Is Lord of the Rings racist?

[Laisrean]

The writer of this article thinks so: http://news.pacificnews.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=5e4c7d2429e7ce8f26735aa7975fda12

:sick:

[Thor]

then he's a fool!

[Eowyn]

ha! This is just.... unbelieveble... Just 3 small parts huh? Éowyn for one is anything but a small part since without her the Ring wouldnt have been destroyed, the Nazugal *spelled right?* would live and all that. Arwen is an important role as well and Galadriel too... Only because they are not in the movie much doesnt mean they arent important...

Besides, I heard why Tolkien had so little women was because he didnt understand them ;)

I think that man's a fool... or woman or whatever.

ETA: Im tired so... :)

[WandererInGray]

She's not a fool and was merely offering a different take on a comparison of the two films.

Be sure you read through the comments, not only is there a reply from the author, but in the comments I think is where you find the real racists comments by people who for some reason get all worked up about someone having a different viewpoint than theirs. :rolleyes:

[Thor]

You know i'm very sad my gf hates the Lord of the Rings.

I tried showing her the first movie, but after an hour and a half, she went behind the
computer because the movie was boring?!

for some reason she keeps on saying its not realistic!

[banondraig]

She's not a fool and was merely offering a different take on a comparison of the two films.

Be sure you read through the comments, not only is there a reply from the author, but in the comments I think is where you find the real racists comments by people who for some reason get all worked up about someone having a different viewpoint than theirs. :rolleyes:

agreed. i think the author is overreacting a bit, as was said in the comments on the article, no black people in the book, no black people in the movie. it's based on medieval europe. peter jackson could arguably have done color-blind casting, as kenneth branagh has done in some of his shakespeare movies, but i found it very confusing to have people of different races cast as full siblings. it took me about half the movie to figure out what was going on there. i don't have a problem with lotr. i do have a problem with what a lot of those people said in response to the article.

[crashtime]

Well... not every cuture and society on Earth sees skin color as a definition of race. If any of you have slightly or remotely read anything about Anthropology you would know in many cultures "race" is determined by religion, or socioeconomic class...not always by skin color. Skin color determining race is a very WESTERN idea. And really, this is a diverse movie. We have Hobbitts, Elves, Humans, etc....all of different races...working together to save mankind. I don't see this movie as racist at all.

I find it a tad hypocritical that she would talk about Peter Jackson being racist when SHE herself uses the term "Eurotrash." She ruined her own argument in my eyes. And yes, I agree that the comments left for the author could be construed as offensive.

[SilverMaiden]

I noticed the same differences between LOTR and the Matrix. I love both LOTR and Matrix. They were the only movies I paid to go see in a theatre. :) Times have changed in writing stories.

I remember when our commercials on TV changed too. Our commericials from the early 50s are totally different from our commericals today. Times have changed and so have a lot of people.

[Ben Trismegistus]

Oh this is completely preposterous. To make the argument that people prefer Lord of the Rings to Matrix because they're racist and/or sexist is just about the stupidest argument I've ever heard. The LOTR movies got better with each installment, to the point that Return of the King is a spectacular piece of filmmaking by any gauge. The first Matrix movie virtually reinvented filmmaking, but its two sequels were convoluted and stupid.

This author ignores the fact that both trilogies are products of their times. Tolkien was a white male European writing in the 1940s and 50s. He was writing in a genre that (at the time) was entirely aimed at young men. The feminist revolutions of the 60s and 70s were a world away from him. And as for racism, what better metaphor for race relations than the prejudices between the Elfs and Dwarfs? Duh.

The Matrix, on the other hand, is a postmodern, milennialist work, drawing on everything from philosophy to comic books. It's only natural that a story written in 1999 would have more strong female characters than a story written in 1945.

Additionally, Peter Jackson could have made the choice to include more minorities or women in the story, but that would be completely unfair to Tolkien -- if you want to bring a book to the screen, don't screw with it.

[zakzekezedd]

Well, everyone's entitled to their own opinion. Personally, I read books or watch movies to be entertained. Peter Jackson has created masterful movies that are not only majestic in scope, but amazingly entertaining. I wish I could say that I found The Matrix to be nearly as entertaining, but I didn't. I still haven't watched to first Matirx all the way through, but I have watched the LOTR movies many times.

[Fairywolf]

I think you have way to much time on your hands if all you do is over analyze movies. Just my 2 cents worth :)


if you want to bring a book to the screen, don't screw with it.


I agree!!!!! 100%

[CryssieWillow]

Whaahahahhaa.
What a fruitcake!
Poor girl... *grins*

[Phoenix Blue]

I didn't see a cry of "Racism" anywhere in the article, either. What I did see after the article, though, stunned me. The first comment bears a bit of similarity to ChrissieWillow's comment, actually:


Oh Andrea, you poor girl, I sat next to hundreds of girls just like you in college who listened so intently, with their mouths drooling as the so-called professors filled their little sponge brains with liberal ideology. They became little marshmallow, liberal, non- thinking racists who swallowed all of the lies, distortions, and revisionist ideas fed to them.

Keep on your path to destroy the nation, the family, and our children. You will be so pleased when you see the result when we are a communist nation of drug addicts, pedophiles, and anarchy rules. When our military has so much estrogen that we can no longer defend ourselves and when you take all the guns away so that only the criminals and gangs will have them. Smart move sweetheart, I bet you have rationalized it all in that swelling liberal brain of yours?

