- This topic has 55 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Authors seem to lose sight of what love actually is, and they play it up to be some big emotions thing because the girl is so beautiful and when he’s with her, he feels this tightness in his throat and his heart begins to flutter because she smells like pine needles! *cough* Eragon… *cough cough*
@Ethryndal Oh yes. That drives me insane. I understand about heart fluttering and stuff, but the reasons and emotions surrounding it are just silly.What d’ye all think of the Lizzy/Mr. Headstone/Eugene triangle from Our Mutual Friend? *gasping cough*
Is there a reason anyone knows of that it’s usually two guys and a girl and not two girls and a guy?
@emma-flournoy Eh, it was decent. I never really liked either Eugene or Headstone though.
🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢
@Daeus I can’t stand Mr. Headstone. I liked Eugene pretty well; but I’ve only seen the movie. It might be different in the book (or audio book).
That triangle was just so depressing though, how it went; for me at least. Even though it was nice in the end (for some parties 😛 ) the happenings were so insane. Do you think there were any redeeming qualities in it other than the end for Eugene and Lizzy?
@emma-flournoy The ending was probably the worst part for me. Eugene’s positive change was very unconvincing and cliche. I don’t know if there were any redeeming qualities, except perhaps when Headstone and Eugene have that midnight walk thing.
🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢
@Daeus The midnight walk thingy must be something not in the movie—was it nice interaction between the two? Because there was something kind of like that in the movie, only Mr. H was totally trying to destroy (for real) Eugene. Hardly a walk…I don’t exactly see that as a redeeming quality. 😛 Maybe Mr. H was nicer in the book.
@Emma-Flournoy
Maybe the 2 guys/1 girl situation stems from the fact that men are typically and created to be the initiators. If there were 2 girls/1 guy in a love triangle, it would be girls chasing a guy, right?@emma-flournoy Well, Eugene would take these walks and Headstone would follow him everywhere, but Eugene would always pretend not to notice his existence in order to drive him to fury. It wasn’t really good, but it was interesting.
🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢🐢
I agree with @christi-eaton, you should write an entire article on this, @kate-flournoy! I’d love to hear your thoughts on the love triangle inserted into the Hobbit movies, and the Christine/the Phantom/Raoul triangle in the Phantom of the Opera if you’re familiar with it 🙂
@Sierra-R I’m not familiar with the Phantom of the Opera one, but as for the Hobbit one— *gag* Please. Don’t even get me started. 😛 The number one problem with it was that it was basically a crush that got treated like real love to the exclusion of a love that had been growing for centuries. Now Legolas in that movie had some SERIOUS characterization issues (which I absolutely hated, because I love Legolas and he basically got demoted to the rank of stuntman) but assuming he had been well done as a character I would have loathed Tauriel for rejecting his proven love in favor of Kili’s crush, and hated it all the more when the movie went on to glorify that as the right choice. That’s basically the problem with it in a nutshell. :/
What are your thoughts?@kate-flournoy, I’m so glad to find people who don’t like that triangle! It annoys me so much. . . first of all, I’m something of a Tolkien purist and since I believe good books make bad movies (with extremely rare exceptions) I wasn’t about to watch any Tolkien movies. Then the Hobbit ones started coming out, and people who’d seen them, and knew that I liked Tolkien, assumed I’d like them too, and started telling me about them. Most of the changes taken alone would have been enough reason not to watch them, but that love triangle — oh dear. So very unnecessary. So poorly done. So pointless. If Tauriel herself were entirely obliterated that would be a good thing. She’d no business even existing in the first place. And it’s that kind of I-can’t-decide-so-I’ll-lead-them-both-on thing (coupled with oh-no-he’s-dead-and-now-I-know-who-The-One-is-and-unfortunately-it’s-the-dead-guy-now-what) that gives love triangles such a bad name.
@Northerner yeah. It was extremely poorly done, to say the least. I didn’t really have a problem with Tauriel actually— even though I’m a Tolkien purist as well 😛 — but the instant they made her the point of a triangle I lost everything I liked about her. It was just so not worth it. I still really enjoyed a lot of the Hobbit movies— Bilbo was spot on, Thorin was really good, and SMAUG WAS AWESOME— and I’d watch them again and enjoy them again, but the parts that weren’t awesome were so badly done it’s not even funny. 🙁
@kate-flournoy I didn’t have a problem with Tauriel as a character either. Especially since she never talks to Bilbo, and since the book is told entirely from his perspective technically she could have been any one of the unnamed elves in the story. I also acknowledge that it was hardly fair of her to reject Legolas’s love over a dwarf’s crush… but I am guilty of being something of Kiliel shipper 😛 Please don’t judge.
What was far more annoying to me was the fuss they made over Legolas’s mother (how exactly was that relevant to the story?) and Thranduil’s majestically-delivered-but-no-less-corny wisdom, “Because it was real”. And Alfred *shudders*. But overall the Hobbit movies, for all their faults, are still high among my favourites.
@Sierra-R *sits and silently judges you*
XD jk.I think I probably would have liked Tauriel and Kili better if the romance had not progressed so ridiculously fast and gone from ‘I hate you because you’re an elf and who doesn’t hate elves’ to ‘Do you think she could have loved me?’ in the span of half a movie… and ugh, yes. Thranduil just took a bad situation and made it worse. 😛 And the whole deal with Legolas’ mother was completely random. Legolas… *headdesk* needed work. Serious characterization problems. That and Azog were probably the worst things about the movies for me. Seriously guys, if you were gonna add in a villain, how much more difficult would it have been to make him compelling? At least more compelling than THAT? 😛
But that’s a different discussion. 😉@Sierra-R But now whenever something hurts so much, you can say why does it, and your sibling can reply Because it was real! and you can have a good laugh. (Or groan.) 😀 That makes stubbing toes a lot funner.
At least Thranduil was well-acted, though he had some stupid things to say.
Something else that makes me groan is the Aragorn reference—when Thranduil tells Legolas about that ranger guy in the North he can go join? Because if I remember correctly from book/appendice stuff, Aragorn was like ten years old at that point in history. In the books at least.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
