Spoilers from the Photo Guide

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

Postby Mithfânion » Thu Nov 07, 2002 2:57 am

Some observations<BR><BR><b>Tele</b><BR><BR><i>If the Voice of Saruman is contained within ROTK, why the problem? Much as I'd like to see it in TTT, the first priority (IMHO) is having it at all. </i><BR><BR>I think the problem lies with the fact that this is really a scene that belongs to the Two Towers, and to the fact that it has the potential to be as awesome as it was in the book. That scene really stood out for me, along with the Ents thrashing Isenguard, return of Gandalf as the White and the battle of HD, as the best scene of TTT. To find that it has been cut from the storyline of TTT and moved to RoTK is a great disappointment. Why?<BR><BR>Because Return of the King already has so many fantastic scenes in it. If anything I would have tried to move some material from RoTK into TTT, but PJ does it the other way around. And yet again it seems that TTT, like FoTR, will be a film without a decent closing. I remember well the reaction of some who hadn't read the books, some of whom were family members, of how FoTR had no closure at all. The Voice of Saruman scene could give TTT something as close to a decent ending as was possible in this trilogy.<BR><BR>Of course the prime reason is that I <b>really</b> want to see this scene. And it irritates me that I now have to wait 14 months before I will be able to so, instead of one and a half. But I just don't see that with so many fantastic material in RoTK, much more overwhelming than TTT, PJ does this. Granted that there seems to be a lot of completely invented action (aragorn's extra scenes, Faramir in Osgiliath etc.) as well, but stil...<BR><BR><b>DavidM</b><BR><BR><i>I believe the tracks follow the storyline of the film -- just like the FOTR soundtrack.</i><BR><BR>Thanks for the link. What I had done was put the track list, which I found already, next to the index of the book, and outside of the first 4 chapters, the tracks were wildly different from the chapters in the book. Which made me think they weren't listed in chronoligal order. Of course I had forgotten to take into account the massive changes the movie makes which makes even the chronology look different.<BR><BR>I guess I agree that the Voice of Saruman scenes have been moved to RoTK. <BR><BR>Nilson, thanks for the link to PJ's interview. He says:<BR><BR><i>The battle probably begins 40 minutes before the end of the film, but we don't just stay with the battle; we have things happening elsewhere. We are intercutting with Frodo and Sam's story, and we're intercutting it with Merry, Pippin, and the Ents. We go other places during the course of the battle</i><BR><BR>None of that, not even "other places during the battle" would leave room for Voice of Saruman. I guess that confirms it. Shame.<BR><BR><b>Diamond</b><BR><BR><i>- The whole deal with Faramir. Well, this could work. It probably will.</i><BR><BR>Well if you think it'll work for your favorite character (along with Frodo) then I'm willing to take some small comfort from that <img src="http://www.tolkienonline.com/mb/i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif"border=0><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
User avatar
Mithfânion
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 11589
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2000 8:35 am
Top

Postby Diamond of Long Cleeve » Thu Nov 07, 2002 2:59 am

Gungnir, LOL!!!!!!! <img src="http://www.tolkienonline.com/mb/i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif"border=0>
User avatar
Diamond of Long Cleeve
Mariner

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

Postby Mithfânion » Thu Nov 07, 2002 3:03 am

<b>Eurogollum</b><BR><BR><i>But I'm still hoping to see it at the end of TTT - It would provide such a powerful dramatic ending to the movie, so it would really suprise me to see PJ let such a great way of ending TTT slip through his fingers</i><BR><BR>Exactly. Except that I wouldn'tbe surprised to see PJ let it slip through his fingers. But it certainly could be a great ending scene.<BR><BR>However if you look at the soundtrack list and it's explanation, the one that DavidM gave here:<BR><BR><a target=new href="http://www.tolkienonline.com/docs/7753.html">http://www.tolkienonline.com/docs/7753.html</a><BR><BR>You'll see that there seems to be very little room for a Voice of Saruman scene.
User avatar
Mithfânion
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 11589
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2000 8:35 am
Top