[WandererInGray]

The author never accuses Peter Jackson of being racist. :rolleyes: How many people actually read the article or just did the kneejerk "it's not a racist film!" bit?

I find some of these comments very amusing.

The author is speaking purely from a personal standpoint. She's talking about what inspires her in the films.....and why anyone would call her a "fruitcake" for being more inspired by the Matrix than LOTR (a personal choice, btw) is beyond me.

I can agree with her point. *shrugs* From an entertainment standpoint they are both good trilogies. From a philosphical standpoint....*shakes head* LOTR is only eye candy, Matrix got the meaning.

She not (as least from my view) saying that LOTR should have been done any different than it was, only that it lacks the punch that the Matrix has.

And I wholeheartedly agree. There is more power to be found in the ambiguous, multi-cultural world of the Matrix, than in the pretty standard story of good vs evil of LOTR.

And, hey, before you flame me...:D...I liked LOTR quite a bit. I just happen to like Matrix more. It's a bit like trying to compare apples and oranges.

[~ Monk ~]

It's a bit like trying to compare apples and oranges.I agree. I love both trilogies for different reasons.

From the article:

Seraph (Collin Chou), the Oracle's protector, who is both a martial arts expert and Buddhist meditation practitioner.

This character is supposed to be a "Buddhist meditation practitioner?" :huh: Did I miss something in the films or is she just making an assumption/generalization?

[mothwench]

so... has anyone actually read this comment?

Male Feminist on Feb 20, 2004 20:52:32, said:
I can understand the frustration that some people feel with left-wing/feminist journalism. And I can understand the desire to satirize its more ridiculous variants. But I cannot understand why the editor would not make it clear to her readers that the piece, above, was in fact satire. There are many gullible people out there who might actually believe that some "crazy" feminist would actually write a column as stupid and ignorant as this one. By printing this "column" without a disclaimer, you're just throwing gasoline onto the fire.

i don't think i'll be taking that article all too seriously...
edited to add: my disclaimer ;) : i don't think assuming that it wasn't satire is gullable. :eek:

[Ben Trismegistus]

The author never accuses Peter Jackson of being racist. :rolleyes: How many people actually read the article or just did the kneejerk "it's not a racist film!" bit?
I did read the article, yes. It's not so much what she *says* at what she *infers*. The tone of the article is very much that Matrix is better than LOTR because there are more strong women and minorities. And, I still say, that's a ridiculous argument.

[Psyche Ague]

Oh this is completely preposterous. To make the argument that people prefer Lord of the Rings to Matrix because they're racist and/or sexist is just about the stupidest argument I've ever heard. The LOTR movies got better with each installment, to the point that Return of the King is a spectacular piece of filmmaking by any gauge. The first Matrix movie virtually reinvented filmmaking, but its two sequels were convoluted and stupid.

This author ignores the fact that both trilogies are products of their times. Tolkien was a white male European writing in the 1940s and 50s. He was writing in a genre that (at the time) was entirely aimed at young men. The feminist revolutions of the 60s and 70s were a world away from him. And as for racism, what better metaphor for race relations than the prejudices between the Elfs and Dwarfs? Duh.

The Matrix, on the other hand, is a postmodern, milennialist work, drawing on everything from philosophy to comic books. It's only natural that a story written in 1999 would have more strong female characters than a story written in 1945.

Additionally, Peter Jackson could have made the choice to include more minorities or women in the story, but that would be completely unfair to Tolkien -- if you want to bring a book to the screen, don't screw with it.
I agree with everything said here with the exception of the first paragraph. I think discussing Tolkien's EXTREMELY white, male, upper class, European view on the world and his audience and the time in which he wrote the books is incredibly important for understanding his works.

This is also something the author of the article overlooked, although her point is valid. Lord of the Rings supposedly represents the history of ENGLAND, an historically white nation. The Matrix is an amazing piece of work in itself, but comparing the two without bringing up their time periods is ridiculous.

[Mithrea]

Lord of the Rings supposedly represents the history of ENGLAND, an historically white nation.

Huhwha?

[laserhazel]

The movies are regionally specific, if they took place a long time ago in a galaxy far far away, then they would have black folk in them.

[Psyche Ague]

The author never accuses Peter Jackson of being racist. :rolleyes: How many people actually read the article or just did the kneejerk "it's not a racist film!" bit?

I find some of these comments very amusing.

The author is speaking purely from a personal standpoint. She's talking about what inspires her in the films.....and why anyone would call her a "fruitcake" for being more inspired by the Matrix than LOTR (a personal choice, btw) is beyond me.

I can agree with her point. *shrugs* From an entertainment standpoint they are both good trilogies. From a philosphical standpoint....*shakes head* LOTR is only eye candy, Matrix got the meaning.

She not (as least from my view) saying that LOTR should have been done any different than it was, only that it lacks the punch that the Matrix has.

And I wholeheartedly agree. There is more power to be found in the ambiguous, multi-cultural world of the Matrix, than in the pretty standard story of good vs evil of LOTR.

And, hey, before you flame me...:D...I liked LOTR quite a bit. I just happen to like Matrix more. It's a bit like trying to compare apples and oranges.
Amen, sister.

Hmm...like Tolkien, I don't seem to have a word of my own to say ;) Ha-ha...

:imout:

[Psyche Ague]

Huhwha?
Heh...

