PJs' Movie bits which enhanced the text.

What do you think of Tolkien on the silver screen...? Whether Bakshi, Jackson, or whoever else, come on in and discuss your reflections, opinions, and memories...

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby Ettinblue » Fri Mar 22, 2013 8:24 am

Hmm, I never really thought of that. How is plate armor an anachronism? Bilbo has a working clock, which seems more like an anachronism than anything else I can think of, if one's comparing Middle Earth to Medieval Europe.
Ettinblue
Citizen of Imladris
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 12:43 pm
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby solicitr » Fri Mar 22, 2013 11:06 am

Well, on Tolkien's terms, Gondor's troops wore mail, and in fact most of Rohan's mail was imported from Gondor. The Dwarves also, the greatest of craftsmen, nonetheless wore mail. (It's also the case that M-E is a pre-gunpowder world, and thus its military technology on a par with Europe ca. 1300).

The Shire is, yes, very much an anachronism in many respects, a calque of rural England ca. 1700 or so.
User avatar
solicitr
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 1388
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 8:45 am
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby Gungnir » Fri Mar 22, 2013 2:28 pm

There most definitely was plate armour in use by the soldiery of Gondor. Tolkien stated that Imrahil of Dol Amroth held his "bright burnished vambrace" in front of Eowyn's mouth to detect her breath.

I once had this discussion with Michael Martinez, the self-appointed Tolkien scholar, who maintained that this vambrace must have been made of leather because there was no plate armour in Middle-Earth. Classic circular logic. However the word 'burnished' means 'polished by abrasion'. Tolkien was very picky about the words he used and would definitely known what 'burnished' means. Polishing leather by abrasion doesn't make it bright, it makes it suede. Therefore we have textual evidence for metal plate armour in Gondor.
User avatar
Gungnir
Mariner

 
Posts: 6137
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2000 7:05 am
Location: Isle of Man
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby solicitr » Fri Mar 22, 2013 7:33 pm

There's nothing inconsistent with wearing elements of plate with an overall chain harness; perhaps best-known are the greaves Roman centurions wore, though they wore the same mail lorica as the rankers, and of course Franks/Goths/Vikings frequently wore iron or bronze bracers. Some sort of forearm protection is a pretty obvious desire when you're wearing a sleeveless or short-sleeved byrnie. By the start of the Hundred Years' war couters and poleynes were common as addenda to hauberks and chausses, but knights and men-at-arms were still effectively mail-clad, not wearing 'white harness.'

At any rate, my problem with the armor of Gondor is not the stylistic misfit, which I admit is probably a function of taste as much as 'historical' nitpicking, but the fact it was so very obviously plastic. (However, I did like the wing-engraved barbutes).


----------------------

Trying to disabuse MM of any of his many shibboleths is an exercise in maddening futility. >-O
User avatar
solicitr
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 1388
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 8:45 am
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby Siberian » Wed Dec 04, 2013 6:38 pm

Like others, I think Boromir is more likable.
Seeing Theodred's funeral added some depth to Theoden's character.
Some parts of Moria (although it wasn't scary/creepy enough)
Shire, obviously, plus a few other locations.
Heck, expanding Arwen's part wasn't a bad idea, I just wish it was done differently.
Soundtrack matched the books rather well.
Siberian
Citizen of Imladris
 
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 6:02 am
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby Gadget2 » Thu Dec 05, 2013 10:45 am

As one who was highly critical of the movies, I think I'll chip in and contribute some things in the spirit of the occasion. First late me say that I can honestly say that there is really nothing from PJ's movies that really affect my reading of the book, or really 'enhance' or 'better' it. The book and the movie are on entirely different planes. While I don't think any of the adaptation changes 'improved upon' the book, so to speak, I do think some his choices were smart adaptive decisions that made a better movie.

For instance, I too liked Grima (other than the batman & robin-esque scene where A, L&G beat up his henchmen), especially his scene with Miranda Otto's Eowyn. He may have been a little to overtly creepy, but frankly that is what always oozed out the pages of the book when I read it, and it works well in the movie context. I enjoyed the moth & eagle bit with Gandalf, after initially not liking it much. That was a nice bit of adaptation and excising Radagast (though, unfortunately it becomes overused and redundant in AUJ). I enjoyed the charge of the Rohirrim at Pelenor, and the lighting of the beacons (even if the set up was a little silly). I liked many of the sets. I kind of liked the non-canonical image of Saruman on top of Orthanc summoning the storm on Caradras. Much of the Shire was quite nice. The Balrog confrontation was epic, along with the image of Gandalf & the Balrog plunging into the subterranean lake. Other changes, like a more sympathetic Boromir, I can understand why they did it and how it works well in the movie, but I feel undermines some of the themes of the story as well. There was a reason Boromir was the first to succumb to the Ring.
User avatar
Gadget2
Shield Bearer

