies with people who aren't God-like.
Now, in my family, their are certain cases where some actors and actrices in movies should not be tolerated.
Such as Angelina Jolie...
However, in the Lord of the Rings, one thing that I don't enjoy is the fact that the actor who plays Gandalf is a homosexual who is very much open about it. I'm not sure if we've mentioned it yet on the topic...again, I must leave soon, before giving a lot more of my views.
All I know is that Acting...is acting. Homosexuality is both a sin and lifestyle, and as long as the actor who isn't demonstrating his sin and lifestyle on screen...then I suppose it's alright.
Though...
The thought of homosexuals portraying God-like characters kinda has me wondering and concerned.
Something to ponder, I suppose.
BC
Should we see movies with people who aren't God-like.
Now, in my family, their are certain cases where some actors and actrices in movies should not be tolerated.
Such as Angelina Jolie...
However, in the Lord of the Rings, one thing that I don't enjoy is the fact that the actor who plays Gandalf is a homosexual who is very much open about it. I'm not sure if we've mentioned it yet on the topic...again, I must leave soon, before giving a lot more of my views.
All I know is that Acting...is acting. Homosexuality is both a sin and lifestyle, and as long as the actor who isn't demonstrating his sin and lifestyle on screen...then I suppose it's alright.
Though...
The thought of homosexuals portraying God-like characters kinda has me wondering and concerned.
Something to ponder, I suppose.
BC
-
Thursday Next
- Catspaw Rocks!
- Posts: 913
- Joined: April 2005
- Contact:
Ok here is another situation that is happening right now. There is a group of Christians that say we should boycott Chronicles of Narnia BECAUSE it is being distrubuted by Disney. Not because of content, not because who's acting in it but solely because it is being distributed by DISNEY. And because of the other stuff Disney has its hands in any decent Christian would not see this film (btw I'm not making this up).
-
Shad Lexer
- Ignorance of the law is no excuse
- Posts: 4032
- Joined: April 2005
- Location: Right where I'm supposed to be.
Eon Spitfire EK V2 wrote:I have something to say about LOTR...boring...the only parts I really liked was the battle scenes in RotK...go watch Spiderman 2 or like Matrix or Star Wars IV-VI. (But oh no Matrix is R rated I guess we cant watch it!
Boring? BORING?!
You need to pay attention to the story line my friend.
Anyway, it doesn't really bother me that the actors were in R rated movies. I mean, I'll bet you can't find 15 actors that could have done the same job that aren't. -_-; I just don't think about it.
Magic? I didn't think they did a bad job using it in the movies. I thought it was very LoTR-ish. Yes, if you read the Silmarillion, there IS a 'God-like' figure, you dishes out magic to the highest bidder!
Magic is indeed wrong, and "God" (Eru) DOES win in the end as portrayed in LOTR.forever_faithful wrote:It all comes down to magic, doesn't it? I believe that magic is wrong. Magic = the use of a power beyond oneself to advance a plan/defend oneself/etc, and in some cases (New Age alert) the 'power within'. I know that God has the power, but we can not manipulate Him. He is sovereign, Holy, and righteous. His power will win in the end, whether we like it or not.Xiao wrote:There is no magic in the LOTR series. All uses "magic" is to explain that something odd happened. Also if you STILL think there is "magic" in it, consider that it is only borrowing the term magic and is not actually the same kind of magic that witchcraft and wizardry and all that is. It is something completely different, only borrowing the term "magic" to explain that it is godly or other-wordly. Also, Narnia has "Deep Magic" reffered almost every chapter. You might say this is refferring to christain morales, well even if it is, what makes you assume LOTR's "magic" isn't?
However, just because Magic is wrong does not mean that it being included in LOTR is a fault with the movie. Sin, portrayed in a movie (especially movies where good wins in the end such as LOTR), cannot be a fault in the movie. There is sin in this world, and they are trying to portray that. It's simply rediculous to think that the magic used is a fault in LOTR. Perhaps you wouldn't agree with the characters that use magic, but even if that is your point it has nothing to do with a review of such a movie.
In LOTR the magic used is strong but it is not strong enough to drown goodness in itself. This is portrayed excellently and is in no way a fault with the movie.
Also, about "Eru" not being portrayed in the movies.. this is also not a fault with the movie but a personal pet peeve. He is not portrayed in the three books, and so he is not portrayed in the movie. It would add un-needed complication and distraction from the main story. Eru does exist in the LOTR universe; just because he wasn't portrayed in three of the many tales does not mean that in those tales he was non-existant.
-
Linne
- Ignorance of the law is no excuse
- Posts: 4347
- Joined: April 2005
- Location: On the stage!