Tolkien may have gathered his sources and inspiration from other European cultures, but he presented his books as a fictional history of England.

[Mithrea]

Heh...

Tolkien may have gathered his sources and inspiration from other European cultures, but he presented his books as a fictional history of England.


Granted I'm no expert, but everything I've ever read portrays him as denying to the end that there was any connection between what he wrote and what really existed. Just like he denied the war of the ring had any connection to the war going on while he was writing. . . I've never heard LotR being called a "fictional history of England." That doesn't even really make sense to me. No offense, intended. Just confused.

[turtlerain46]

For a society that's supposed to have gotten over racism for the majority,it sure is emphasised alot (race). That's all I have to say.

[blueiris]

I agree Turtlerain.

[Mithrea]

For a society that's supposed to have gotten over racism for the majority,it sure is emphasised alot (race). That's all I have to say.

Who says we've gotten over it?

[turtlerain46]

I'm not saying everyone has. I just feel that society places to much emphases on race.

[Vanessa TPD]

I actually assumed the article was satire to start out, but I changed my mind after reading it. It was reasonably well-written, but just a very shallow analysis. You'd think satire would have some more outrageous elements.

[WandererInGray]

Granted I'm no expert, but everything I've ever read portrays him as denying to the end that there was any connection between what he wrote and what really existed. Just like he denied the war of the ring had any connection to the war going on while he was writing. . . I've never heard LotR being called a "fictional history of England." That doesn't even really make sense to me. No offense, intended. Just confused.
Actually Tolkien began writing because he wished that England had great epic myths (fictional histories) of its own, and they didn't. I believe that is what Psyche was referring too.


I did read the article, yes. It's not so much what she *says* at what she *infers*. The tone of the article is very much that Matrix is better than LOTR because there are more strong women and minorities. And, I still say, that's a ridiculous argument.

Unfortunately Ben, the fact that you chose to infer something from her writing, is not the author's fault, but your own. :) She's saying that SHE likes it much better, not that everyone should.
*grins* At least that's what I infer from it.

And I wasn't really including you in that comment about reading it, I knew you did. ;)

Oh, and it's not a satire, folks. Someone in the comments just thought it was. If you go down further the author herself comments and from that you can see pretty clearly that she means what she said.

[Vanessa TPD]

My bad...but, sheesh, that's a very narrow opinion she's expressed. As someone else here has already said, she seems to be the racist here! Why on earth should there be minorities cast in a movie based on a novel intended to serve as a piece of Anglo-Saxon mythology? That's like saying a token White needs to be included in a movie about an African legend.

[WandererInGray]

And I think that the people of this forum were biased to the article before they ever read it.

What would your opinion of the piece have been if the title of this thread (and the following post) had said "African-American woman discusses why she finds more power in The Matrix than LOTR" ? :eyebrow:

She wasn't asking for minorities to be cast in LOTR. She was saying she related better to The Matrix because it was peopled with those she could better identify with. I see nothing racist nor wrong with a view like that.

What continues to amaze me is the number of people who get worked up when someone doesn't like LOTR! :geez: It's a free country, people can choose what they want to see, and they can even write articles about movies they dislike. (heck some people even get paid for it, they're called critics)

[Kalika]

And I think that the people of this forum were biased to the article before they ever read it.

What would your opinion of the piece have been if the title of this thread (and the following post) had said "African-American woman discusses why she finds more power in The Matrix than LOTR" ? :eyebrow:

She wasn't asking for minorities to be cast in LOTR. She was saying she related better to The Matrix because it was peopled with those she could better identify with. I see nothing racist nor wrong with a view like that.

What continues to amaze me is the number of people who get worked up when someone doesn't like LOTR! :geez: It's a free country, people can choose what they want to see, and they can even write articles about movies they dislike. (heck some people even get paid for it, they're called critics)

Bingo! :D

[jelly.belly]

What continues to amaze me is the number of people who get worked up when someone doesn't like LOTR! :geez: It's a free country, people can choose what they want to see, and they can even write articles about movies they dislike. (heck some people even get paid for it, they're called critics)

Personally I have to say I understand why some people get worked up here, believe me, I love LOTR, but I do understand if someone doesnt, in fact a lot of the people I know hate it and I still talk to them! :D But it's more the fact that she talks about the lacking of races in LOTR and then just talks about the bad guys in the Matrix as "Eurotrash". I would've understood her opinion and respected it if it wasn't for that... I just felt that she was blasting LOTR just because of the "white dominance" and liked the Matrix only because of the multi-cultural "gang" beating the "Eurotrash". I just think that her opinion doesn't go very far if she starts talking about racism only to start making, what I personnally think, are racist remarks...

[KaliGiri5]

I didn't think Lord of the Rings was racist..
I loved it myself.

[Kitfox]

I can agree with her point. *shrugs* From an entertainment standpoint they are both good trilogies. From a philosphical standpoint....*shakes head* LOTR is only eye candy, Matrix got the meaning.

She not (as least from my view) saying that LOTR should have been done any different than it was, only that it lacks the punch that the Matrix has.

And I wholeheartedly agree. There is more power to be found in the ambiguous, multi-cultural world of the Matrix, than in the pretty standard story of good vs evil of LOTR.

And, hey, before you flame me...:D...I liked LOTR quite a bit. I just happen to like Matrix more. It's a bit like trying to compare apples and oranges.