 
Posts: 375
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 8:47 pm
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby solicitr » Fri Dec 06, 2013 8:04 am

Well, Brad Dourif's Grima was an outstanding entry in the Really Creepy Bad Guy sweepstakes- but I don't think it's right for the story to have Grima, on first appearance, outright shout Really Creepy Bad Guy! He's EEEEEVIL! Don't Trust Him At All!

Grima after all was a trusted counselor, who wormed his way into Theoden's confidence before his brain went soft. In fact the whole Rohan business to my mind works better if Wormtongue's advice seems on the surface to be reasonable and wise, and it has to be credible that so many people from the King on down would believe him. Think "The Governor" in The Walking Dead.
User avatar
solicitr
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 1388
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 8:45 am
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby pat457 » Sat Jan 04, 2014 9:10 pm

FrodoTook wrote:For those who have read LOTR and seen PJs' movie adaptation of LOTR...

Regardless of what you experienced first...

What of text LOTR do you now enjoy even more because of PJs' LOTR movies?

What did you experience in PJs' LOTR movies which further enhanced your joy of text LOTR?

More or less, after seeing the movie, now...when you read the text..do you find yourself thinking of the enhancement / adaptation in a good way?


This for now (I'll think of more later).

I'll admit that I really like how PJ handled an aspect of Théoden's character - minus the exorcism sequence - in The Two Towers, which to be fair I thought was overall the weakest of the trilogy (particularly the theatrical version). In the book at least, it seems to me that Théoden trusts Gandalf too easily and quickly after Wormtongue is gone. :wink: Although that kinda prompts the question of whether book Théoden just happened to be a gullible person who believes people all too soon (which might account for Saruman via Grima being able to manipulate him). I also agree about Boromir.
User avatar
pat457
Shield Bearer

 
Posts: 373
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 4:25 pm
Location: Japan
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby Frodome » Thu May 29, 2014 7:04 pm

Though, I hardly find anything that is better in the movie than the books. I think I'd go with Sam's speech at the end of The Two Towers. It was the proof of his growing wisdom and his journey from coming out of his name- Samwise.
User avatar
Frodome
Shield Bearer
 
Posts: 134
Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2013 8:36 am
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby BerenVonRictoffen » Sun Jun 22, 2014 7:39 pm

FrodoTook wrote:
I found Boromir much more interesting in the movie. I felt I "knew" him..more than I did from the text. I better "understood" him. I felt more compassion for him and felt sad when he died. Much more sad than I felt when reading the text.


Then I have to say, I think you didn't understand the text. Boromir, being of the blood of the "lesser men," represented a standard view of martial law, i.e. that it should be enacted at need, and that good intentions would prevent corruption. Meanwhile Faramir, like Gandalf, realized martial law could only lead to the very dictatorship that it was intended to prevent; or as Tolkien said about Hitler, "you can't defeat the enemy with his own Ring"; and this was also explained in the book, with Elrond saying that whoever used the Ring would become just like Sauron.
The movie likewise failed to convey the problem with Boromir's plan to use the Ring against Sauron; the answer is vague and confused, with the Council saying that only Sauron can use it, but Gandalf refusing to take the Ring because it's evil etc. This is because Boromir's plan made perfect sense when viewed from a standard view, and it was over Jackson's head to understand Tolkien's objection to it.
BerenVonRictoffen
Shield Bearer

 
Posts: 181
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 2:40 pm
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby siddharth » Sun Jun 22, 2014 8:26 pm

BerenVonRictoffen wrote:
FrodoTook wrote:
I found Boromir much more interesting in the movie. I felt I "knew" him..more than I did from the text. I better "understood" him. I felt more compassion for him and felt sad when he died. Much more sad than I felt when reading the text.


Then I have to say, I think you didn't understand the text.


Why is disagree = not understanding the text? And FT of all people! :lol:
And of course the "not equating to my understanding of Tolkien, so Jackson simply didn't get it" argument.