Postby Iavas_Saar » Thu Nov 07, 2002 3:04 am

smeagolpoop - Thankyou for your words. <img src="http://www.tolkienonline.com/mb/i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif"border=0> I think it would do well to remember that for some people the book is harder to let go than for others. And also that purists can often have very solid and well thought out reasons why they think a change will be bad. And especially when pragmatists start jumping on the boat too, it's a sign that there is a credible reason to be worried. But I know it can be frustrating to argue the positives.<BR><BR><BR><i>It's the change to Faramir's character that really gets up my nose. "Not if I found it lying by the road... " Ha! Not until I drag you to Osgiliath with every intention of taking the ring to Minas Tirith, argue with you for a while, and send you off through the sewers...</i><BR><BR>Ethel, why <i>should</i> Faramir be so special in relation to the Ring? I look at the Ring as something that you're only safe from if you are totally at peace with yourself, with no internal conflicts or insecurities for it to prey on. Now, Faramir is not at peace with himself. His brother has recently died, his relationship with his father is not good. Is it so bad that these insecurities make him atleast slightly at risk from the Ring?<BR><BR><BR><i>What bothers me the most about the Aragorn/Brego deal is the already plethora of near deaths in this trilogy.</i><BR><BR>I don't see this as a problem because people and heroes do actually die in this story, so the audience can never be totally sure. Also, there may be several near-deaths, but they are spread over 3 very long films so the number of them won't be that conspicuous. And whether the audience knows the character won't die or not, it still doesn't mean it's not a very exciting addition to the story. And finally Aragorn, as the main hero, does seem to get through the book without ever seeming in trouble. Isn't it more realistic that after going through so much he <i>would</i> have a brush with death at some point?<BR><BR><BR><i>Good grief Iavas. If you honestly believe that the story of ROTK is 'Frodo and Sam' deficient, then there's nothing more to be said on that subject.</i><BR><BR>Di, it was PJ who first said there wasn't enough material for Frodo and Sam in ROTK, and he's the one who has seen it in script form and should know what he's talking about, I'm only repeating what he said. So if you're going to good grief someone, do it to PJ! <img src="http://www.tolkienonline.com/mb/i/expressions/face-icon-small-tongue.gif"border=0><BR><BR><BR><i>Di said it for me above - this is straight from "Champion the Wonder Horse".</i><BR><BR>Oh tosh! Tolkiens horses are intelligent and loyal, Brego remembering and rewarding Aragorns kindness strikes me as extremely Tolkien-esque.
User avatar
Iavas_Saar
Mariner


 
Posts: 9145
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2001 7:39 pm
Top

Postby Gungnir » Thu Nov 07, 2002 3:15 am

<b>Oh tosh! Tolkiens horses and intelligent and loyal, Brego remembering and rewarding Aragorns kindness strikes me as extremely Tolkien-esque.</b><BR><BR>Now why doesn't that surprise me?<BR><BR>PJ's flights of fancy are increasingly starting to grate.
User avatar
Gungnir
Mariner

 
Posts: 6142
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2000 7:05 am
Location: Isle of Man
Top

Postby Mithfânion » Thu Nov 07, 2002 3:35 am

Iavas, you say a couple of things that I take issue with. I'm sure PJ would applaud your defense, and in a way I find it has some very minor charm as well, but I think you're letting your love for the film, and your stated dislike of many of the book's scenes, cloud your judgement. Considerably, in fact.<BR><BR>First, you're defending the Legolas statement. According to what will be in the film, Legolas now feels utterly betrayed by his people.<BR><BR>You say to that:<BR><BR><i>I don't think it's "completely contradictory", because in the book Legolas doesn't seem to show any emotion about it either way</i><BR><BR>Iavas, that is <b>factually incorrect</b>. Legolas does state an emotion in the books, which is the complete opposite of feeling betrayed. He shows understanding and reconciliation for the reasons his people aren't at Helm's Deep. Nienna's quote proves this:<BR><BR>"I do not think any would come. They have no need to march to war, war already marches on their own land." says Legolas</i><BR><BR><i>PJ is adding an emotion, but he's not contradicting an already existing one</i><BR><BR>Clearly the added emotion PJ felt was absolutely necessary to add, *is* contradictory, as shown above. If PJ had wanted to add emotions, and if he had wanted to explore Legolas' thoughts on this matter further, why then does he not do so <b>in the same line of thought</b> that Legolas had in the book? For instance, why not have Legolas show actual understanding for his people's absence at HD? You could have someone angrily comment on the absence of the Elves and have Legolas explain to them in what situation the Elves are. It would further establish Legolas' opinion, and be in keeping with the book. <BR><BR><i>If the book Legolas was clearly feeling great pride for his people at that moment then you would have more of a point</i><BR><BR>Not really. See, the point is that the added scene with Legolas is contradictory to what is said in the book. That he doesn't also show pride in the books is totally unrelated.<BR><BR>As for Gandalf, it doesn't seem wise to continue discussion the adaptational flaws where he is concerned in this thread, so I'll keep it short.<BR><BR><i>I bet in all cases where you feel Gandalfs role was diminished that a) the effect on his overall character was minimal </i><BR><BR>I thought that the whole string of (admittedly small) changes to his character made him different from the way he was presented in the book. Gandalf's mother made an excellent thread about that a while ago, listing all the changes PJ felt were necessary to make Gandalf different. So no, I don't really think the effect was minimal.<BR><BR>Which, Iavas, is not to say that I think McKellen did poorly. I think he did a fantastic job as Gandalf the Grey. But I mentioned the many small changes to Gandalf in connection to the changes to Legolas. Small, but highly irritating because they feel so wrong, and are utterly needless.<BR><BR>You say to Diamond<BR><BR><i>But if Shelob was in TTT, then you would be left pretty Frodo/Sam deficient in ROTK instead</i><BR><BR>Strange. Their story was never deficient in the books. Is that the poorest of poor ways to come up with an apology for PJ's cutting of Shelob from TTT?<BR><BR><i>Oh tosh! Tolkiens horses and intelligent and loyal, Brego remembering and rewarding Aragorns kindness strikes me as extremely Tolkien-esque</i><BR><BR>I agree Iavas. It is not unTolkienesque to have Brego do this. It is in the spirit of M-e. It is very different from what for instance Legolas is expressing, who now suddenly feels betrayed by the Elves. That is not in the spirit of M-e.<BR><BR>Iavas, one final thing. You stated that I was <i>obsessed with the details and unable to look at the grand picture</i>. For someone who refers to the <b>"Terms of Service"</b> as often as you do, that is a pretty abrassive comment to make, is it not? You're basically painting me out to be an incompetent, narrow-minded poster. I don't really mind that much, but I hate the double standards you apply when someone else accuses you. So either take the hits and don't whine about it, or refrain from hitting yourself <img src="http://www.tolkienonline.com/mb/i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif"border=0><BR><BR>
User avatar
Mithfânion
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 11589
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2000 8:35 am
Top