No offense. Really, no offense. I'm gonna rant here. Take this with a huge ass grain of salt.


LOTR is in fact the purest essence of screwy brain trauma.

LOTR focuses (film only) on the fact evil sweeps across the face of a culture, a race, a time, and consumes everything. Evil is so strong that it takes away the health and the future of things near it. And yet, we will jump into the fire of evil to save what is most precious to us with no knowledge of the cost.

Evil, of course, is not even really representing evil. In fact, it represents something different to each person that sees it. Each character lends itself to a different piece of the human puzzle, the different effects that life's bitchiness has upon us.

LOTR does something that Matrix does not. It connects on the deepest level possible. We all have our "evil", our "One Ring", in our lives. We have our Sams, our Aragorns, our Wormtongues, even our Faramirs.

The problem with the Matrix, is that it comments on the reality we live in, but not how to try live in it and deal with it. The Matrix trys to blow it up, LOTR trys to save it.

LOTR is a sweeping grand adventure, yes, but in it's simplicity shows us two hobbits struggling across a barren land getting lost while carrying a burden called life.

That is the essence and the beauty.

There isn't a happy ending. Frodo feels the cold until he has to leave from it, Aragorn dies, Legolas sees his seagulls, and Sam, my Sam, all he can say is, "Well, I'm back."

And all that's left is a big red book.

[CelestiaSynth]

And I think that the people of this forum were biased to the article before they ever read it.

What would your opinion of the piece have been if the title of this thread (and the following post) had said "African-American woman discusses why she finds more power in The Matrix than LOTR" ? :eyebrow:

She wasn't asking for minorities to be cast in LOTR. She was saying she related better to The Matrix because it was peopled with those she could better identify with. I see nothing racist nor wrong with a view like that.

What continues to amaze me is the number of people who get worked up when someone doesn't like LOTR! :geez: It's a free country, people can choose what they want to see, and they can even write articles about movies they dislike. (heck some people even get paid for it, they're called critics)

I have to admit, before I read the article, I thought that the author was probably being overzealous and trying to accuse LOTR in purposely excluding diverse racial representation. Because logically-speaking, fantasy-medieval Europe isn't going to have many blacks, asians and latinos running around. Not to mention that damsels in distress have been more of a standard motif than determined, headstrong women. But after reading what was said, I have to agree with Wanderer. I seemed more like she was explaining why she appreciated and related to the message of the Matrix trilogy more than the LOTR. And that's nothing to lose sleep over. I personally agree in some ways.
I have a big fan of both of the trilogies because they both appeal deeply to me in mental and spiritual ways. I'm also in the minority who liked the entire Matrix trilogy and can appreciate it's message more than that of LOTR.

Like I said, I loved both of them, but The Matrix just had me more interested and intrigued. My friends and I have actually had discussions about the movies and what they like and dislike about them, and we all agreed on something: LOTR would have far more appeal than the Matrix overall. We determined this just by how we all reacted to the movies, which we would all go see together. When we went to see LOTR, we we're all giggling and pointing and cheering. While when we we're watching the Matrix, we just sat and tried to listen to everything that was happening so we wouldn't miss any detail, no one talked till the credits rolled. See, LOTR is a very simple story on a grandeur scale. It's about good conquering evil and the privilage of friendship--on a multi-million dollar budget. It's beautiful and encompassing and it's fun to watch. But what really pulls people in is how, even on this grand scale, there's no complications. It's "These are the good, noble guys. These are the mean evil-doers, and you know who wins, but watch anyway". The Matrix is all about trying to get YOU to determine what's going on and why. It's a movie based on interpretation, and none of your ideas are truely right or wrong. Sure, your given a guy who's pointed out of being the important "One" with Neo, and your given the Agents and Smith as your "bad guys", but it dives so much further than that it's insane, especially is you saw the prequel "Animatrix".

The Matrix makes you have to sit down and try to absorb and understand and then deciper what's going on and why. That's something I can really dig, while most people, at least I don't think so, go to the movies to have brainteasers. They want a story laid out for them to enjoy, with some twists here and there, depending on the movie genre. LOTR is that movie where the story is laid out, and you watch it in awe and enjoy it. The Matrix is not like that at all, and I honestly think the movies became more less-acclaim, not so much that they were actually bad movies, but because people didn't get them. The main complaint I heard about 'Reloaded' was that it was 'too much talking'. Seeing as the Matrix movies are heavily philosophically based, I found this to be strange. Then it became, ' too much complicated talking' and then I understood. People who got into the Matrix for the cool special fx only now had to sit through more post-modern dialogue than usual.
And when you just want to see people roundhouse in slow-mo, that's not happening for you, so the Matrix stock went down. But I still think all the movies we're good, and definetely better than they are now popularly perceived. I liked the challege it sets the audience up for, and that's something I can say LOTR does not do. I'm not knocking the hobbits, I just still liked the agents. :D

[Vanessa TPD]

What would your opinion of the piece have been if the title of this thread (and the following post) had said "African-American woman discusses why she finds more power in The Matrix than LOTR" ? :eyebrow:

She wasn't asking for minorities to be cast in LOTR. She was saying she related better to The Matrix because it was peopled with those she could better identify with. I see nothing racist nor wrong with a view like that.