Anyway, It's upto the individual if they think the movie representation was better than the book. And even for a majority of Tolkien-fans that I have come across, film-Boromir was a much complex and interesting character than the book one, largely thanks to Sean Bean.
User avatar
siddharth
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4148
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 10:13 am
Location: ===Always changing===
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby BerenVonRictoffen » Sat Jun 28, 2014 5:55 pm

siddharth wrote:
BerenVonRictoffen wrote:
FrodoTook wrote:
I found Boromir much more interesting in the movie. I felt I "knew" him..more than I did from the text. I better "understood" him. I felt more compassion for him and felt sad when he died. Much more sad than I felt when reading the text.


Then I have to say, I think you didn't understand the text.


Why is disagree = not understanding the text? And FT of all people! :lol:
And of course the "not equating to my understanding of Tolkien, so Jackson simply didn't get it" argument.

Anyway, It's upto the individual if they think the movie representation was better than the book. And even for a majority of Tolkien-fans that I have come across, film-Boromir was a much complex and interesting character than the book one, largely thanks to Sean Bean.


So when Frodo tells Boromir "you are not yourself," he wasn't kidding!
Everyone has the right to their own opinions, but not their own facts; and Tolkien was engaged in definite symbolic themes which Jackson didn't understand... starting with not reading the book. For example, book-Faramir relates to Frodo how Boromir always wanted Denethor to take up the kingship of Gondor, but Denethor refused out of duty and honor of Gondor's greatness; as Book-Faramir tells Frodo:

You spoke with skill in a hard place, and wisely, it seemed to me. But I learned or guessed more from you than your words said. You were not friendly with Boromir, or you did not part in friendship. You, and Master Samwise, too, I guess have some grievance. Now I loved him dearly, and would gladly avenge his death, yet I knew him well. Isildur’s Bane – I would hazard that Isildur’s Bane lay between you and was a cause of contention in your Company. Clearly it is a mighty heirloom of some sort, and such things do not breed peace among confederates, not if aught may be learned from ancient tales. Do I not hit near the mark?’
‘Near,’ said Frodo, ‘but not in the gold. There was no contention in our Company, though there was doubt: doubt which way we should take from the Emyn Muil. But be that as it may, ancient tales teach us also the peril of rash words concerning such things as – heirlooms.’
‘Ah, then it is as I thought: your trouble was with Boromir alone. He wished this thing brought to Minas Tirith."
Frodo thought for a moment, fearing some further trap, and wondering how this debate would turn in the end. He had hardly saved the Ring from the proud grasp of Boromir, and how he would fare now among so many men, warlike and strong, he did not know. Yet he felt in his heart that Faramir, though he was much like his brother in looks, was a man less self-regarding, both sterner and wiser.

But in the film, we see if anything, the reverse.
Finally, the movie-Council of Elrond never explained the danger of using the Ring, i.e. that whoever used it would simply take Sauron's place as the new Dark Lord; and thus Boromir's desire for it is both confusing (since he can't use it, "it is Sauron's Ring and answers to him alone), and understandable (since the danger is never explained).
So it's clear that Jackson simply didn't understand the story or the characters in it... or didn't care.
BerenVonRictoffen
Shield Bearer

 
Posts: 181
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 2:40 pm
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby Gungnir » Sun Jun 29, 2014 1:40 am

solicitr wrote:[...] and especially the designers taking the description of the Great Pier being "like a ship's prow" far too literally.


Is this the first time a purist has criticised PJ for sticking too closely to the book?*


solicitr wrote:I also disliked the plate armor, which not only was an anachronism, if one can use that term for Middle-earth


There were at least some elements of plate armour in use in Gondor - Imrahil had a 'bright burnished vambrace'. It has to be metal. Burnishing means to polish by abrasion. Try that on leather and you get suede.

*Answer - No
User avatar
Gungnir
Mariner

 
Posts: 6137
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2000 7:05 am
Location: Isle of Man
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby BerenVonRictoffen » Mon Jun 30, 2014 2:49 pm

solicitr wrote:The Shire is, yes, very much an anachronism in many respects, a calque of rural England ca. 1700 or so.