Postby Diamond of Long Cleeve » Thu Nov 07, 2002 3:36 am

Mithfanion,<BR><BR>David Wenham will have his work cut out to make me forgive this outrageous plot change and this fundamental change to Faramir’s character. We’ll see.<BR><BR>I share your worries about so much fantastic material being short-changed.<BR><BR>But Mith, you said that FOTR was a film without a decent closing! WHAAAAT? I can’t understand this at all! The ending was fabulous. It ended more or less like FOTR the book, with Frodo and Sam together. Yes, they moved Boromir’s death (entirely the right thing to do) and Fro and Sam are on Emyn Muil. But what other way was there for FOTR to end but with Frodo and Sam? Their final scene together is one of my favourites in the whole film. And I loved the way PJ didn’t go for an irritating upbeat Hollywoodisation of Tolkien’s story.<BR><BR>At the end of my first viewing a girl behind me cried, ‘but they can’t leave it there! They just can’t!’<BR><BR>Woo-hoo! Somebody hooked by a cliffhanger.<BR><BR><i>Di, it was PJ who first said there wasn't enough material for Frodo and Sam in ROTK, and he's the one who has seen it in script form and should know what he's talking about, I'm only repeating what he said. So if you're going to good grief someone, do it to PJ! </i><BR><BR>Then I will do so gladly, Iavas. Good grief, PJ. <BR><BR>For me Frodo and Sam are the true heroes -- with Aragorn a close third -- and the films should emphasise that.<BR><BR><BR>-edit-<BR><BR>Iavas, I was very forgiving of the changes PJ made in FOTR because I appreciate that LOTR is a <b>very</b> difficult book to bring to the screen. I will always love PJ for having the guts to attempt it at all. He did a great job! I loved FOTR, although a few moments here and there made me wince. But Mith is right, TTT is full of great material and it's a bit dismaying to see all the new material coming in and shoving it out. We'll just have to wait and see.
User avatar
Diamond of Long Cleeve
Mariner

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

Postby Iavas_Saar » Thu Nov 07, 2002 3:56 am

<i>PJ's flights of fancy are increasingly starting to grate.</i><BR><BR>Looks like Saranthir may have had a point about converts after all. But even if you're not sold on the flights of fancy, virtually everything from the book is going to be in the film; the three hunters seems identical, Treebeard is there, the healing of Theoden is unchanged, Helms Deep, the storming of Isengard, the taming of smeagol, the black gates, Henneth Annun/forbidden pool. So PJ isn't actually replacing book material with his own ideas, he's filling it out.<BR><BR><BR><i>For me Frodo and Sam are the true heroes -- with Aragorn a close third -- and the films should emphasise that.</i><BR><BR>And PJ clearly felt that F/S wouldn't come across as the true heroes in ROTK without more material to balance out the awesome scale of events at Minas Tirith.
User avatar
Iavas_Saar
Mariner