You're absolutely right: "racist" isn't the right word. And I guess I was hypocritical myself for posting such an unthinking comment branding her article as shallow (misreading the thing, as you already pointed out). I think she is, however, race-conscious to a fault. She implies that it's hard for her to identify with people who don't fall into the exact same categories as she does. She apparently identifies more with being black and female than with the overarching personalities and issues that both movies deal with. She implies that she can't identify with white males, which certainly does nothing to bridge the race or gender divide. The issues the characters face in LOTR are common to all races and both sexes. That she doesn't see this reflects a pretty narrow worldview, in my opinion at least.

[Laisrean]

My view on this is that how well you like a movie should not depend on the race of the actors in it. The woman who wrote the article likes the movie less because all of the characters were white. That, IMHO, is racism.

[Kitfox]

What continues to amaze me is the number of people who get worked up when someone doesn't like LOTR! :geez: It's a free country, people can choose what they want to see, and they can even write articles about movies they dislike. (heck some people even get paid for it, they're called critics)


The thing is about us people who sometimes get pissed off that others don't like LOTR is that we don't understand that sentiment.

I don't know how you could not need to love it and it's characters, how you can feel the human struggle in the struggle towards Mordor. For me, it is impossible to comprehend such a thing.

LOTR also lies close to my heart. The thing about LOTR is that it grabs you, you fall in love with these characters, write fan fiction like a mad person to try to illustrate the vastness of their characters left undescribed. You cry everytime to put down the book and switch off the t.v. because there is no more after this and the appendices don't help to bring it back.

LOTR makes you care so deeply about fictional characters that you celebrate their birthdays, randomly quote book and movie lines whenever applicable (and often when not), and frequently imitate Billy Boyd's accent whenever speaking Pippin lines.

If you don't love LOTR, you don't understand and you don't understand why we get pissed. We get pissed because you aren't just not liking the movie, you're not liking a world we choose to live in if only in our wildest dreams.

We LIVE these books and these films and we don't comprehend why you don't.



hum....man, does talking about LOTR get me riled up or what?

[Phoenix Blue]

I don't know how you could not need to love it and it's characters, how you can feel the human struggle in the struggle towards Mordor. For me, it is impossible to comprehend such a thing.
You don't have to comprehend it to accept it and move on. :)

[Laisrean]

hum....man, does talking about LOTR get me riled up or what?

I know how you feel. LOTR has a place in my heart as well. :) For me it just isn't any book, it is a classic. The movies aren't just any other movies, they are based on this classic. :)

[Phoenix Blue]

My view on this is that how well you like a movie should not depend on the race of the actors in it. The woman who wrote the article likes the movie less because all of the characters were white. That, IMHO, is racism.
No, Laisrean, it is not racism. It's culture - and it's okay, last I checked, for people to have different upbringings that may contribute to or detract from their enjoyment of a movie. I never even went to see "Barbershop" or "Do the Right Thing," simply because I knew I wouldn't be able to relate. The movie would hold no meaning for me, and therefore my enjoyment of the film would be greatly reduced. I have refrained from seeing "The Passion of the Christ" for similar reasons, though in that case the cultural divide is across religious lines, rather than racial ones.

[blueiris]

Exactly Pheonix Blue. That is also why I don't like rap or hip hop or country music. I can't relate to them at all.
By the way, I absolutely love Lord of the Rings. :hearthear

[Vanessa TPD]

No, Laisrean, it is not racism. It's culture - and it's okay, last I checked, for people to have different upbringings that may contribute to or detract from their enjoyment of a movie. I never even went to see "Barbershop" or "Do the Right Thing," simply because I knew I wouldn't be able to relate. The movie would hold no meaning for me, and therefore my enjoyment of the film would be greatly reduced. I have refrained from seeing "The Passion of the Christ" for similar reasons, though in that case the cultural divide is across religious lines, rather than racial ones.

I don't think it's racism, per se, but I do think it's narrow thinking. LOTR is very different from "The Passion of the Christ" because the issues it deals with - courage under fire and the basic idea of good vs. evil - are pertinent to any group of people, no matter what their sex, religion, or race. Someone who can't bring herself to enjoy such a movie all that much because the characters aren't of the same skin color is, in my opinion, missing out. (In any case, I don't see why her preference that a main character in a movie be a female minority merits an entire article to be written about it.) On the other hand, "The Passion of the Christ" is a movie that is less appropriate for non-Christians - why would you want to see someone being brutally tortured to death if you didn't have an emotional connection to the person?

(Disclaimer: I personally haven't seen TPOTC, so I don't know how much that movie draws you into the story of Jesus and the enormity of his sacrifice and am not really qualified to comment on its appeal to non-Christians. From the reviews I've read though, it's a two-hour bloodbath that even some of the devout Christians I know have found offputting.)

[Laisrean]

No, Laisrean, it is not racism. It's culture - and it's okay, last I checked, for people to have different upbringings that may contribute to or detract from their enjoyment of a movie. I never even went to see "Barbershop" or "Do the Right Thing," simply because I knew I wouldn't be able to relate. The movie would hold no meaning for me, and therefore my enjoyment of the film would be greatly reduced. I have refrained from seeing "The Passion of the Christ" for similar reasons, though in that case the cultural divide is across religious lines, rather than racial ones.

I have seen Passion of the Christ, and I found it to be enjoyable. I am not, of course, a Christian. But I could certainly sympathize with Jesus' suffering and it made me cry. It had some good messages of forgiveness to your enemies and things like that. So I don't think you have to be a christian to find meaning in the movie.... I don't view Jesus' as God or as the son of God, but I have respect for him.

