First look at Evangeline Lilly in 'The Hobbit: the Desolation of Smaug'
|
Hmmn. Perhaps they should have simply named this character “Legolass?”
|
First impression: Is she the long-lost daughter of long-lost Maglor of something? She looks Feanorian.
Second impression: She looks old and not too beautiful. Bad job, whoever was working on her. Third impression: Is that quiver hanging on her waist? I think we only saw the ones on the back in LOTR. |
Quote:
The quiver seems to be hanging on her waist indeed. More practical than having it on the back, in my opinion. I reserve my judgment till I've seen what PJ does with her. I'm not too hopeful because we know what he's capable of, but hey, somebody's got to be the captain of guard, and unlike many, while I'm skeptical by default about all PJ's additions, I don't have a problem with her being a woman. |
Wait...I must be way out of the loop, but I thought I read something that said her character had been cut.
Also, there is something about the ears that is bothering me...they are too noticable or something. And, because of the recent Star Trek movie, I look at her and think "Vulcan." :eek: |
I have no particular objection to her appearance, although I can't help but feel a slight "cut-price Arwen" vibe for whatever reason.
The most objectionable thing I've heard about this character is the alleged Elf-Dwarf romance (involving Kíli, perhaps?). Seems to just perpetuate the previous film's attitude that Dwarves are only "interesting" if they're basically just short Men. Incidentally, is there a particular reason, do you think, that Tolkien never (to the best of my knowledge) suggests "half-Dwarves" or any interbreeding of that kind? Besides the insular nature of Dwarven culture, I mean. I always supposed that being "adoptive" children of Eru, there was something slightly alien about them in almost a physiological sense which put something of a divide between them and the explicitly "human" races which interbred: Elves, Men (including Hobbits) and Orcs (assuming they were Fallen Children). That's my more lore-based reason for why I find the romance rumour a bit dodgy. Knowing PJ's tendencies though she'll probably end up with about three lines of incidental dialogue in large group scenes and lots of shots of her and Legolas intercut fighting spiders, werewolves, goblins, Ringwraiths, giant robotic Saurons, mûmakil riding slightly larger mûmakil, and Azog. Well, maybe that last one's a bit far-fetched... |
Quote:
Quote:
|
There were warrior women in ancient mythologies--the Amazons. They were even said to resort to mastectomies in order to improve their use of weapons.
So, like Aganzir, I don't necessarily object to adding a female character (which I view as less troublesome than mucking up Arwen). I just don't have much faith that the director will handle the character well. Or the writers for that matter. It would be really nice, for instance, if the added new female character passed the Bechdel test. |
Quote:
|
Maybe I should have put this in Mirth, because it's so amusing, but it relates...
http://www.figures.com/forums/attach...riel.jpg?stc=1 (link, in case you can't see the picture, because I can't) Look at these adorable lovebird action figures! Now, maybe the toy makers know more details about the plot than PJ lets on?... :Merisu: http://images6.fanpop.com/image/phot...7-1280-734.jpg Now what does Tauriel do behind the scenes, we wonders... |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
When you say that "Tolkien hits it" I really have no idea what you mean except that you approve of or like the characters--which of course is your right. I'm not much of a fan of Galadriel because I don't like the "type" she is, the revered, distant beauty. The emphasis on physical beauty is a drawback to me, but that is my personal opinion. Her characterisation is also confused, rather than consistent, through the ages. This bugs me too. Melian is more consistent and I like her trait of singing but even there I am bothered by the concept of her "girdle" which maintains the peace and serenity of Doriath. Again, this is my own personal grudge about the idea of a magical barrier that keeps a place safe. I don't believe that 'good' can be maintained against 'evil' that way. It's possible Tolkien didn't either because every time he uses the concept, it fails. Now, if The Silm had given us an extended passage where the two--Galadriel and Melian--discuss the fate of the world, that would have been something which would have demonstrated their intellect and wisdom. But we don't get that. Mostly we are told of their wise decisions rather than seeing how they negotiate the correct stance. Ultimately, we get a mum who really does not defend her daughter against an overbearing and autocratic husband/father. She never challenges the patriarchy for the sake of her daughter. Again, this is my personal value rather than a guideline for discussing how characters are presented. I will say that at least Tolkien didn't indulge in pyrotechnics with Galadriel, which a certain director did. With Gandalf, we get exposition about his attraction to the ring. With Galadriel, we get fireworks. I would much rather have seen the actress emote. Makes me very dubious about this Tauriel. Perhaps her red hair is supposed to be a joke about all those Mary Sues? |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I do mind her being a woman or at least having a woman imposed on a book character - though from the barrel scenes and the casting we have clearly lost my favourite scene of Galion getting sozzled with the captain of the guard. While Elf women could and did fight in defence having a woman shoehorned in as a military leader is hugely patronising as well as uncanonical. Women do not have to bear arms to equal men. And she looks dreadful.... the work of Weta and the costumes were one of the things I actively enjoyed from the first films - Evangeline Lilly, who is unquestionably a beautiful woman, looks as if she is in fancy dress for a convention with the bad henna dye job and the jokeshop ears.