 
Posts: 9145
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2001 7:39 pm
Top

Postby Saranthir » Thu Nov 07, 2002 4:18 am

I think a lot of you are going to be more surprised than you can imagine come December 18th.<BR><BR>We all know how much material there is in RoTK, and that New Line seem determined to cap the films at 3hrs. Therefore I submit, and with a little inside knowledge, that they will either have to allow a 3hrs 30min cut of RoTK, or include scenes like the Voice of Saruman in TTT.<BR><BR>If PJ imagines that he can cram Shelob, the VoS and all that other stuff into RoTK, then I will be very surprised indeed. He seems bent on including his own invented material as well. So we will have to assume that his invention will continue in RoTK.<BR><BR>So I would say, and indeed hope, that the ending of TTT is being kept very much under wraps.<BR><BR>I like the odd bit of what Iavas has given us, but I do not like much. The whole Aragorn, Brego, Sharku deal is all well and good and perhaps does fit with the Prof's world, but it is simply an irrelevance, which could be left out entirely and is just another symptom of PJ's upping that ante again.<BR><BR>And we get the Legolas whinge about the Elves not coming to help. Then, lo and behold, the Elves turn up like the sodding cavalry. How many more 'surprise' arrivals does PJ think the audience can take and have them remain credible?<BR><BR>What I think is at least obvious here is that PJ's wild ride on the Brego of invention will lead us to a markedly different story to the one we are used to. Some will like it without hesitation, like Iavas - and others might be slightly unsettled. The there will be those like myself who may well find the departures from the story too hard to swallow.
User avatar
Saranthir
Ranger of the North


 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2000 5:46 am
Top

Postby Gungnir » Thu Nov 07, 2002 4:26 am

<b>But even if you're not sold on the flights of fancy, virtually everything from the book is going to be in the film...</b><BR><BR>Yes, when I look at it that way, I don't feel quite so apprehensive about the film.<BR><BR>Perhaps someone could come up with a "Tolkien Edit" which takes all of PJ's flights of fancy out and leaves us with the proper story relatively intact?
User avatar
Gungnir
Mariner

 
Posts: 6142
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2000 7:05 am
Location: Isle of Man
Top

Postby Uber-Monkey » Thu Nov 07, 2002 4:30 am

I too hope that the ending of TTT is simply being kept under wraps. The Voice Of Saruman simply wouldn't work effectively in ROTK. And it would give a good sense of closure to the end of TTT (putting Saruman to the side and so giving focus to Sauron in ROTK), possibly before cutting to a quick scene of Frodo, Sam & Gollum (ala FOTR).
User avatar
Uber-Monkey
Ranger of the North
 
Posts: 1122
Joined: Sat Apr 20, 2002 4:04 pm
Top

Postby DrStrangelove » Thu Nov 07, 2002 4:33 am

<i>Perhaps someone could come up with a "Tolkien Edit" which takes all of PJ's flights of fancy out and leaves us with the proper story relatively intact? </i><BR><BR>I think something like that has always been inevitable. I think some purists would much prefer a selection of selected PJ scenes that were close to the book, linked perhaps by narration, than to watch the PJ films.
User avatar
DrStrangelove
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4753
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2000 1:00 am
Top

Postby Saranthir » Thu Nov 07, 2002 4:52 am

Dr_S - can I just ask if all of the changes we have heard so far sit well with you? I know we haven't seen the full context and blah, blah, but come on, some of these alterations do seem a little, er, difficult to stomach.<BR><BR>I'm also surprised at the lack of comment regarding the Nazgul, because they are certainly in the film and are seen more than they were in the book version of TTT - including a close encounter with Frodo, Sam and Gollum. Unless, of course, it has been cut.<BR><BR>There has been more infor and discussion about the Nazgul and especially their steeds, which appear to have been very well realised. I would be surprised if they were going to be kept for RoTK alone.
User avatar
Saranthir
Ranger of the North


 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2000 5:46 am
Top

Postby Mithfânion » Thu Nov 07, 2002 4:57 am

Diamond<BR><BR><i>But Mith, you said that FOTR was a film without a decent closing! WHAAAAT? I can’t understand this at all! The ending was fabulous. It ended more or less like FOTR the book, with Frodo and Sam together</i><BR><BR>Di, I don't think the first film's ending was very strong, because it was too open for a lot of folks. There's nothing PJ could have done to avert that, because as you say it is similar as is in the books. Difference, you don't notice that in the books because you can read right on. You just flow into the The Two Towers. With the film there is *just* the ending, and then you have to wait a year or more before you get to see the rest. <BR><BR>I'm trying to say that the ending of FoTR can be rather unsatisfactory if you haven't read the books or even if you don't know there are sequels coming. My point is also that TTT does have the chance to close it off pretty neatly, with the defeat of Saruman. It finishes off at least one enemy.
User avatar
Mithfânion
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 11589
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2000 8:35 am
Top

