The Lord Of The Rings (Bakshi) (1 Viewer)

[DavidPla]

I confess. But... I do not repent!

Sam was my favourite character from the books and when I saw Bakshi's LOTR for the first time, I was absolutely appalled by the treatment of Sam. I think probably that's why I came to dislike the film so much. Nothing about the film really rubbed me the wrong way but Sam... oh boy! To me, Jackson's version captured Sam EXACTLY like the books and it made me remember why he was my favorite character when I first read them. I even prefer the Rankin/Bass Sam over the Bakshi one. I cannot stress enough how much I loathe Bakshi's Sam. They say a picture speaks a thousand words...

(The hideous creature in the middle is Sam! ARGH!!!)
http://www.cedmagic.com/featured/tolkien/

 

[MichaelBA]

Amazing link to Bakshi images, David!
I think it really shows that Bakshi had an excellent eye (no pun intended).
But some things aren't good. Like Gollum:

But there was a 1980 calendar using images directly from the Bakshi, but reworked with a lot more care, and I think they show the great potential his film had:
http://www.inetres.com/gp/anime/lotr/

 

[Jon Bell]

Thanks for those links. Very cool.

The Balrog looks like something out of the Dungeons and Dragons Monster Manual.

Treebeard is also really bad. But these characters are in for such a short amount of time, they never bothered me too much.

Gollum is fine-- he doesn't bother me.

Those links also reminded me how much I like the background mattes, like the landscape of the Shire (looks just like JRRT's art that was used on the FOTR cover) and the one of Orthanc. I think some of them are better than a lot of the Tolkien art that you see in the calendars and art compilations. I like Hildebrandt Bros., Lee, Darrell K. Sweet, and some others, but some of the published art just looks bad IMO. Michael, I agree that the 1981 calendar art in that link shows the potential-- that's what I'm talking about when I say that I like the design.

I own three animation cells from this movie. One of Boromir (presumably preparing to battle the Midgard Serpent), one of Galadrial in the mirror scene and one of Gandalf, Aragorn, Boromir and (I think) Frodo or Merry in Moria. I picked them up about 12 years ago, and they weren't too expensive. I also remember seeing some cells with backgrounds that Bakshi signed selling on ebay, which for some reason I never got around to buying. I just checked ebay, and there are four cels up for auction there, including one signed by Bakshi.

 

[Ray H]

When I saw the movie, I really hated the weird live-action effect they did for the Orcs. It didn't bother me much at first, but by the Breaking of the Fellowship scenes, I seriously felt nauseous and wanted to puke.

 

[Dick]

My favorite moment in the BAKSHI film: the very 3-D-like (I assume multiplane) image of (I belive it was) Gandalf riding on Shadowfax at night, with the moon unmoving in the distance while the near background and foreground whiz by at varying speeds. Great shot, all too brief.

My least favorite: the entire Galadriel sequence. Cate Blanchette is like a Goddess compared to this poorly designed and animated figure in the '78 version. Such weird and unattractive eyes!

 

I wanted to see if I could find this thread that I started about 11 years ago, and here it is! I wanted to post because it's ironic that I started it defending Bakshi's version, but rather quickly, I became a huge fan of Jackson's version and since then the series has become my favorite of all time, and I consider ROTK to be the greatest film of all time. It would be a hard statement to back up normally, but ROTK with 94% on Rottentomatoes, $1.1 billion worldwide, and 11 Oscars including Best Picture, director, screenplay, score, and VFX it has about everything tangible one would need to make this argument, a critical and financial monster success. But you know what, I still enjoy the Bakshi film. I think I remember stating that I prefer Leonard Rosenman's score, which I still love, but that has changed too. Howard Shore's scores are also my favorite of all time. I never thought anything could supplant Star Wars (original trilogy or as a whole) on either of these fronts, but it happened nonetheless. For the record I'm pretty disappointed with the Hobbit though. I think i will enjoy it more on a second watch with lower expectations though.

 

[mattCR]

I have said, in the other thread, having gone back and watched the Bakshi version of "The Hobbit" today with my boys, I find that I consider it far more enjoyable than the current theatrical release. Heckle me all you want, I'll stand by that opinion.

 

Bakshi had nothing to do with the Hobbit. That was Rankin and Bass.

 

[TonyD]

Oops.

 

[mattCR]

Rankin Bass then Bah! I had it right in the other thread. We watched it with the kids today, on the glorious mono DVD.. still great fun.

 

I wish I had bought the R&B version before it went out of print and the price from vendors became so prohibitive. I was lucky enough to find the R&B Return of the King at a thrift store, which was surprisingly good considering Jackson's version is my favorite movie of all time. I just wish the Witch King hadn't been the voice of an easily recognized Scooby -Doo voice over artist John Stephenson. I half way exoected him to say "I would have gotten away with it if it hadn't been for you meddling hobbits!" A minor quibble though. I had forgotten from seeing it years ago as a kid that it did have the ending where Frodo has to leave Middle Earth. For me, the Peter Jackson version of this scene is my all time tearjerker scene, leaves me a wreck every time. The musical theme that is prominent in the song "Into the West" just makes the tears all the more inevitable. Impressive that the R&B version managed to make me cry too.

 

[Brett_M]

My problem with his version is the utter lack of vision displayed by Bakshi, et al. He did not know what he was dealing with and it shows. There are some neat things about his film but as a director he had no clue. The designs of everything lack imagination and understanding. The film is nonsensical. PJ and crew got everything right in the vision and design aspects.

 

[Sam Favate]

I've always enjoyed Bakshi's film, although there's no doubt that Jackson's films are the superior movies. There is also, in Fellowship, what I believe is a tribute to the Bakshi film. In the scene where the hobbits have left the shire and are hiding from the Ringwraith, it's almost a shot-by-shot recreation, as the wraith peers down the side of a tree, and barely misses seeing Frodo, Sam, Merry and Pippin hiding.

 

[Lord Dalek]

Originally Posted by Sam Favate /t/31715/the-lord-of-the-rings-bakshi/90#post_4015582
I've always enjoyed Bakshi's film, although there's no doubt that Jackson's films are the superior movies. There is also, in Fellowship, what I believe is a tribute to the Bakshi film. In the scene where the hobbits have left the shire and are hiding from the Ringwraith, it's almost a shot-by-shot recreation, as the wraith peers down the side of a tree, and barely misses seeing Frodo, Sam, Merry and Pippin hiding.

The most blatant tribute (Jackson even points it out on the commentary track) is the "PROUDFEET!" line.

 

[David Forbes]

Just a small thing from glancing through this thread, but the Saruman/Aruman thing was NOT a mistake. It was a deliberate choice by Bakshi because he was worried that audiences would get confused by the similarity (at least in his thinking) between the names Saruman and Sauron.
But good Christ, I hated his movie.