![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Did the changes from book to screen bother you more or less (or the same) in TTT vs. FOTR? Any TTT changes that you found particularly distressing, or any that others are harping on that bother you not at all? Were there any parts of the movie that you thought made no sense if you hadn't read the books?
For the most part, I don't have a problem at all with the changes Jackson has made in moving from book to film. Most of the complaints that I've heard stem from the fact that the films are not "true" to the books. By "true," they mean that the films fail to precisely reproduce what is in the books. However much Jackson may stray from the books, he remains very true to the spirit of the texts, and that is what is most important to me, not some slavish reproduction of the book.
What the most severe fault-finders fail to take into account is that a film and a novel are two very different beasts. While readers may not object to having characters (some they know, many they are meeting for the first time) simply tell stories and talk for the lengthy Council of Elrond chapter, a film audience is not going to sit still for twenty minutes of tale telling. They aren't. They will be flinging popcorn at the screen faster than you can say "hairy little hobbit."
Perhaps the most bitter complaint I heard about Fellowship concerned the elimination of Tom Bombadil. I've endured debates about his thematic importance to the work because of the Ring's lack of power over him. The richness of meaning that is lost because of his absence. How the film becomes somehow diminished and more trivial. Yadda, yadda, yadda.
Now, I like Bombadil well enough and agree that he's a fine old fellow. But I cannot imagine, given the tone and texture of Fellowship, what would happen if Jackson dropped in a big guy in wacky, bright-colored clothes who trots about the countryside singing silly songs. I mourn the loss of Bombadil more because it also meant sacrificing the scene with the barrow-wights, which would have been shivery good fun, than for his absence.
Coupled with the Bombadil complaint is one leveled against the poor cave troll. I must confess I am a great fan of the cave troll and the
battle in Balin's tomb. I'm happy that more was added to it in the Expanded Version of the film-especially since it was an Aragorn/Boromir moment. Complaints leveled against the troll are that the battle is a bit of gratuitous violence that pandered exclusively to interests of Adolescent boys and wasted time that could have been spent...well, including important stuff. Like Bombadil. Please.
A close second to Bombadil-related moaning is the complaint about Arwen's expanded role. Glorfindel fanciers pout because their favorite Elf has been cut. Others complain that having Arwen stand up to the Nine at the Ford of Bruinen robs Frodo of the chance to make a stand against them and find the Pieta-esque image of her cradling Frodo on the river bank cheesy. On the lowest level, people say there was a reason Tolkien put the story of Arwen and Aragorn in the Appendices, and there it should stay.
I like Jackson's Arwen. Frankly, the image of her wandering alone after Aragorn's death is one of the things that always haunted me in the book. The terrible sacrifice that is the cost of her love has always interested me, and I'm happy that Jackson is exploring that in the film. I don't have a problem with her riding about with a sword either. In fact, I'd prefer that so seeing her sit prettily in the Hall of Fire and smile vacantly at her husband-to-be. Arwen doesn't come from a line of weak, passive women, and if she is to be anything other than a trophy bride she'd have to have more than beauty and grace to attract and hold Aragorn's attention and affection.
Since TTT departs more radically from the book than Fellowship, it provides a more attractive target to those looking to criticize the "faithfulness" of the film to its source.
Faramir's character seems to be drawing the most fire from irate fans. People wanted the "I would not pick [the Ring] up if I found it lying on the highway" fellow rather than a man who is tempted by the Ring. Book purists wail that Jackson has made him "just like Boromir" (as if that's a bad thing).
Frankly, I find the Faramir flack quite puzzling. These same people are not lamenting the fact that Boromir is more noble and Aragorn more angst-ridden than in the books. If it's simply a matter of "purity," then those adaptations should enrage every bit as much as the ones to Faramir.
I like Faramir in the books, especially in RotK, and the buzz that preceded the opening of the film concerned me. But after Fellowship, I trust Jackson. I trust he won't let me down. And he didn't.
I also like the edge Jackson has given Faramir in this film. And let's be honest here, without it--without his temptation, without his taking the hobbits to Osgiliath--Frodo and Sam's story arc reads something like this:
Hobbits walk through rocks, get lost, find guide of questionable repute. Hobbits get out of rocks. Hobbits walk through swamps. Hobbits meet Men and are questioned, given news of Boromir's death, fed, and then set loose. Hobbits walk some more. Hobbits walk up stairs and through tunnels.