Postby Iavas_Saar » Thu Nov 07, 2002 5:12 am

Mith,<BR><BR><i>According to what will be in the film, Legolas now feels utterly betrayed by his people.</i><BR><BR>The word "utterly" was not used, that is a clear exaggeration.<BR><BR><BR><i>Iavas, that is factually incorrect. Legolas does state an emotion in the books, which is the complete opposite of feeling betrayed. He shows understanding and reconciliation for the reasons his people aren't at Helm's Deep.</i><BR><BR>Is understanding really an emotion? I mean, I understand and am reconciled to the fact that pubs close at 11pm, does that tell you anything about whether I think it's a good or bad thing?<BR><BR><BR><i>If PJ had wanted to add emotions, and if he had wanted to explore Legolas' thoughts on this matter further, why then does he not do so in the same line of thought that Legolas had in the book? For instance, why not have Legolas show actual understanding for his people's absence at HD?</i><BR><BR>But how interesting is Legolas showing understanding? It's not interesting at all, and wouldn't be worth showing. Also, as I've asked before and still haven't been given an answer to, what if Legolas <i>didn't</i> know that the elves had their own wars to fight, and suspected that they <i>could</i> spare some of their forces? What would be his view then? IMO that is a far more interesting thing to explore, and the change needed to explore it is minor, the difference between Legolas thinking the elves are already at war and him thinking they're not, and what would his reaction be in the second scenario.<BR><BR><BR><i>Strange. Their story was never deficient in the books. Is that the poorest of poor ways to come up with an apology for PJ's cutting of Shelob from TTT?</i><BR><BR>I don't need to apologise for it, PJ has given his reasons and knows what he's doing. There is a whole thread about this somewhere, but moving Shelob does primarily 3 things:<BR><BR>1. Gives Frodo and Sam more to do in ROTK thereby making their final 'chapter' more climatic.<BR>2. Keeps the timelines consistent. One of the best things about the book is the way the events from the different strands of the story tie together at certain times. It would mess up things like the dawnless day, or the army leaving Minas Morgul, because the Gandalf/Aragorn etc. side of the story would be lagging too far behind.<BR>3. It avoids a cliffhanger ending and will allow TTT more closure. No movies should end right in the middle of a scene.. it needs a slow, reflective ending, just like FOTR.
User avatar
Iavas_Saar
Mariner


 
Posts: 9145
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2001 7:39 pm
Top

Postby hamish_spence » Thu Nov 07, 2002 5:12 am

I find it easier to believe the scenes of Frodo and Sam escaping LOOK like sewers but aren't: are hidden, damp, brick-lines passages which finish up with them at Ithilien. After all, Tolkien did not say much about the blindfolded scene.<BR>Faramirs declining of the ring is THE faramir scene: necessary to make him a really sympathetic character. DO NOT lose it PJ!<BR>The two towers would end best with gandalf and Pippin racing toward Gondor on Shadowfax, scrolling up to reveal the lit beacons at night. It would work in a mini-series, and I think it would do well in TTT.<BR>Grima's knife scene: PERFECT for the scene right after the party leave with the palantir. Saruman walks back up from the balcony to face Grima. He knocks him to the floor. Grima draws the knife, which goes flying when saruman kicks it out of his hand. Cut to Gandalf saying:<BR>"Often does evil hurt itself. I guess that even if we had gone in, we could find few treasures greater than that Wormtongue threw at us"<BR>(loud screams from Orthanc)<BR>"It seems Saruman thinks so too"<BR>Return of the king: Tolkiens romance scenes between Faramir and Eowyn are important, partly because it lays the ground for the end scenes. It should appeal to those who are tired of heroes having to be all action: Faramir wins Eowyn by compassion and empathy: both are in the same situation.<BR>
User avatar
hamish_spence
Shield Bearer

