willow and LOTR

willow a rip-off of LOTR? your thoughts, please.

 

They're different stories...no.

 

yeah, they're different stories, but they contain a lot of the same elements:
a hobbit-type person going on a quest
against a dark lord-type and overwhelming odds to save the world, etc.

 

I think George Lucas was without a doubt inspired by the LotR books when he came up with the story for Willow...

 

Jeez is everything a rip-off of LOTR?
No Willow is actually a very different story than LOTR. Lucas might have hinted on it that he was inspired by the books which were the only LOTR at the time but almost all of the creatures, societys, and other elements of Willow are very original. Willow like Frodo? Is Frodo a wizard? Bavmorda like Sauron? Nah not really.

 

"Willow like Frodo? Is Frodo a wizard? Bavmorda like Sauron? Nah not really."

They don't have to be exactly alike for one to be more or less a rip off of the other. I love Willow and always will, but that doesn't keep me from admitting that it borrows heavily (almost too heavily) from Lord of the Rings.

Willow and Frodo are both small people forced to enter a large world that is mostly foreign to them. They are both unwitting heroes because they've been chosen (Elora chose Willow, the ring chose Frodo).

Madmartigan is essentially a hybrid of Aragorn, Legalos, and Gimli, particularly Aragorn.

Bavmorda isn't so much Sauron, but she's definitely a Saruman-type character. And Raziel is a Gandalf-type character. And no surprise, they have a duel (which actually is kind of similar to the battle between Gandalf and Saruman in Fellowship).

Cherlindrea may as well have been named Galadriel based on her purpose in the film (giving Willow guidance and a gift - the wand).

Now, maybe it's all one big coincidence, but when every major character in a film (and Willow was supposed to be a trilogy, but that might be a bit of a stretch) is that similar to the major characters of one of the most widely-read and renowned series of books of all time, it's hard to argue.

Amazing.

 

Wel most fantasy borrow or owes a lot to LOTR, but even LOTR was inspired by a lot of great and classic mythology.

Personally I don't see it much, I see more similarities with Star Wars: the dark fortress, the two small comical companions, Kael = Vader, Bavmorda = the emperor, Raziel = OB1, Madmartigan = Han Solo, etc.

Since Lucas used Campbell's Hero With a Thousand Faces which studies mythological themes which are the basis of LOTR it doesn't surprise me the similarities, either intentional or not.

Heck many movies are retellings or heavily inspired or adapted from previous movies and books. It's just a matter of tastes and styles if you consider it a rip-off or an homage with a different setting.

 

i really enjoyed willow

 

I don't know. In the early 80's, when George tried to buy the rights to LOTR and failed? perhaps this is why he said "fine, I'll make something better than LOTR".

And by the way, James Horner is a "hack". Listen to "Willow the Sorceror" cue and then try and get your hands on the opening movement of Schumann's "Renish" (5th) Symphony... for shame.

 

Well most modern fantasy is based or owes something to LOR so tryiong to say only Willow is bad is a low blow. But considering fantasy movies, Willow is a high point there aer only a few worth watching in modern times like Dragonslayer, Conan the Barbarian, Ladyhawke and a few other. Just remember all the sword and hack films from the 80s (though I admit a lot were lots of fun).

Anyway I love Horner though I do agree he borrows sometiems a bit too much from himself and others. But even John Williams was inspired by Gustav Holst's Mars (from The Planets, heck Zimmer borrowed heavily of it for Gladiator).

 

Up.

 

OK, thanks, I don't know why it wasn't in the search I did.

Anyway, yes, Willow is a straight off rip off of LOTR but a vastly inferior piece of work. I have no idea why Lucas made this other than the fact that he was trying to milk the Tolkien and fantasy fans for a few Dollars.

But here's the worst part: Has anyone seen this comparison of Willow and Star Wars?

In Star Wars we have Luke Skywalker who is the Main Character; a farmer in a remote area who is swept up in a quest to bring about the downfall of a Tyrannical Ruler.

In Willow we have Willow Ufgood who is the the Main Character; a farmer in a remote area who is swept up in a quest to bring about the downfall of a Tyrannical Ruler.