I don't see how someone who isn't white couldn't likewise have respect for the characters in LOTR. Actually, even if you are white the cultural background of LOTR is different than the world of today. There is no one in the modern world who lives like the men of Rohan, or the Elves of Lorien. Doesn't mean we can't respect them, or even relate to their plight.

[WandererInGray]

I don't see how someone who isn't white couldn't likewise have respect for the characters in LOTR. Actually, even if you are white the cultural background of LOTR is different than the world of today. There is no one in the modern world who lives like the men of Rohan, or the Elves of Lorien. Doesn't mean we can't respect them, or even relate to their plight.


Okay. First off they're characters in a movie. Having "respect" for them, to me, is a silly concept. That's like saying if I liked the characters in Finding Nemo I should stop eating fish. *shakes head* I don't get it.

Secondly, just because you relate to their plight, doesn't mean everyone else has too.
I tried to watch Mad Love several years ago and thought it was the stupidest movie I'd ever seen! The characters were dumb, and the girl's physco act made me roll my eyes. It very nearly became the first movie I ever walked out of a theatre in the middle of. *shrugs* And to this day I'm still not quite sure why I didn't. As an old friend of mine says "that's two hours of my life I'll never get back".

I have, however, seen Twelve Monkeys, and thought that Brad Pitt's performance as a crazy guy was fantastic.

So tell me....does that make me sexist because I prefer one over the other?

Just because LOTR is a classic to some doesn't mean it is to everyone. :rolleyes: Nor does it mean that it is extempt from being critiqued.

[Aidron]

I have seen Passion of the Christ, and I found it to be enjoyable. I am not, of course, a Christian. But I could certainly sympathize with Jesus' suffering and it made me cry. It had some good messages of forgiveness to your enemies and things like that. So I don't think you have to be a christian to find meaning in the movie.... I don't view Jesus' as God or as the son of God, but I have respect for him.

I don't see how someone who isn't white couldn't likewise have respect for the characters in LOTR. Actually, even if you are white the cultural background of LOTR is different than the world of today. There is no one in the modern world who lives like the men of Rohan, or the Elves of Lorien. Doesn't mean we can't respect them, or even relate to their plight.


Frankly, I have not seen one thing in this post concerning anyone outside of yourself. Perhaps you will then realize that this is your opinion, and not a universal fact or creed that everyone has or even possibly should relate to and/or follow.

I couldn't watch The Passion. Not because I'm not christian, and not because I could not relate, but because I would so bored I would be unable to keep awake. The entire story of Jesus bores me to pieces, in fact, the entire Bible does. Am I wrong in saying that or perhaps, discriminating? I think not. I'm bored, and it's my right to be bored senseless.

Also, I do not see what 'race' has to do with this. Tolkien wrote the book in a different time and people have to accept that. Black people (I'm so not calling them African Americans, I find that to be an insult) simply did not exist in the same cultural and societal way that they do now. Was it a shame? Sure. Should we butcher Tolkien's work to make it a more poltiically correct piece of work? No, cause once you change the smallest of details, the larger ones are only a step away and then before long, it's not even the original story. Whether you're white, black, or orange with yellow polka-dots, you can enjoy the movie or not. I personally do not have to 'relate' to a movie to enjoy it or entirely understand where the characters are coming from.

I'm so glad though that you can speak for everyone on Earth and claim that no one lives like the men of Rohan or the Elves of Lothlorien. How do you honestly know? We discover new people and cultures every year and there are probably still many whose existence we are unaware about.

The bottom line, however, is that the author is entitled to her opinion, no matter how absurd or moronic it may seem to some. Let her have it, and you enjoy having yours. Just because someone did not enjoy a movie you did or cannot relate to it is not the end of the world. If anything, this 'need' for people to respect a movie, enjoy it, or be moved by it is conformity in its most basic form, and conformity makes me physically ill to be quite honest.

[lednevir]

If you read the book you will find that the orcs are really elves,perhaps their skin turned dark because they are in the sun alot.The Silmarilion is about the begining of time.The LOTR is set in middle earth a time long ago.Perhaps all humanity had'nt been in the sun long enough.

[Laisrean]

Frankly, I have not seen one thing in this post concerning anyone outside of yourself. Perhaps you will then realize that this is your opinion, and not a universal fact or creed that everyone has or even possibly should relate to and/or follow.

Of course it is my opinion. I also never said others don't have the right to disagree with me. What I am saying, however, is that I don't understand how someone can enjoy a movie less simply because they can't relate to the culture of the characters in it. And I am also saying that the inhabitants of middle-earth are not living any kind of culture that we have here today. The culture of, say, the Dwarves is as alien to a white person as it is to a black person, so why do some people say it is something only whites can relate to? I personally don't know of any white (or black) people that live like Dwarves in tunnels under mountains.

So to summarize: I don't buy the argument that middle-earth cultures are something only whites can relate to.

[Laisrean]

If you read the book you will find that the orcs are really elves,perhaps their skin turned dark because they are in the sun alot.

Actually according to the book Orcs hate the sunlight and try to avoid it as much as possible. Really, I don't think Tolkien described very well how Orcs look like so it's pretty much anyone's guess.