Do you want to watch an hour of that? No. Didn't think so. With Shelob moved to RotK, Frodo and Sam need an obstacle to overcome. Faramir becomes that for them.
I've also read complaints about the fact that the Ents first decide not to go to war in the Entmoot scene. Again, Merry and Pippin need to do something in this film except get hauled about by orcs, run away, and hang out with the Ents. Their fight is to get the Ents to engage with the troubles of the world and take an active part in trying to resolve them.
Rather than the Faramir controversy, I expected there to be more rumblings about the very reduced role of Eomer in the movie. In the books, while Legolas and Gimli are bonding during the battle of Helms Deep, Aragorn and Eomer are as well. This change allows more focus on the relationship between the King of Rohan and the reluctant King of Gondor. In fact, Theoden actually speaks some of Eomer's lines from the book. I'm interested in seeing how this will be continued in RotK.
In TTT, I would have liked more of Faramir. The scenes that were cut (and will hopefully be restored on the Extended Version) would have gone a long way to establishing his motives and conflicts. People who hadn't read the books will not get the same thrill when Faramir is tempted and says, "Now is the chance for Faramir, Captain of Gondor, to show his quality." They won't know of the scenes between Denethor and Faramir that are waiting in RotK.
Oh, it is starting to annoy me that the bloody sword has not yet been reforged. I'd like to think that Aragorn will have it before he faces off with Sauron in the palantir.
The thing that distressed me most in Fellowship, the ruthless compression of the gifting scene in Lorien, was remedied in the Extended Version, and I expect the same will happen with TTT. In fact, in both films, the one thing that was most disappointing was how quickly they were over. I was ready for another hour of film when the credits started to roll, and that isn't something I'd be feeling if I were fidgeting over Faramir or Elves at Helm's Deep or the absence of Eomer.
For the most part, I don't have a problem at all with the changes Jackson has made in moving from book to film. Most of the complaints that I've heard stem from the fact that the films are not "true" to the books. By "true," they mean that the films fail to precisely reproduce what is in the books. However much Jackson may stray from the books, he remains very true to the spirit of the texts, and that is what is most important to me, not some slavish reproduction of the book.
What the most severe fault-finders fail to take into account is that a film and a novel are two very different beasts. While readers may not object to having characters (some they know, many they are meeting for the first time) simply tell stories and talk for the lengthy Council of Elrond chapter, a film audience is not going to sit still for twenty minutes of tale telling. They aren't. They will be flinging popcorn at the screen faster than you can say "hairy little hobbit."
Perhaps the most bitter complaint I heard about Fellowship concerned the elimination of Tom Bombadil. I've endured debates about his thematic importance to the work because of the Ring's lack of power over him. The richness of meaning that is lost because of his absence. How the film becomes somehow diminished and more trivial. Yadda, yadda, yadda.
Now, I like Bombadil well enough and agree that he's a fine old fellow. But I cannot imagine, given the tone and texture of Fellowship, what would happen if Jackson dropped in a big guy in wacky, bright-colored clothes who trots about the countryside singing silly songs. I mourn the loss of Bombadil more because it also meant sacrificing the scene with the barrow-wights, which would have been shivery good fun, than for his absence.
Coupled with the Bombadil complaint is one leveled against the poor cave troll. I must confess I am a great fan of the cave troll and the
battle in Balin's tomb. I'm happy that more was added to it in the Expanded Version of the film-especially since it was an Aragorn/Boromir moment. Complaints leveled against the troll are that the battle is a bit of gratuitous violence that pandered exclusively to interests of Adolescent boys and wasted time that could have been spent...well, including important stuff. Like Bombadil. Please.
A close second to Bombadil-related moaning is the complaint about Arwen's expanded role. Glorfindel fanciers pout because their favorite Elf has been cut. Others complain that having Arwen stand up to the Nine at the Ford of Bruinen robs Frodo of the chance to make a stand against them and find the Pieta-esque image of her cradling Frodo on the river bank cheesy. On the lowest level, people say there was a reason Tolkien put the story of Arwen and Aragorn in the Appendices, and there it should stay.