 
Posts: 458
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2001 8:46 am
Top

Postby DrStrangelove » Thu Nov 07, 2002 5:12 am

<i> Dr_S - can I just ask if all of the changes we have heard so far sit well with you? I know we haven't seen the full context and blah, blah, but come on, some of these alterations do seem a little, er, difficult to stomach. </i><BR><BR>Gut instinct?<BR><BR>Aragorn "apparently" being dead - poor.<BR><BR>Elrond's council at Lothlorien - fine - could be great.<BR><BR>Elrond apparently "foreseeing" Aragorn dead, but in fact its just people thinking he is - poor, misunderstands elven prophecies IMO<BR><BR>Legolas moaning no elves - again no problem for me. I welcome more emphasis on the elves as a way of emphasising elven fading<BR><BR>Osgiliath - fine and excited to see it<BR><BR>Escaping through the sewers - erk!<BR><BR>Faramir and the Ring - Excellent! See BBC adaptation to see why Faramir temptation by the wrong works really, really well in relation to Faramir and especially in relation to Boromir.<BR><BR>Frodo accidentally dropping the Ring and he and Sam both going to pick it up, and both seeing the other - pausing close to each other, before holding back no more and kissing slowly at first, but then more passionately - while gollum films the lot on his digital camera because he knows orcs that would pay good money for that sort of thing - pure Tolkien!<BR><BR><BR>PS - I'm not sure I can trust my own source on some of these <img src="http://www.tolkienonline.com/mb/i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif"border=0>
User avatar
DrStrangelove
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 4753
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2000 1:00 am
Top

Postby Dances-With-Shrapnel » Thu Nov 07, 2002 5:15 am

I've got the photo guide and I think it all sounds great. The pictures are excellent.<BR><BR>I would like to point out that it is obviously missing plot elements. Case in point: Although it goes to the trouble of mentioning that Elrond tries to convince his people to send aid, and mentions Legolas' feelings regarding the lack of Elven help, it never says that the elves show up. <i>Which we know they do.</i>. <BR><BR>The entire end of the photo guide is feels dodgy as. Almost as if the author didn't actually know what would happen. It leaves Merry and Pippin at Isenguard. There is no conclusory part to the Frodo and Sam thread either.<BR><BR>The Voice of Saruman could still be in TTT, mark my words! The limited time is a factor, but you'll notice at most 3 minutes described in the photo guide. Also at the conclusion of films you can skip a lot of transition and travelling scenes without damaging the perception of the editting. This would save a lot of time. <BR><BR>Imagine this: The battle for Helm Deep is won (having shown intercut the Ent attack on Isenguard without conclusion). Gandalf speaks with Aragorn regarding their ploy. King and company ride over the hill and see Isenguard torn apart. Then they are at Orthanc and talking with Saruman. It doesn't really take a lot of time when you move swiftly between scenes. <BR><BR>Also, remember that the quote from PJ regarding the time remaining before the end of the film was an estimate only, and the final cut may differ. <BR><BR>The wholescale transportation of The Voice of Saruman to post-ring destruction ROTK is an interesting idea that would probably work there. However, I think it might leave TTT denuded of meaningful resolution. If Saruman was defeated completely by the Ents (or assumed to be), that might lead to a perception in the audience that the ents are merely a plot device. In the book it is clear that Gandalf defeats the Saruman when he breaks his staff, which seems a more satisfying conclusion to the movie.<BR><BR>If the scene is moved to the ROTK, I too worry that PJ may find himself in a position where he has far too much to try to fit in, and that the quality of what should be capstone to the trilogy will be affected. <BR><BR>This would we be a sad development. <BR><BR>Dances. <BR><BR>
User avatar
Dances-With-Shrapnel
Rider of the Mark
 
Posts: 531
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2002 4:40 am
Top

Postby Diamond of Long Cleeve » Thu Nov 07, 2002 5:19 am

Oh OK, Mith, I see your point. <img src="http://www.tolkienonline.com/mb/i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif"border=0> Yes, if you don't know the story, it must seem like the weirdest ending ... <BR><BR>My reactions to plot changes in TTT ... I think it will be an even better film than FOTR, tighter, more streamlined, and certainly very epic and powerful. Buuuuuut ... as regards the actual changes to Tolkien's story... <BR><BR>- I begrudge every invention by PJ which takes precious screentime away from my favourites Frodo and Sam. <BR>- I think the whole 'Brego rescue, is Aragorn dead?' thing is thoroughly cliched. Both Eowyn and Arwen will now think he's dead. Gosh, that's original. <b>And who cares????</b> Aragorn was OK in the book, apart from a brief scare at Helm's Deep, let's get moving with the original plot, shall we???!!!! Jeez!<BR>- Faramir and Ring-temptation. Don't mess with the Captain ...<BR><BR>At least Arwen and Eowyn will not meet face to face in TTT. There is nothing to indicate that they will. I suppose that's something to be glad about, at least.<BR><BR>I dunno, I'm getting the impression that PJ has moved away from the noble intellectualism of Tolkien's original story and gone for a more obvious romantic dashing film. I can understand it ... but I don't have to like everything about it. My cranky inner purist seems to have woken up. <img src="http://www.tolkienonline.com/mb/i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif"border=0><BR><BR>But of course there is also a lot to look forward to ... the Ents storming Isengard, Gandalf's fight with the Balrog, etc.<BR><BR><i>Frodo accidentally dropping the Ring and he and Sam both going to pick it up, and both seeing the other - pausing close to each other, before holding back no more and kissing slowly at first, but then more passionately - while gollum films the lot on his digital camera because he knows orcs that would pay good money for that sort of thing - pure Tolkien! </i><BR><BR>LOL, Dr S. <img src="http://www.tolkienonline.com/mb/i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif"border=0> <BR><BR>Hamish Spence, I am so with you on the Faramir thing! <img src="http://www.tolkienonline.com/mb/i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif"border=0> But like Dr Strangelove, I do like the way the BBC portrayed Faramir and his moment of temptation (is he? isn't he?) with the Ring. <BR><BR>
User avatar
Diamond of Long Cleeve
Mariner

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

Postby Hama » Thu Nov 07, 2002 5:34 am

Again, I'm not commenting on any of this. Given the disparity between how the rumours from FoTR sounded before hand, and then how the scenes played out in the film, I think what we fear will not be what we should fear. <BR><BR>That said, I love Brego the Wonderhorse. LOL, Gungnir.<BR><BR>Hama.<BR>
User avatar
Hama
Ranger of the North


 
Posts: 4892
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 1999 10:10 pm
Top

Postby Iavas_Saar » Thu Nov 07, 2002 5:37 am

<i>If PJ imagines that he can cram Shelob, the VoS and all that other stuff into RoTK, then I will be very surprised indeed.</i><BR><BR>I have never understood this. ROTK is the shortest of the three books, even without the Scouring being cut. And when I think about it, the film risks becoming totally dominated by the seige of Minas Tirith. What is all this stuff you talk about that needs to be crammed in? It's basically just 2 big battles, a short hike across Mordor, and an ending. Not that I want the VoS in ROTK, but I welcome Shelob being there.<BR><BR><BR>Regarding the overall changes to TTT. I would actually hesitate to label them as 'changes', they are more 'additions'. Those who don't want Tolkiens story messed with will still be getting it, from what we know all the major events of the book will be there in the film. If you just then accept that ROTK will not be overcrowded, PJ was right when he said there wasn't enough material in TTT, and so he's added a few things to fill it out. I think all the talk of the additions is clouding the fact that everyones favourite book moments should be there in the film too.
User avatar
Iavas_Saar
Mariner


 
Posts: 9145
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2001 7:39 pm
Top

Postby Mithfânion » Thu Nov 07, 2002 6:03 am

Iavas<BR><BR><i>Is understanding really an emotion? </i><BR><BR>In Legolas' case it certainly is. He explains that he has full understanding of the Elves position, and gives two arguments. He has reconciled with the facts of the world at that time. That is an emotion. Having Legolas feel utterly betrayed is contradictory.<BR><BR><i><BR>I mean, I understand and am reconciled to the fact that pubs close at 11pm, does that tell you anything about whether I think it's a good or bad thing?</i><BR><BR>Depends on the way you say it. The way Legolas says it is clear that he has perfect understanding and doesn't feel betrayed at all. There is no way for you to twist out of this one Iavas <img src="http://www.tolkienonline.com/mb/i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif"border=0><BR><BR><i>But how interesting is Legolas showing understanding? It's not interesting at all, and wouldn't be worth showing. </i><BR><BR>Yes Iavas it is perfectly clear by now that nothing that Tolkien wrote should take precedence over Jackson's idea's. We get it. Legolas' POV from the books simply isn't interesting you say. It has to be a Legolas who feels betrayed. Nonsense. There is no reason why this *has* to be so or why his opinion isn't interesting. And if it isn't, cut it. But don't insert your own invented and totally contradictory lines.<BR><BR><i>Also, as I've asked before and still haven't been given an answer to, what if Legolas didn't know that the elves had their own wars to fight, and suspected that they could spare some of their forces? </i><BR><BR>That doesn't make sense. He's Legolas right? He knows that the Elves have wars of their own. If he doesn't he's not Legolas, he's someone else. There's no reason to make yet another invention by having Legolas not aware of the Elves' position. He knows.<BR><BR><i>I have never understood this. ROTK is the shortest of the three books, even without the Scouring being cut. And when I think about it, the film risks becoming totally dominated by the seige of Minas Tirith. </i><BR><BR>Yet again you speak words that are simply not correct. The siege of Minas Tirith actually takes up a small portion of the third book, and many, many other things are in there, as someone who's actually read and recalls the books would know. There is no danger whatsoever that the relatively short siege should dominate all the other large events in RoTK. <BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>
User avatar
Mithfânion
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 11589
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2000 8:35 am
Top