But the Shire was a part of Fornost, which was a kingdom of Numenoreans, and so they likely shared some of their crafts with the hobbits. This is why I thought the Shire looked far too primitive and rustic in Jackson's film, (with cows and pigs actually roaming on Bag End, no central village, butcher-shop or post-office etc), rather than a well-ordered 18th-century county; even the simple notion of Bilbo having a wind-up clock on his mantle, for example, indicates 18th-century technology. Bag End itself likewise was shown as a rather small and primitive dwelling, when Tolkien's work clearly shows it to be a tunnel about 12 feet in diameter (and height), and great length, with many, many various rooms off to either side.
Of all the film, only Bree and Rivendell seemed the most accurate to the book's "anachronisms," while Isengard and Minas Tirith also looked far too small and primitive.
BerenVonRictoffen
Shield Bearer

 
Posts: 181
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 2:40 pm
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby Diamond of Long Cleeve » Fri Jul 11, 2014 2:31 am

BerenVonRictoffen wrote:But the Shire was a part of Fornost, which was a kingdom of Numenoreans, and so they likely shared some of their crafts with the hobbits. This is why I thought the Shire looked far too primitive and rustic in Jackson's film, (with cows and pigs actually roaming on Bag End, no central village, butcher-shop or post-office etc), rather than a well-ordered 18th-century county; even the simple notion of Bilbo having a wind-up clock on his mantle, for example, indicates 18th-century technology.


I'd say that Tolkien's wonderfully anachronistic Shire was around mid-19th century in its portrayal and habits. Frodo, Merry, Pippin and Sam would not be out of place in the 1870s, or even later. Their dialogue is at least early 20th century in its character.

And cows and pigs did roam through rustic villages in the late 1800s! OK, they would be shepherded, but this is hardly unusual or out of place. To say that the movie Shire is 'too rustic' is ... a little astonishing.

Bag End itself likewise was shown as a rather small and primitive dwelling, when Tolkien's work clearly shows it to be a tunnel about 12 feet in diameter (and height), and great length, with many, many various rooms off to either side.


You seem to have watched a different film from me. ;) Movie Bag End is gorgeously elegant, <3 . Why would it be necessary to show many other rooms? All PJ had to do was to show Bag End as a plush hobbit-hole, befitting the Baggineses, who are obviously quite posh. Job done!

Of all the film, only Bree and Rivendell seemed the most accurate to the book's "anachronisms," while Isengard and Minas Tirith also looked far too small and primitive.


I thought Isengard and Minas Tirith were nigh-near perfect! Bree's architecture was ... odd, in a way I can't quite explain. Movie Rivendell was beautiful ... especially the waterfalls.
User avatar
Diamond of Long Cleeve
Mariner

 
Posts: 6643
Joined: Mon May 08, 2000 12:00 am
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby Shadowman82 » Fri Jul 11, 2014 2:21 pm

For the most part I loved how PJ made the various locations look .
Shadowman82
Citizen of Imladris

 
Posts: 98
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2014 12:32 pm
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby BerenVonRictoffen » Sun Jul 13, 2014 12:03 am

Diamond of Long Cleeve wrote:
BerenVonRictoffen wrote:But the Shire was a part of Fornost, which was a kingdom of Numenoreans, and so they likely shared some of their crafts with the hobbits. This is why I thought the Shire looked far too primitive and rustic in Jackson's film, (with cows and pigs actually roaming on Bag End, no central village, butcher-shop or post-office etc), rather than a well-ordered 18th-century county; even the simple notion of Bilbo having a wind-up clock on his mantle, for example, indicates 18th-century technology.


I'd say that Tolkien's wonderfully anachronistic Shire was around mid-19th century in its portrayal and habits. Frodo, Merry, Pippin and Sam would not be out of place in the 1870s, or even later. Their dialogue is at least early 20th century in its character.

Yes, and Jackson messed it up completely.

And cows and pigs did roam through rustic villages in the late 1800s! OK, they would be shepherded, but this is hardly unusual or out of place. To say that the movie Shire is 'too rustic' is ... a little astonishing.

Except that Hobbiton was not a "rustic village," but a busy metropolis of closely-packed homes, streets and businesses, at the center of the Shire's rustic villages.

Bag End itself likewise was shown as a rather small and primitive dwelling, when Tolkien's work clearly shows it to be a tunnel about 12 feet in diameter (and height), and great length, with many, many various rooms off to either side.


You seem to have watched a different film from me. ;) Movie Bag End is gorgeously elegant, <3 . Why would it be necessary to show many other rooms? All PJ had to do was to show Bag End as a plush hobbit-hole, befitting the Baggineses, who are obviously quite posh. Job done!

Yes, like a bird does a job on a windshield. I didn't see a 12' ceiling, but just a few little tunnels and a cramped kitchen with Gandalf bumping his head on the roof to show how cramped it was (D'OH!).

Of all the film, only Bree and Rivendell seemed the most accurate to the book's "anachronisms," while Isengard and Minas Tirith also looked far too small and primitive.