I like Jackson's Arwen. Frankly, the image of her wandering alone after Aragorn's death is one of the things that always haunted me in the book. The terrible sacrifice that is the cost of her love has always interested me, and I'm happy that Jackson is exploring that in the film. I don't have a problem with her riding about with a sword either. In fact, I'd prefer that so seeing her sit prettily in the Hall of Fire and smile vacantly at her husband-to-be. Arwen doesn't come from a line of weak, passive women, and if she is to be anything other than a trophy bride she'd have to have more than beauty and grace to attract and hold Aragorn's attention and affection.
Since TTT departs more radically from the book than Fellowship, it provides a more attractive target to those looking to criticize the "faithfulness" of the film to its source.
Faramir's character seems to be drawing the most fire from irate fans. People wanted the "I would not pick [the Ring] up if I found it lying on the highway" fellow rather than a man who is tempted by the Ring. Book purists wail that Jackson has made him "just like Boromir" (as if that's a bad thing).
Frankly, I find the Faramir flack quite puzzling. These same people are not lamenting the fact that Boromir is more noble and Aragorn more angst-ridden than in the books. If it's simply a matter of "purity," then those adaptations should enrage every bit as much as the ones to Faramir.
I like Faramir in the books, especially in RotK, and the buzz that preceded the opening of the film concerned me. But after Fellowship, I trust Jackson. I trust he won't let me down. And he didn't.
I also like the edge Jackson has given Faramir in this film. And let's be honest here, without it--without his temptation, without his taking the hobbits to Osgiliath--Frodo and Sam's story arc reads something like this:
Hobbits walk through rocks, get lost, find guide of questionable repute. Hobbits get out of rocks. Hobbits walk through swamps. Hobbits meet Men and are questioned, given news of Boromir's death, fed, and then set loose. Hobbits walk some more. Hobbits walk up stairs and through tunnels.
Do you want to watch an hour of that? No. Didn't think so. With Shelob moved to RotK, Frodo and Sam need an obstacle to overcome. Faramir becomes that for them.
I've also read complaints about the fact that the Ents first decide not to go to war in the Entmoot scene. Again, Merry and Pippin need to do something in this film except get hauled about by orcs, run away, and hang out with the Ents. Their fight is to get the Ents to engage with the troubles of the world and take an active part in trying to resolve them.
Rather than the Faramir controversy, I expected there to be more rumblings about the very reduced role of Eomer in the movie. In the books, while Legolas and Gimli are bonding during the battle of Helms Deep, Aragorn and Eomer are as well. This change allows more focus on the relationship between the King of Rohan and the reluctant King of Gondor. In fact, Theoden actually speaks some of Eomer's lines from the book. I'm interested in seeing how this will be continued in RotK.
In TTT, I would have liked more of Faramir. The scenes that were cut (and will hopefully be restored on the Extended Version) would have gone a long way to establishing his motives and conflicts. People who hadn't read the books will not get the same thrill when Faramir is tempted and says, "Now is the chance for Faramir, Captain of Gondor, to show his quality." They won't know of the scenes between Denethor and Faramir that are waiting in RotK.
Oh, it is starting to annoy me that the bloody sword has not yet been reforged. I'd like to think that Aragorn will have it before he faces off with Sauron in the palantir.
The thing that distressed me most in Fellowship, the ruthless compression of the gifting scene in Lorien, was remedied in the Extended Version, and I expect the same will happen with TTT. In fact, in both films, the one thing that was most disappointing was how quickly they were over. I was ready for another hour of film when the credits started to roll, and that isn't something I'd be feeling if I were fidgeting over Faramir or Elves at Helm's Deep or the absence of Eomer.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
no subject
That said, I hope the extended version DOES expand on Faramir a lot - we need to see that he loved his brother; we need to see that he has these issues about not being the one to go; we need to have a better understanding of him to make this all work. I did like him more the second time around, and he's growing on me, but right now, I'm afraid Jackson made Boromir so compelling that, that what we are meant to see as Denethor's unfair and misguided partiality for Boromir isn't really working for me - in the movies, Boromir is the charismatic AND humane brother and his death is a tragedy. It's funny - I just reread the books for the first time after seeing the movies, and the recollections that everyone has about Boromir in The Two Towers and The Return of the King seem to fit the movie version of him better than the book version.
Anyway, seriously, the only things that bothered me in the movie on a second viewing were the mysterious lack of any vats of boiling pitch/oil, etc. to drop on Orcs (or even big rocks) and the fact that all those horsemen were able to charge down a 45 degree slope into a bunch of guys holding spears. (I've obviously been watching way too much "Sharpe" because all I could think was "form a square, you stupid orcs".)