[Vanessa TPD]

Okay. First off they're characters in a movie. Having "respect" for them, to me, is a silly concept. That's like saying if I liked the characters in Finding Nemo I should stop eating fish. *shakes head* I don't get it.

I personally view characters as people. (If I can't see them as real, the author/director isn't doing his job.) I personally don't get where your third sentence about the fish is coming from - I could like the Finding Nemo characters, but I'd hardly attribute their personalities to the trout on my plate.


Secondly, just because you relate to their plight, doesn't mean everyone else has too.
I tried to watch Mad Love several years ago and thought it was the stupidest movie I'd ever seen! The characters were dumb, and the girl's physco act made me roll my eyes. It very nearly became the first movie I ever walked out of a theatre in the middle of. *shrugs* And to this day I'm still not quite sure why I didn't. As an old friend of mine says "that's two hours of my life I'll never get back".

I have, however, seen Twelve Monkeys, and thought that Brad Pitt's performance as a crazy guy was fantastic.

So tell me....does that make me sexist because I prefer one over the other?

Just because LOTR is a classic to some doesn't mean it is to everyone. :rolleyes: Nor does it mean that it is extempt from being critiqued.

It would be a different story if this author were criticizing the substance of the characters. If she'd said Aragorn was a one-dimensional guy, I'd see her point and totally respect her view. But her critique is of the characters' skin color and gender. Your case and hers are two different animals.


Frankly, I have not seen one thing in this post concerning anyone outside of yourself. Perhaps you will then realize that this is your opinion, and not a universal fact or creed that everyone has or even possibly should relate to and/or follow.

...Can't we all just get along?


I couldn't watch The Passion. Not because I'm not christian, and not because I could not relate, but because I would so bored I would be unable to keep awake. The entire story of Jesus bores me to pieces, in fact, the entire Bible does. Am I wrong in saying that or perhaps, discriminating? I think not. I'm bored, and it's my right to be bored senseless.

I don't think you're wrong at all. I do think you would be wrong if you said you couldn't identify with Jesus for the sole reason that he was OMGCHRISTIAN.


I'm so glad though that you can speak for everyone on Earth and claim that no one lives like the men of Rohan or the Elves of Lothlorien.

The vast, vast majority of LOTR viewers don't. The fact that this movie is screened in multiplex cinemas pretty much precludes the people waching it, who are ostensibly able to identify with these nomadic, simple people, from being nomadic and simple themselves. Laisrean was trying to make a point - that touching characters don't necessarily have to be people of a similar background - not include every obscure culture in the world in his generalization.


The bottom line, however, is that the author is entitled to her opinion, no matter how absurd or moronic it may seem to some.

And we're entitled to ours. I don't mean to say in any of my comments that the article should be TAKEN DOWN RIGHT NOW BECAUSE IT'S OMGRACIST. It's a free country; she can say whatever she wants. I still maintain, however, that her thinking is pretty narrow. I still disagree. And so does Laisrean. That's what a debate is all about.

[Kitfox]

If you read the book you will find that the orcs are really elves,perhaps their skin turned dark because they are in the sun alot.The Silmarilion is about the begining of time.The LOTR is set in middle earth a time long ago.Perhaps all humanity had'nt been in the sun long enough.

Actually, they just got tortured and warped so much that they hate the sun.

Nice, huh?

[Sequoia]

You know. . . after the first twenty or so posts, I didn't even have the energy to read the origional article that everyone's arguing over.

But I mean. . . come on guys. It's just a freaking article. Over a movie. Based on books. I hate to break your heart, but all of the events, persons, locations and creatures in Lord of the Rings and related works are FICTION, as well as those in the Matrix (or are they? :2G: ). If you're celebrating the birthday of Frodo, I think you're a tad obcessed. Same goes for Trinity (unless we're talking about Mol and Semele's daughter). It's not the history of England. It does not represent any social class. To my knowlage, the author was not trying to do some kind of grand metaphore. He was writing a story. For heaven's sakes, I'm not a bad person because I'm not obcessed with sexy Strider and his friends, or because I call him Strider instead of his real name, because the only movie I've seen more than once is the first one. You aren't a better person because you can name the entire lineage of the royal elven family back a thousand years. God. I was a trekkie, it's called obcession, get over it, sweeties. I love you, but it's just a story.

Yes, the story was great. The movies were spectacular. There was that wonderful good vs. evil repeating theme that we human beings love. But for heaven's sakes, it is neither about race nor religion, sexism nor classes. It's. A. Story. Just like "The Matrix."

Story.

Okay? Do we get it?

Honestly. I don't know why people argue over these things. It's not real. I'm sorry, but it's not. You're never going to meet Frodo and travel with him to return the ring to mount boom-and-doom or whatever it was. Just like I'm never going to meet Captain Picard and fly to the Romulan border and spy on them. It's called Fiction. Why are we arguing over the subliminal messages in fiction? There probably aren't any to begin with!

Augh!

And whoever it was who detailed the entire ending sequence- thank you. I haven't seen the third movie yet, and I'm really glad you told me it in such a manner. Could you at least edit your post to add "Warning: Spoilers" along with your "huge @ss grain of salt" reference?