Bree and Rivendell were adequate, but I thought Isengard and Minas Tirith were nigh-near perfect! Bree's architecture was ... odd, in a way I can't quite explain. Movie Rivendell was beautiful ... especially the waterfalls.[/quote]
YMinas Tirith looked like a dump, not the beautiful city described in LotR:
"Even as Pippin gazed in wonder the walls passed from looming grey to white, blushing faintly in the dawn; and suddenly the sun climbed over the eastern shadow and sent forth a shaft that smote the face of the City. Then Pippin cried aloud, for the Tower of Ecthelion, standing high within the topmost wall, shone out against the sky, glimmering like a spike of pearl and silver, tall and fair and shapely, and its pinnacle glittered as if it were wrought of crystals; and white banners broke and fluttered from the battlements in the morning breeze, and high and far he heard a clear ringing as of silver trumpets. Pippin gazed in growing wonder at the great stone city, vaster and more splendid than anything that he had dreamed of; greater and stronger than Isengard, and far more beautiful."

In Jackson's film: "It's only a model."
BerenVonRictoffen
Shield Bearer

 
Posts: 181
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 2:40 pm
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby Diamond of Long Cleeve » Mon Jul 14, 2014 2:26 am

BerenVonRictoffen wrote:Except that Hobbiton was not a "rustic village," but a busy metropolis of closely-packed homes, streets and businesses, at the center of the Shire's rustic villages.


I've been reading LotR for 30 years and with all due respect, this seems a rather idionsyncratic interpretation of Hobbiton from the text. 'Closely packed homes' suggests an English city after the Industrial Revolution, not the rural, insular community that Tolkien deliberately creates. What businesses in Hobbiton are described in canon, apart from the Sandymans' mill? :? And the rural postal service? Tolkien says explicitly in the Prologue that Hobbits "do not and did not understand or like machines more complicated than a forge-bellows, a water-mill, or a hand-loom, though they were skilful with tools." He also says that they "love peace and quiet and good tilled earth: a well-ordered and well-farmed countryside was their favourite haunt." If you've seen Tolkien's beautiful watercolour illustration of Hobbiton from the late 1930s (and you probably have), what he depicts is a quiet little hamlet, not 'a busy metropolis'.

I didn't see a 12' ceiling, but just a few little tunnels and a cramped kitchen with Gandalf bumping his head on the roof to show how cramped it was (D'OH!).


Gandalf is a Big Person. :lol: Bag End would be cramped, maybe, for a Big Person. Certainly not cramped for a hobbit! Or two hobbits.

Minas Tirith looked like a dump, not the beautiful city described in LotR.


We'll have to agree to disagree. The Minas Tirith scenes are beautiful, and I certainly didn't think Movie Minas Tirith was a 'dump'.
User avatar
Diamond of Long Cleeve
Mariner

 
Posts: 6643
Joined: Mon May 08, 2000 12:00 am
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby siddharth » Mon Jul 14, 2014 3:44 am

BerenVonRictoffen wrote:Except that Hobbiton was not a "rustic village," but a busy metropolis of closely-packed homes, streets
and businesses, at the center of the Shire's rustic villages.
[/quote]

Well that's something Alan Lee, Baynes, Fairchild, Giancola, Jenny Dolfen, Hickman, Guo and Tolkien himself all missed out on.
Astonishing!
User avatar
siddharth
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4148
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 10:13 am
Location: ===Always changing===
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby BerenVonRictoffen » Thu Jul 17, 2014 3:09 pm

Diamond of Long Cleeve wrote:
BerenVonRictoffen wrote:Except that Hobbiton was not a "rustic village," but a busy metropolis of closely-packed homes, streets and businesses, at the center of the Shire's rustic villages.


I've been reading LotR for 30 years and with all due respect, this seems a rather idionsyncratic interpretation of Hobbiton from the text. 'Closely packed homes' suggests an English city after the Industrial Revolution, not the rural, insular community that Tolkien deliberately creates. What businesses in Hobbiton are described in canon, apart from the Sandymans' mill? :? And the rural postal service? Tolkien says explicitly in the Prologue that Hobbits "do not and did not understand or like machines more complicated than a forge-bellows, a water-mill, or a hand-loom, though they were skilful with tools." He also says that they "love peace and quiet and good tilled earth: a well-ordered and well-farmed countryside was their favourite haunt." If you've seen Tolkien's beautiful watercolour illustration of Hobbiton from the late 1930s (and you probably have), what he depicts is a quiet little hamlet, not 'a busy metropolis'.