(2) In SW we have The Force which is a Mystical Power that the main character learns to master during his quest.

In Willow we have Magic which is Mystical Power that the main character learns to master during his quest.


(3) In SW we have The Emperor who is The Tyrannical Ruler, master of the Mystical Power; plans to enslave the universe.

In Willow we have Queen Bavmorda who is The Tyrannical Ruler, master of the Mystical Power; plans to enslave the universe.


(4) In SW we have Alderaan which is The Main Character's Initial Destination; a peace-loving kingdom where he will supposedly be safe. When he gets there, he finds out it has been destroyed by the Tyrannical Ruler.

In Willow we have Tir Asleen which is The Main Character's Initial Destination; a peace-loving kingdom where he will supposedly be safe. When he gets there, he finds out it has been destroyed by the Tyrannical Ruler.


(5) In SW we have Obi-Wan Kenobi, The Main Character's older peer who has experience with the Mystical Power; he lets the Main Character know that he too has potential to master the Mystical Power and sends him on his quest.

In Willow we have The High Aldwin, The Main Character's older peer who has experience with the Mystical Power; he lets the Main Character know that he too has potential to master the Mystical Power and sends him on his quest.


(6) In SW we have Han Solo, The Rogue-Hero; he starts out as a criminal who reluctantly follows the Main Character on his quest and ends up believing in the cause.

In Willow, we have Madmartigan, The Rogue-Hero; he starts out as a criminal who reluctantly follows the Main Character on his quest and ends up believing in the cause.


(7) In SW we have, Lando Calrissian, The Rogue-Hero's old friend; starts out actually betraying the Rogue-Hero, but eventually redeems himself by joining the quest.

In Willow we have Airk Thaughbaer, The Rogue-Hero's old friend; starts out actually betraying the Rogue-Hero, but eventually redeems himself by joining the quest.


(8) In SW we have Princess Leia, The Princess; daughter of Darth Vader, whom she ends up fighting against. She falls in love with the Rogue-Hero.

In Willow, we have Princess Sorsha, The Princess; daughter of the Tyrannical Ruler, whom she ends up fighting against. She falls in love with the Rogue-Hero.


(9) In SW we have, Yoda, The Main Character's Mentor; trains the hero in the mystical power; has a humble appearance that teaches "you can't judge a book by its cover."

In Willow, we have Fin Raziel, The Main Character's Mentor; trains the hero in the mystical power; has a humble appearance that teaches "you can't judge a book by its cover."


(10)In SW we have, C3P0 and R2D2, Bumbling sidekicks of the Main Character; their chemistry provides much comic relief.

In Willow, we have Franjean and Rool Bumbling sidekicks of the Main Character; their chemistry provides much comic relief.

(11) In SW we have, Darth Vader, wears a scary mask and is the Emporer's right-hand man.

In Willow, General Kael, wears a scary mask and is Queen Bavmorda's right-hand man.


Other parallels can be drawn as well.

Both Darth Vader and Sorsha start out second-in-command on the bad guys' team and end up working for the good guys.

Obi-Wan and Cherlindrea both serve as exposition

 

Well, if anyone has the right to rip off Star Wars, it's George Lucas.

 

Anyway, yes, Willow is a straight off rip off of LOTR but a vastly inferior piece of work. I have no idea why Lucas made this other than the fact that he was trying to milk the Tolkien and fantasy fans for a few Dollars.

Not a straight ripoff anyway. Lots (probably most) of fantasy is at least inspired by LOTR. But LOTR was also influenced by English, Celt and Nordic folkore anyway as well as mythic tales. I don't hear anyone accusing Tolkien though.

So by that logic all scifi movies are derived from War of the Worlds, Foundation, and The Stars My Destination?

Maybe Lucas made it because he is interested in the hero's mythic journey, as explained in Joseph Campbell's books (Hero with a Thousand Faces and The Power of Myth). And iot not like it was the first time as he was involved in other fantasies mainly Labyrinth. I think he expressed back then (might have been in Starlog) he wanted to do for fantasy what Star Wars did for scifi movies.

Many things are very close but that's part of the genre. Just like maybe aliens and spaceships in scifi movies. But there are some key differences as well. For one in Willow, the destruction of evil is being foretold and a chosen one will bring about it (though in this case with the help of Willow). LOTR provided no such assurances, no prophecy, and certainly how things end is more about some incredible coincidences and accidents (how the Ring comes about, etc.)

I wouldn't sweat it.

But here's the worst part: Has anyone seen this comparison of Willow and Star Wars?

Well I indicated some of similar points a few posts up, though maybe not as detailed as yours but just the general gist. As jp-30 said if anything Lucas is entitled to it. And there are probably a lot of examples out there from a lot other directors and movies.

You are right on most points but I don't see what the problem is and it doesn't bother me.

 

Not a straight ripoff anyway. Lots (probably most) of fantasy is at least inspired by LOTR. But LOTR was also influenced by English, Celt and Nordic folkore anyway as well as mythic tales. I don't hear anyone accusing Tolkien though.

thats because tolkien borrowed settings,
and lucas borrowed plotlines


BIG DIFFERENCE

 

They are two different storys but great movies.

 

Willow is LOTR Star Wars style.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if Willow did borrow from the LOTR books. Didn't Lucas borrow closely, sometimes shot for shot, from other movies for Star Wars?

It's been a while since I've seen Willow, but the analysis a few posts above about the Willow/Star Wars parallel is somewhat disheartening. If he really did recycle his own story, it seems like all he's good for is that one plotline.

 

> Didn't Lucas borrow closely, sometimes shot for shot, from other movies for Star Wars?

Well, WWII fighter plane footage was mimicked in some of the space battle shots to make them more 'realistic', but that's the extent of it as far as I'm aware.

 

thats because tolkien borrowed settings, and lucas borrowed plotlines

Even if it were totally true I hardly see it as a particular condemnation, as Hollywood in general is currently doing that a lot, with remakes and film versions (say Charlie's Angels, etc.).

Tolkien borrowed more than just settings. He worked on a translation of Beowulf and was very steep in celtic and nordic folklore. The Elvish language was heavily influenced on a nordic language (Norwegian?).

On the other hand Lucas diod borrow quitre a bit from Kurosawa's films and The Hero with a Thousand Faces. On the later one you can almost follow a bvery precise blueprint of how the original Trilogy and Willow develop.

But as the old cliche goes, there is nothing new in Hollywood, all has been done before. It doesn;pt matter if you copy of base on something previous, but how you prsent them again, how fresh they aer recombines or what twist to it you can contribute.

Willow might not have been the most original in either case but it still was a good accomplishment when Fanatsy in cinema was dying in the late 80s. Plus we are talking somewhat disjointly between two different mediums, and film in these case has always heavily borrowed from other places.

it seems like all he's good for is that one plotline.

And where would THX-1138, American Graffiti and the Indy movie would fit in that assesment ;-).

but that's the extent of it as far as I'm aware.

It's been a while since I've watched some of Kurosawa's films but there might be a few others. Maybe from Dark Fortress? Would be interesting to compare.

 

"But as the old cliche goes, there is nothing new in Hollywood, all has been done before. It doesn;pt matter if you copy of base on something previous, but how you prsent them again, how fresh they aer recombines or what twist to it you can contribute.

Willow might not have been the most original in either case but it still was a good accomplishment when Fanatsy in cinema was dying in the late 80s. Plus we are talking somewhat disjointly between two different mediums, and film in these case has always heavily borrowed from other places."
______________________________________________________

Agreed; it's part of the mythmaking process. In my opinion, the copyright has stunted the creation of myth for our culture. In ancient times, a myth was told over and over by different persons, but with the same characters and situations. I'll wager that the first few epics based on the fall of Troy were hack pieces waiting for Homer. In a somewhat more modern era, most of Shakespeare's plots were stolen from lesser writers. Now, characters are not permitted to be used, but situations--or mirrors of them--are used. Much of the resulting literature may be fourth-rate, and many of the resulting films may be seventh-rate, but they eventually lead to first-rate productions, as when the matinees led to 'Star Wars.' Originality is not the highest virtue in art; composition is.