[Teresa21]

The author wasn't arguing that the LOTR should have more minorities in it, because clearly, there are none in the book, so why put them in the movie? What is problematic about LOTR is not so much implicit racism as it were but a construction of evil as the opposite of white. All of the enemies come from the East, and the Orcs are explicitly described as "swart and slant-eyed." The men who fall under evil's spell are darker and from the South. Tolkien wrote the trilogy as a mythology of England, but it is necessary to ask, how nostalgic did he allow himself to be? If it were in fact a story for England, should the West not have invaded the East? The problem with the LOTR is that it feeds into the idea that foreign or non-white is bad and must be kept at bay or stamped out. For those who argue that this book is English mythology and can't be taken away from Anglo-Saxons, I wonder if they too like Tolkien need this myth to reaffirm their false beliefs in Western supremacy and its relevance.

[djmixon]

You know. . . after the first twenty or so posts, I didn't even have the energy to read the origional article that everyone's arguing over.

FICTION,story,just a story.

But for heaven's sakes, it is neither about race nor religion, sexism nor classes. It's. A. Story. Just like "The Matrix."

It's not real,fiction?

"Warning: Spoilers" along with your "huge @ss grain of salt" reference?

I agree with Puma. . .give it a rest. . .you can find racism and/or discrimination in any and every piece of literary or theatrical work known to humankind!!!!!

Not everything is meant to be hateful, but merely entertaining, so please. . . .for the sake of Pete (whoever he is). . . .get over it!

Thanks, just my two cents!

Donna :rant:

Oh and love the grain of salt reference. . . .

[charmedkisses1]

How on earth is it RACIST???? LOTR is one of the most entertaining stories ever..... it was written based on Old England, and God/dess forgive them if they didn't have many blacks, Asians, etc there...... big whoop- I don't see skin color- I see personality.............

[charmedkisses1]

You know i'm very sad my gf hates the Lord of the Rings.
for some reason she keeps on saying its not realistic!

LOL That's the point..... :lol:

[djmixon]

The Silmarilion is about the begining of time.


The Simarilion??? You mean people actually READ it? OMG??? I read farther in BattleField Earth than I did in the Simarilion. . .

I think it was just practice writing, not meant for public consumption (and the resultant bleching).

Of course, if you feel it was a good book, be my guest. . .I used mine as fire starter long ago (along with Battlefield Earth)

[djmixon]

for some reason she keeps on saying its not realistic!

So, just how OLD is your girlfriend????? And how long has she been an orc/goblin/troll??? hmmmm?????

(hey, you know I am just teasing)

[SilentDreams]

I agree a lil bit.Yes there are no people except white people in the film. But at the time the books were written nobody would buy a story about a africian american people being shown in such heroic light. You cant blame a movie based on a book trying to be a similar to the book as possible.

[Azure]

Okay, speaking as a medieval literary scholar, and feminist critic and a liberal (though probably not as extreme in those areas as some would like) - just for clarification, LOTR was written by an English professor whose literary interest was Anglo Saxon and Norse literature, and in Celtic (meaning specifically early medieval Irish and Welsh) literature. LOTR was heavily influenced by that mythos, and that's the world it's based on. Anyone who reads Beowulf, or the Icelandic Sagas, or the Mabinogion will recognize elements of Tolkien's work.

The Shire is a metaphor for England in WWII, according to the author himself. Tolkien wrote during and after that war and was a veteran of WWI. His own war experience left him deeply scarred, and he wrote much of what became the trilogy for his sons, serving against the Nazis in the British military.

Why say this? Because Tolkien's writing is a product of his experience and time - since WWII in the European theatre was about white people battling white people it's not really a surprise that the book is about the same. The powers in the East, however, are influenced by the ugliness of the WWI era battles with and in the Ottoman Empire - then referred to as "The Sick Old Man of Europe."

For the record, there are black characters in European medieval literature - and they aren't the bad guys. An example: Parsifal the Grail Knight has a mixed race half brother in Wolfram von Eshenbach's Parsifal. His mother is an African princess, and her Europeam knight husband loves her deeply, and mourns when she dies.

As a scholar, I have to say that the knee jerk idea that a period piece is by nature racist or sexist bothers me. Like it or not, you have to look at context and history.

Could Peter Jackson have managed colorblind casting? Sure, but I honestly don't think it would have made a diffence in the film he made or the story as it was told. Is there any overt, or even slight, message that people of color or women are bad and inferior in either the films or the novels? Not that I can see.

As a professional actress and director(yup, degrees in those too), I've been part of such casts and I've directed such casts. They work when the production is good, they distract when the production is bad. I don't think they are required for a production nor do I think they're a bad idea. I directed a show set in 1830s Ireland with a black father and two white children. It worked because the father was a good actor.

Where I see racism and sexism is when right wing talk radio morons rant about "black night at the Oscars" because Denzel Washington and Halle Berry both won a couple of years ago. I actually heard that - made me sick. Believe it was Tony Snow, but not positive, since Iwas in someone else's car at the time.

There are plenty of obvious, blatant examples of racism and sexism out there for us to combat. Let's not go looking for small fights to pick when there are big ones staring us down.

If you don't like something, that doesn't mean it's bad - it means you don't like it. Which is just fine, but it's an opinion, just like everyone else's and they aren't bad simply for not sharing that opinion.

[rain_fallen_tears]

Dear goddess save me! Why do people insist on creating racist/sexist symbolism in EVERYTHING! Let it go, not everything is about you, why can't people like the writer see the beauty in what the film does say, no matter how small, how different, or what odds are set against you, you can accomplish anything! So what if Frodo wasn't african american or a chickadee!?! :rolleyes: