Ralph Bakshi, the animation maestro and eccentric genius, has never been shy about expressing his opinions on Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings movies. While many fans and critics rank Jackson's trilogy over Bakshi's 1978 animated feature, the latter director has consistently argued that Jackson's adaptation owes a creative debt to his own cinematic take on J.R.R. Tolkien's literary classic. Bakshi's motivation for taking over the project was to save it for Tolkien, as he deeply cared about the source material. This unique position granted him a strong opinion when Jackson's live-action interpretation came out.
Bakshi's beef with Jackson goes back to 2002, when he told The One Ring that he had yet to see Jackson's big-screen interpretation of The Fellowship of the Ring. When the interviewer pointed out that Jackson appeared to have borrowed some imagery directly from Bakshi's movie, the director replied, "No. Because there was never an acknowledgment of that. As a matter of fact, there was a complete denial of it for a long time. Jackson avoided mentioning me or my film, or the influence it had on him until he was forced to very late in the game."
Bakshi's ire didn't cool with time. In a 2006 interview with Frames Per Second Magazine, he was asked about Jackson's films once more. He started out hot, replying, "[My version] had more character, more soul, more heart. Less sneaker selling." From there, the gloves really came off. Bakshi critiqued the production design of Jackson's films, from big sets like Lothlórien right down to the weapons and clothing. He also brought the shot of the hobbits hiding under some roots from a sniffing Black Rider, which is nearly identical to the way his animated movie visualizes that moment.
Bakshi feels he set the table for Jackson's Rings adaptation, stating, "They took everything from me. The ring wraiths were taken from me. There was a lot! I mean, I designed the ring wraiths. [...] Look. I'm sitting here with a book called 'Lord of the Rings,' and no film to look at. Every f***ing thing you're looking at in 'Rings' I — the design, Gimli, Aragon, the dwarfs, the elves, all that stuff — I came up with, basically because there was nothing to look at. Peter Jackson looked at it and said, 'I like that, I don't like that, I can improve on that.' Who are you kidding?"
Despite their differences, the results of their adaptations are inarguable. As a viewer, there's no doubt that the result of their adaptations has left us with some of the most exciting and imaginative fantasy films in history. However, Bakshi's passion and frustration reveal a deeper question: How much should filmmakers acknowledge the influence of their predecessors? In my opinion, while Jackson's films are undoubtedly impressive, Bakshi's work deserves more recognition and respect. From my perspective, the fact that Jackson avoided mentioning Bakshi or acknowledging his influence until late in the game is a missed opportunity for both filmmakers and audiences to appreciate the depth and creativity of Bakshi's work.