Um, and hello! I think this might be the first time I've commented in your LJ - sorry it's so gargantuan!
From:
no subject
*ROTFL* Yep, that went through my mind too. Too, too much Sharpe. Same bloody thing happened while watching The Four Feathers -- wanted to scream at the dying British line, "Form square, you wankers!" Hmm... I appear to be channelling the British today. Dear me.
From:
Re:
From:
no subject
It was, well, it was pretty costumes and pretty men. That's about it. The plot was predictable but watchable, although the female love interest set my teeth on edge. Oh, and while I'm no military strategist or anything (just attracted to period pieces), the troop movements/fighting were flawed at best.
That's where the whole "Form square, you wankers!" comes in. Putting aside the fact that most of the soldiers' clothes never got dirty, torn, or even wrinkled, there was one scene that summed up the whole problem. Cavalry comes sweeping towards the British, shooting wildly from their horses (and hitting their marks entirely too much during all that bouncing up and down), the whole bunch forms square just like they're supposed to, bayonets fixed and presented, the officers give the order for the lines to fire, and instead of having the cavalry break uselessly on the square and sweep away down the sides, the troops suddenly break ranks for no good reason and run out into the midst of the horses.
Yeah. Good move. Talk about fabulous discipline. Much killing, which results in a shift in the plotline, but that's about it.
Was very disappointed with the whole white feathers thing, too, as they were barely mentioned, and then only when convenient. Pfft.
But still, Heath Ledger and Wes Bentley in British officers' uniforms makes it a rental. ^_~
I'm a total sucker for any kind of costume film
Yep. I'm with you there. Have a serious case of costume-envy every time I go to LotR. Eeep. Want those women's closets, and some of the men too. (Mostly the noblemen - Boromir, Faramir, Theoden, anyone with those amazing wine-coloured tunics with the fabulous gold embroidered collars...)
Loved "Elizabeth," haven't seen "Queen Margot."
From:
no subject
The lack of oil and really big rocks didn't bother me at all. It seemed that they were unprepared in terms of provisioning, etc. for this attack, and the fact that they didn't have eveything they might need wasn't so troubling.
The spears, though. Yeah. I would have liked to have seen either a few horses impaled or the orcs drop or raise them slightly in the sunlight in order to give the riders more of a chance to charge in unscathed.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
How many days until December 17th?
From:
no subject
That is all.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
*G* Makes sense to me!
Also expect it explains shared Sons of Gondor love. ^_^
From:
no subject
::reads comments:: Mmm hmmm. Like they said.
From:
no subject
Seriously, I had this argument about Faramir with the husband. I *like* movie!Faramir. A lot. Book!Faramir is so boring, so noble, so devoid of inner conflict that I really have no clue what a valiant shieldmaiden, such as Eowyn, sees in him. I could totally see her falling for movie!Faramir. When you *choose* to do the right thing and overcome your baser instincts, *then* you become interesting and real.
And hell yeah with the Eomer. *notthati'mbiasednotthati'mbiased* From a cinematic standpoint, oh, yes, lovelylovely shot of Eomer riding up behind Gandalf and the Rohirrim charging down the mountain, and Theoden's look of surprised joy and the way he breathed "Eomer"...guh! Truly beautiful.
That being said, I feel that Pete really lost something in not having more Eomer/Aragorn interaction. It's because of Eomer that Aragorn finally starts to embrace his destiny. (Okay, and I'm really torqued that Eomer wasn't at Helm's Deep, but it's something I'll learn to live with, it's why I have the books). Hopefully we see more of their deep friendship in ROTK.
In short, um, yeah. What you said. *grins*
From:
no subject
I had something about that shot in the post. It is a wonderful moment of high drama.
I'm thinking that there has to be more Aragorn/Eomer when they meet on the plains in the Extended Version. That whole scene was so quick. Rushed. Aragorn is firm with Theoden in Edoras about Eomer being loyal and returning. Those seem heavy judgments to rest on that little meeting we saw.
Without Eomer in Edoras and Helms Deep to interact with Aragorn, the significance of Aragorn's relationship with Boromir is heightened in terms of his embracing his destiny. It all comes back to the sons of Gondor love. ^_^
From:
Re:
*grins*