Having watched the LotR films a few years ago I decided to buy the books and read through them. I splashed out on the big heavy illustrated edition, but upon opening the cover I found it to be a long, long slog that frankly bored me, though I persisted and eventually finished the books (finding the appendices more interesting than the story itself).
What put me off was the pages and pages of description where nothing happened. Undoubtedly, this attention to detail aided the visual look of the excellent films, but I can't understand why people think this wooden prose makes LotR some of the best books every written. Admittedly, having the film's imagery fresh in my mind and me not adjusting well to the slower pace of the books didn't help.
To draw a (rather strained) parallel, it's a bit like The Da Vinci Code - good plot, but awful writing.
I'm currently in the middle of reading The Hobbit for the first time in my life. I'm up to where Bilbo and the dwarves have reached the Lonely Mountain, nicked a few gems, pissed off Smaug and are now wondering how to kill the dragon and make off with tons of loot. I'm finding it much easier going, though it too gets seriously bogged down in places.
I'll stop before I fall foul of the same leaden pace, but am I alone in this critique of Tolkien's writings?
Yes, this is a bit of an age-old argument. I can see where you're coming from though I don't feel quite the same about the books as you. I first read them when I was a kid, and I read them again before watching the movies. I think you're right when you say that it's hard to slow down to the book's pace when you've watched the films, but I don't necessarily think that the books are slow either.
I've been a fan of LOTR for ages, and I will continue to be one for ages. I think the books were great, and I personally enjoyed the LOD that he used. Having said that, I can see how some might find it overbearing.
The Hobbit, imho, was rubbish. I felt that it was more of a childrens' book written in a very childish manner. I'm not a fan of it at all. I'll be interested to see how you feel when you've read the last page! :)
It's always a bad idea to read the book after you've seen the film. For that reason I shall never read the LotR.
I felt the same with Fight Club, I read the book after seeing the film and it just wasn't as good, especially since the details of the plot are very different.
How about a book you read before seeing the film? I read Fear & Loathing in Las Vegas before I saw the film and thought it was a good adaptation. I'd be interested to know if anyone read the book after seeing the film and what they made of the book and how they saw the film after that.
I tried reading LotR before the films came out and after about a month gave up halfway through Fellowship and re-read all 5 Hitch-Hiker books in about 2 weeks.
I do agree that reading the books after watching the film can be a drag, especially if the film is very good. I read Jaws a while back and it's one of the most boring books I've ever read in contrast to the film. Bram Stoker's Dracula might not be a great film but the book is one hell of a chore to read, the Johnathon Harker parts are good but Mina's parts are almost unreadable.
I've read Sleepers and found it really good. Not seen the film yet...
What about "The DaVinci Code"? I read the book and enjoyed it. I know lots of people say it's shite coz it doesn't represent what actually happened, but that's why it's a fiction book. I haven't seen the film, because I can't stand the idea of Tom Hanks playing the lead role.
The Da Vinci Code read like a cheap action flick to me. It's obviously ficitonal so I don't suscribe to that criticism of it. The main problem is Dan Brown's writing style.
Also, I haven't seen the Da Vinci Code film either and didn't fancy it after reading the book.
I kinda agree, but kinda don't. I liken it to "Commando", the film with Arnie in it. It's a really cheezy action film, but shit it's fun to watch. The acting bites, the scenes are repetitive, and there are so many things wrong with it - but it's great fun to watch.
That's how I felt when reading TDVC. It was a bit cheap, but it was fun at the same time.
Well, The Da Vinci Code was cheap and nasty as you say. Some of it was enjoyable, but it did try to put itself across as being a lot cleverer than it really was and that annoys me about it.
Finished the Hobbit and found it a bit too neat an ending, though it is a childrens book as you say OJ and never pretends to be anything but. I quite enjoyed the simple tale.
I read about the first five chapters of the Da Vinci Code and stopped cos it wasn't really doing it for me. "Wooh, what's that? It looks like a secret message on the Mona Lisa in Prof. Whatshisface's spunk."
Or something like that.
Look! A bloke wearing a bit of rusty barbed wire round his leg. He must be the baddie!!! ;-)
Empire of the Sun is a very good book. Goes into much more depth than the film.
I agree on the LOTR books - big bag of tedious shite. I agree on the Da Vinci code, too (Decent plot, awful writing). And I agree with Mr. Motherfucker about Fear and Loathing (Great book, great adaptation).
I don't think I've ever agreed with three things in a row on a comments page before. Congratulations.