Postby Saranthir » Thu Nov 07, 2002 6:11 am

Iavas - are you for real? <img src="http://www.tolkienonline.com/mb/i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif"border=0><BR><BR>Try reading RoTK again will you. There is so much in it that PJ will struggle, I'm serious. That is why 3hrs 30mins has already been floated towards New Line - and it is possible should TTT out-gun FoTR financially, but still unlikely.<BR><BR>Think of all those scenes that are important, impressive and absolutely required. RoTK sees Tolkien, IMHO, reach his peak with LoTR. Nearly every passage is solid gold. There is no way we can have it all, no way in the world. So what would you cut, Iavas, and then what else to fit in Shelob, VoS if it has slipped, which I doubt.<BR><BR>Just think about what lies within RoTK and you will, in some ways, find it a much denser book than FoTR.
User avatar
Saranthir
Ranger of the North


 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2000 5:46 am
Top

Postby Gungnir » Thu Nov 07, 2002 6:14 am

<b>Given the disparity between how the rumours from FoTR sounded before hand, and then how the scenes played out in the film, I think what we fear will not be what we should fear.</b><BR><BR>The wisest words yet spoken on this thread. Well said, Hama.<BR>
User avatar
Gungnir
Mariner

 
Posts: 6142
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2000 7:05 am
Location: Isle of Man
Top

Postby Saranthir » Thu Nov 07, 2002 6:21 am

Hama - watch out, a scouser schmoozing up to you - he's probably trying to nick something!!! <img src="http://www.tolkienonline.com/mb/i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif"border=0>
User avatar
Saranthir
Ranger of the North


 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2000 5:46 am
Top

Postby Mithfânion » Thu Nov 07, 2002 6:40 am

Sar, isn't it possible to just ask your source about the possible cutting of Saruman's demise? He obviously hasn't mentioned it in his original review, but perhaps he simply forgot. Could you ask? It seems vital to me.
User avatar
Mithfânion
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 11589
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2000 8:35 am
Top

Postby Gungnir » Thu Nov 07, 2002 6:45 am

At this juncture, I would normally try to come back at Saranthir with some riposte for the 'scousers' jibe.<BR><BR>However, as the inhabitants of Leicestershire have absolutely no distinguishing characteristics to enable them to be mocked (the most interesting person from Leicester is Gary Lineker - QED) I will admit defeat.
User avatar
Gungnir
Mariner

 
Posts: 6142
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2000 7:05 am
Location: Isle of Man
Top

Postby TheLidlessEyes » Thu Nov 07, 2002 6:57 am

The fact that Iavas is religiously defending a film he hasn't even seen yet sums up everything.<BR><BR>A few "it sounds promising but I will reserve judgement until I see it" comments would go down well with the punters.<BR><BR>Ditto with the others ""it sounds awful but I will reserve judgement until I see it" comments would not be amiss.<BR><BR>Gungnir, BTW, funny but my attention wandered about a third of the way through and I skimmed the rest. Perhaps brevity really is the soul of wit?
User avatar
TheLidlessEyes
Mariner


 
Posts: 9760
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2002 8:47 am
Top

Postby Lord_Baltimore » Thu Nov 07, 2002 7:06 am

People,<BR><BR>Regardless of your fears, worries, and concerns, I think you should trust to PJ and his ability to make everything "feel" like Middle-earth. Believe me, after your senses are overwhelmed by the sheer beauty of his creative vision -- and after your mind is put to sleep -- you will be singing songs of unconditional praise to PJ.<BR><BR>Bring on the bread and circuses! To hell with the story: I want to be entertained! <img src="http://www.tolkienonline.com/mb/i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif"border=0>
User avatar
Lord_Baltimore
Ranger of the North
 
Posts: 1072
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 11:10 am
Top

Postby TheLidlessEyes » Thu Nov 07, 2002 7:15 am

LB,<BR><BR>Irony, it appears, is alive and kicking.<BR><BR><img src="http://www.tolkienonline.com/mb/i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif"border=0><BR><BR>Note to self: The ability to take the piss out of one's self, my motto, is a rare art.<BR><BR>LB - you have SO gone up in my books with that post.
User avatar
TheLidlessEyes
Mariner


 
Posts: 9760
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2002 8:47 am
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Movies and Media: Tolkien

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests

cron