That's The Hill, not Hobbiton. And the farms are in the farthings outside of Hobbiton.
Consider the text:
The next day more carts rolled up the Hill, and still more carts. There might have been some grumbling about ‘dealing locally’, but that very week orders began to pour out of Bag End for every kind of provision, commodity, or luxury that could be obtained in Hobbiton or Bywater or anywhere in the neighbourhood. People became enthusiastic; and they began to tick off the days on the calendar; and they watched eagerly for the postman, hoping for invitations.
Before long the invitations began pouring out, and the Hobbiton post-office was blocked, and the Bywater post-office was snowed under, and voluntary assistant postmen were called for.
The tents began to go up. There was a specially large pavilion, so big that the tree that grew in the field was right inside it, and stood proudly near one end, at the head of the chief table. Lanterns were hung on all its branches. More promising still (to the hobbits’ mind): an enormous open-air kitchen was erected in the north corner of the field. A draught of cooks, from every inn and eating-house for miles around, arrived to supplement the dwarves and other odd folk that were quartered at Bag End.

Doesn't sound like much of a quaint rural "hamlet," particularly if he could order a tent big enough for 144 hobbits. More like a VERY busy place.

I didn't see a 12' ceiling, but just a few little tunnels and a cramped kitchen with Gandalf bumping his head on the roof to show how cramped it was (D'OH!).


Gandalf is a Big Person. :lol: Bag End would be cramped, maybe, for a Big Person. Certainly not cramped for a hobbit! Or two hobbits.


Not even for a dozen hobbits, as Sam later proved. Bag End was huge. And Gandalf was not 12' tall... or even six. Bag End was a hobbit-mansion, it would have high ceilings even on the side-rooms.

Minas Tirith looked like a dump, not the beautiful city described in LotR.


We'll have to agree to disagree. The Minas Tirith scenes are beautiful, and I certainly didn't think Movie Minas Tirith was a 'dump'.

It wasn't like Tolkien described it, not by a longshot.
BerenVonRictoffen
Shield Bearer

 
Posts: 181
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 2:40 pm
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby Diamond of Long Cleeve » Fri Jul 18, 2014 4:21 am

BerenVonRictoffen wrote:Consider the text:
The next day more carts rolled up the Hill, and still more carts. There might have been some grumbling about ‘dealing locally’, but that very week orders began to pour out of Bag End for every kind of provision, commodity, or luxury that could be obtained in Hobbiton or Bywater or anywhere in the neighbourhood.


But this doesn't really indicate that Hobbiton was the busy metropolis you seem (strangely) determined to prove that it was ... all this shows is that Bilbo's party orders deplete local supplies for miles around. Hobbiton seems to be a marginally larger and busier place than Bywater, but in fact there's nothing in the text about its actual size, and no mention at all of any businesses. And we know that people come from all over the Shire to the Bagginses' party.

This is starting to be a somewhat baffling conversation. :) Bottom line, I think that the films' depiction of the Shire as a rural idyll is consistent with canon.

I also think that if any town in the Shire qualifies to be its 'capital', then Michel Delving is the prime contender, since it has the Town Hole. And a mathom-house.

Doesn't sound like much of a quaint rural "hamlet," particularly if he could order a tent big enough for 144 hobbits. More like a VERY busy place.


Plenty of quaint rural venues in England can host big party marquees. Just saying. Saw one in North Devon last summer!

It wasn't like Tolkien described it, not by a longshot.


'Not by a long shot'? The white walls, the seven circles of the city, the Tower of Ecthelion, the White Tree of Gondor, the Houses of Healing ... they're all there in the film. You're entitled to your opinion, of course :) but since these details in the film are all canonically correct, I don't understand the criticism. Each to their own.
User avatar
Diamond of Long Cleeve
Mariner

 
Posts: 6643
Joined: Mon May 08, 2000 12:00 am
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby siddharth » Fri Jul 18, 2014 4:55 am

BerenVonRictoffen wrote:Consider the text:
The next day more carts rolled up the Hill, and still more carts. There might have been some grumbling about ‘dealing locally’, but that very week orders began to pour out of Bag End for every kind of provision, commodity, or luxury that could be obtained in Hobbiton or Bywater or anywhere in the neighbourhood.


Hmm, I always thought the traffic was all due to Bilbo's party.

Di wrote:I also think that if any town in the Shire qualifies to be its 'capital', then Michel Delving is the prime contender, since it has the Town Hole. And a mathom-house.