- Contact:
On the whole magic thing.....I believe God was talking about witchcraft and things that are used for evil, because God himself has used His powers to perform supernatural wodners, and He has given that power to His followers. How else can we explain Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego escaping the fiery furnace unharmed? How did thw widow's flour and oil never run out until the drought was over? And how were many people healed and raised from the dead? There are good forms of " magic" (although that's not the word I would use), and that's what is shown in LOTR, the good side never uses magic for a wrong purpose. (Frivolous maybe, but wrong, never. Please correct me if I'm wrong about that.)
Please correct me if I'm wrong about that.)
I know that Middle Earth is a completely different universe, as portrayed, but still, it is not a Christocentric universe. It is not based on the same values as our universe. Yet I love the LotR because Tolkien was so into details. We saw all the details in the movies. There were millions more details in his histories, in the Silmarillion...and that's why I enjoyed Tolkien. His 'world' is so full of details that I can't help but enjoy it. It's almost as though it's real. The magic/power stuff seems to be a bit off, though, so I don't enjoy it as much as I do the Chronicles of Narnia.Xiao wrote:Magic is indeed wrong, and "God" (Eru) DOES win in the end as portrayed in LOTR.forever_faithful wrote:
It all comes down to magic, doesn't it? I believe that magic is wrong. Magic = the use of a power beyond oneself to advance a plan/defend oneself/etc, and in some cases (New Age alert) the 'power within'. I know that God has the power, but we can not manipulate Him. He is sovereign, Holy, and righteous. His power will win in the end, whether we like it or not.
However, just because Magic is wrong does not mean that it being included in LOTR is a fault with the movie. Sin, portrayed in a movie (especially movies where good wins in the end such as LOTR), cannot be a fault in the movie. There is sin in this world, and they are trying to portray that. It's simply rediculous to think that the magic used is a fault in LOTR. Perhaps you wouldn't agree with the characters that use magic, but even if that is your point it has nothing to do with a review of such a movie.
In LOTR the magic used is strong but it is not strong enough to drown goodness in itself. This is portrayed excellently and is in no way a fault with the movie.
Also, about "Eru" not being portrayed in the movies.. this is also not a fault with the movie but a personal pet peeve. He is not portrayed in the three books, and so he is not portrayed in the movie. It would add un-needed complication and distraction from the main story. Eru does exist in the LOTR universe; just because he wasn't portrayed in three of the many tales does not mean that in those tales he was non-existant.
Well, God doesn't use 'magic', Because magic could be used to explain supernatural things. The first thing to remember is that the power ALWAYS comes from God. God did that. Not magic. I, too, don't use the word 'magic' because it always implies a separate power beyond/within myself. God has power, Satan has power. Satan seems to have more visible power, but it is true that God will ALWAYS triumph in the end.Barely Is wrote:On the whole magic thing.....I believe God was talking about witchcraft and things that are used for evil, because God himself has used His powers to perform supernatural wodners, and He has given that power to His followers. How else can we explain Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego escaping the fiery furnace unharmed? How did thw widow's flour and oil never run out until the drought was over? And how were many people healed and raised from the dead? There are good forms of " magic" (although that's not the word I would use), and that's what is shown in LOTR, the good side never uses magic for a wrong purpose. (Frivolous maybe, but wrong, never. Please correct me if I'm wrong about that.)
they may be copper,
annoying little coins! but,
they might be giants.
annoying little coins! but,
they might be giants.
You like Narnia more for this single reason?forever_faithful wrote:The magic/power stuff seems to be a bit off, though, so I don't enjoy it as much as I do the Chronicles of Narnia.
If you ask me LOTR exeeds in filmmaking, music, art, action, effects, characters (and character development), depth, emotion, acting, and the tremendous sucess of delivering an extremely powerful message, among other things.
However Narnia is still an excellent movie.
(I am no way saying your opinion is invalid! I am just stating my own.)
-
Linne
- Ignorance of the law is no excuse
- Posts: 4347
- Joined: April 2005
- Location: On the stage!
- Contact:
Yup, that's what I said.forever_faithful wrote:Well, God doesn't use 'magic', Because magic could be used to explain supernatural things. The first thing to remember is that the power ALWAYS comes from God. God did that. Not magic. I, too, don't use the word 'magic' because it always implies a separate power beyond/within myself. God has power, Satan has power. Satan seems to have more visible power, but it is true that God will ALWAYS triumph in the end.Barely Is wrote:On the whole magic thing.....I believe God was talking about witchcraft and things that are used for evil, because God himself has used His powers to perform supernatural wonders, and He has given that power to His followers. How else can we explain Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego escaping the fiery furnace unharmed? How did thw widow's flour and oil never run out until the drought was over? And how were many people healed and raised from the dead? There are good forms of " magic" (although that's not the word I would use), and that's what is shown in LOTR, the good side never uses magic for a wrong purpose. (Frivolous maybe, but wrong, never. Please correct me if I'm wrong about that.)