Is a capital never mentioned for The Shire? I always presumed Michel Delving was the center, especially since IIRC the Mayor lived there. (I could be wrong there)

Doesn't sound like much of a quaint rural "hamlet," particularly if he could order a tent big enough for 144 hobbits. More like a VERY busy place.


Although I am not in England but atleast here, I know that village-gatherings often can be as big as 300-400, especially when people from neighboring villages are coming.
Last edited by siddharth on Fri Jul 18, 2014 5:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
siddharth
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4148
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 10:13 am
Location: ===Always changing===
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby siddharth » Fri Jul 18, 2014 5:06 am

It wasn't like Tolkien described it, not by a longshot.


Oh please.

tolkiengateway wrote:Minas Tirith was surrounded by the Rammas Echor, a large ringwall encircling the city and the Pelennor Fields
...
The city itself lay on a hill beneath Mount Mindolluin, which rose above the city's citadel, by a length of a couple of thousand feet.

The city was divided into seven one-hundred-foot high levels, each surrounded by white walls, except the first walls which had the same kind of black stone as Orthanc as a face. The gates connecting the levels did not lay behind one another in a line, but faced in different directions.
A spur of rock, whose summit was level with the city's uppermost tier, jutted out from the front of the city in an easterly direction, dividing all but the first level into two. The spur of rock has been described as being in the shape of the bow of the ship, an obvious reference to how man first colonized the area. Each level was scattered with many alleys, narrow passageways, marketplaces, family shops and stores, and public living buildings, such as apartments and full-fledged houses (which were probably quite rare in the city). On the sixth level were located the Houses of Healing, surrounded by pleasant gardens. Finally, within the seventh wall, was the Citadel of Minas Tirith, with the White Tower of Ecthelion - three hundred feet high, so that its apex was one thousand feet above the plain, the Fountain, the leafless White Tree, and Merethrond. Upon the saddle between the city and Mindolluin were the Houses of the Dead - a tomb for the Kings of Gondor and their Stewards.


Here are some images from the movie:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e ... Tirith.jpg

http://www.councilofelrond.com/wp-conte ... stirit.jpg

http://www.google.co.in/imgres?imgurl=h ... 55&ndsp=15

http://images2.fanpop.com/image/photos/ ... 60-404.jpg

http://dungeonblarg.files.wordpress.com ... rith_2.jpg


The ONLY two differences that I can think of is that the first wall is not made of black stone and that the fortress in the movie has a more narrow and smaller base than in the book.
User avatar
siddharth
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4148
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 10:13 am
Location: ===Always changing===
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby BerenVonRictoffen » Mon Jul 21, 2014 2:03 pm

IOW as with everything else, it was a crude mockery of the book, with some token accuracy that you take as 100%.
As always, you're free to think that pigeon-dropping covered model resembled the Minas Tirith that Tolkien intended, but you're mistaken to think that Tolkien would. It's just no context. :rofl:
For one thing, it's way too small; Minas Tirith was over a mile wide-- i.e. "greater than Isengard" (which was also grossly diminished in the film).
Then there's the fact that it was a city at the edge of a bustling metropolis of farmlands and river-docks, with a great road leading up to the city-gates, and walls surrounding the Pelennor for 15 miles; the movie-version shows it, as everything else, in the middle of a wilderness of scrub-lands as if it's some ancient ruins... again, no context whatsoever.
BerenVonRictoffen
Shield Bearer

 
Posts: 181
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 2:40 pm
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby siddharth » Mon Jul 21, 2014 11:37 pm

BerenVonRictoffen wrote:IOW as with everything else, it was a crude mockery of the book, with some token accuracy that you take as 100%.
As always, you're free to think that pigeon-dropping covered model resembled the Minas Tirith that Tolkien intended, but you're mistaken to think that Tolkien would. It's just no context. :rofl:
For one thing, it's way too small; Minas Tirith was over a mile wide-- i.e. "greater than Isengard" (which was also grossly diminished in the film).


So you say "it is not Tolkien, by a long shot" and then go on to point out a single difference which I already mentioned above.
I am sure now you'd point out a couple of more details, which are most assuredly minor, and that would still not justify your statemnt "not by a long shot". Just like your arguments against Hobbiton in the film.

Then there's the fact that it was a city at the edge of a bustling metropolis of farmlands and river-docks, with a great road leading up to the city-gates, and walls surrounding the Pelennor for 15 miles; the movie-version shows it, as everything else, in the middle of a wilderness of scrub-lands as if it's some ancient ruins... again, no context whatsoever.


I thought you were speaking only of the city and not it's surroundings.If that is the case I agree it was a fallacy to not show the farmlands on the Pelennor fields.
User avatar
siddharth
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4148
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2012 10:13 am
Location: ===Always changing===
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby Eucatastrophe » Sat Jul 26, 2014 3:38 am

siddharth wrote:
BerenVonRictoffen wrote:IOW as with everything else, it was a crude mockery of the book, with some token accuracy that you take as 100%.
As always, you're free to think that pigeon-dropping covered model resembled the Minas Tirith that Tolkien intended, but you're mistaken to think that Tolkien would. It's just no context. :rofl:
For one thing, it's way too small; Minas Tirith was over a mile wide-- i.e. "greater than Isengard" (which was also grossly diminished in the film).


So you say "it is not Tolkien, by a long shot" and then go on to point out a single difference which I already mentioned above.
I am sure now you'd point out a couple of more details, which are most assuredly minor, and that would still not justify your statemnt "not by a long shot". Just like your arguments against Hobbiton in the film.

Then there's the fact that it was a city at the edge of a bustling metropolis of farmlands and river-docks, with a great road leading up to the city-gates, and walls surrounding the Pelennor for 15 miles; the movie-version shows it, as everything else, in the middle of a wilderness of scrub-lands as if it's some ancient ruins... again, no context whatsoever.


I thought you were speaking only of the city and not it's surroundings.If that is the case I agree it was a fallacy to not show the farmlands on the Pelennor fields.


No response?
I am not surprised. :nono:
User avatar
Eucatastrophe
Shield Bearer
 
Posts: 132
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2014 10:17 am
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby Diamond of Long Cleeve » Thu Jul 31, 2014 2:28 am

BerenVonRictoffen wrote:For one thing, it's way too small; Minas Tirith was over a mile wide-- i.e. "greater than Isengard" (which was also grossly diminished in the film). Then there's the fact that it was a city at the edge of a bustling metropolis of farmlands and river-docks, with a great road leading up to the city-gates, and walls surrounding the Pelennor for 15 miles; the movie-version shows it, as everything else, in the middle of a wilderness of scrub-lands as if it's some ancient ruins... again, no context whatsoever.


Again with the 'bustling metropolis'! A large tract of farmland is not a 'bustling metropolis'. There are only two 'bustling metropolis's' in Gondor: Minas Tirith and Dol Amroth.

Middle-earth is not some kind of semi-urban landscape. (Especially given Tolkien's strong bias against urbanisation.)
User avatar
Diamond of Long Cleeve
Mariner

 
Posts: 6643
Joined: Mon May 08, 2000 12:00 am
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby portia » Tue Aug 19, 2014 10:02 am

What would be the effect of what HAD BEEN farmland around Minas Tirith? I think that the lad around it would have been deserted pretty fast after the threats from Mordor became serious. There might even have been some defensive destruction. So, I am not very impressed by the idea that there should have been more buildup around the city. The movie was made less complicated by the lack of buildup.
User avatar
portia
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 10841
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:57 pm
Location: Lost in the forest
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby LordoftheShortys » Wed Sep 10, 2014 4:24 pm

I saw the movies before I read the books, Ill say that first.

When I read the books, I imagined Gollum as a hunchback creature with horrific and even crooked expressions. But also with a softer side since Smeagol is still within Gollum since he does show remorse when he and Frodo reach Shelobs tunnel. More like two sides of one coin. Gollum in the movie was all that and beyond. Andy Serkis did an incredible job with all the expressions he was able to make to bring Gollum to life. Sometimes he was even freaky or creepy to watch. I applaud Serkis and PJ for bettering my vision of Gollum.

I also stick with what was said before that the environment was used to bring out the cities and landscapes of Middle-earth. It still astounds me to know that Minas Tirith and Helms Deep were built in the same rock quarry. :O

Thats all I can really think about for now. Its been a long time since I read the books too.
User avatar
LordoftheShortys
Petitioner to the Council
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 1:53 pm
Top

Re: PJs' Movie bits which enhanced ( or bettered ) the text.

Postby RyersonSonOfRyer » Wed Sep 17, 2014 1:15 pm

Well, i thought the way peter jackson had frodo hold the ring in FOTR at the end and say "i wish the ring had never come to me, i wish none of this had happened." And then he hears gandalfs words and he builds up the courage to continue the quest. That was beautiful, jackson incorporated that very well into the movie
User avatar
RyersonSonOfRyer
Citizen of Imladris
 
Posts: 85
Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2014 2:10 pm
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Movies - Lord of the Rings

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 4 guests

cron