|
I do seriously look forward to the clip from DOS with Bilbo on water-skis, jumping over a shark.
|
Quote:
I don't remember any particular passage that states definitively that procreation between Men and Dwarves doesn't exist, but the absolute lack of any speculation about it implies heavily that this is the case. Cultural isolation and differences aside, I'm not sure it would even be biologically possible. I've also heard rumours about
Quote:
Still, PJ is going to make uncanonical changes, and although the quality of the story he tells isn't even close to Tolkien, some changes are better and some worse than others. I can't tell which Tauriel is before I've seen her, but as a rule, making an additional character woman is far from the worst thing he has done. And even if they botch her, chances are I'm still more upset about Azog and short beards. Quote:
Took you long, didn't it? Quote:
Quote:
You're right about Weta doing a better job with the first trilogy. How many of you have seen Disney sequels? That's exactly what springs to mind when comparing the visual styles of the two trilogies with each other. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
(Or did look like that– link seems to be broken now.) |
Quote:
That said, I could certainly do without this thread turning into another of those OMG a WOMAN in THE HOBBIT??? EWWW!!! GIRLGERMS!!!111!!!! affairs. :rolleyes: |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Does this present the scene I had spoken of, >>>Now, if The Silm had given us an extended passage where the two--Galadriel and Melian--discuss the fate of the world, that would have been something which would have demonstrated their intellect and wisdom. But we don't get that. Mostly we are told of their wise decisions or thought rather than seeing how they negotiate the correct stance.<<< ? Well, yes, it does appear that Melian learns something significant from this conversation. Yet can we say that essentially Melian's role is to be almost Thingol's spy here? She reports it to Thingol, so that the entire conversation serves Thingol's needs, precedes the report of a spreading rumour about the Noldor, and in fact antagonises the King against the visiting Finrod. The events in the chapter become an explanation for the decline of one language and the supremacy of another. The women are small potatoes in that, no matter how ironic their role in the events may be. And of these effects neither Galadriel nor Melian have any control. They are passive conveyors of details rather than characters with full agency. They are women negotiating their position within the patriarchy and as such I think that is a kind of representation. But they are still discussing men--the haughty and fell nature of the sons of Feanor and Thingol's need for guidance. This is indeed far closer than anything in LotR or TH, but the women are still passive and inadvertent bearers of story details that really are about the men in their lives. Not quite what I had in mind, but I might be too strict in my interpretation of the Test. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And I do believe this is the longest post I've made in ever so long. |
Quote:
Really rather sad. Quote:
Quote:
... Though I highly doubt Tauriel is going to be as in Tolkien's words: "a renowned amazon with a picked bodyguard of women" (The Peoples of Middle Earth). Also, if anyone remembers from the 'sneak peak' preview on The Hobbit website where of all people Stephen Colbert points out the difference between Thranduil & family from the rest of the elves in his society, PJ makes a quip about Tauriel being among those who did not heed the call west. Apparently she's some sort of device to familiarize the audience with the stratification of elven society (aka: 'one of these elves is not like the other-'). To be honest and nothing against the wishful thinking of other female fans, I see Tauriel as a plot device to do two major things: - Familiarize fans who may not have read too deep into the different branches of elven society (as since most highly recognizable elven characters in the film are high elves of some sort) - Serve as a device to bust the dwarves out of prison, since apparently our merry drunken duo and most of Bilbo's crafty reconnaissance and stealth have been dropped out of the film. It's always a good thing to remember that in homages and recreations of works where a female figure has been inserted for appeasement purposes or else, it can still be pandering and sexist (maybe even more so) than if no character had been added to the original material. Mostly because, in the often wrong hands, such a character comes off as just 'eye candy', 'comedic', 'one dimensional' and/or 'useless'. It just ends up being heaped upon the burn pile of 'ugh, not another fan-service to feminism' for those who tend to think us females rattle our sabers over nothing. |
Quote:
On the other hand– Quote:
See, one hears a lot about the “the need for strong female characters”, but obviously it’s a bit more complicated than that when, even in such a small group, we can’t seem to reach any real agreement about what the phrase means in the first place. (I also find it to be of some concern how restrictive the various criteria are– male characters are always given a lot more leeway.) For my part I’d be reasonably satisfied if this Tauriel’s portrayal doesn’t turn out downright embarrassing– and I think that has more to do with issues other than such relatively abstract ones. Will she get any real characterisation at all, or just be a cardboard cutout? Will she spout allegedly hilarious one-liners? Will her scenes feature endless cheesecake shots? Will we be subjected to the threatened Elf/Dwarf romance? ...Will she *really* look this silly? (“Hmmn... looks like the Costume Department's already over-budget, so we’ll just hire an elf-ranger outfit from Partyland down the road. I’m sure no-one’ll notice...") |
Meh, I probably shouldn't even be posting here, as I haven't seen AUJ, and I have no plans to watch DOS.
I'll just leave off by saying that if Tolkien fails in his presentation of what one perceives as a "strong" female character, I am not at all confident that the movies, geared as they are toward mass modern audience appeal, will accomplish that better. |
Are male characters only strong if they bear arms? Why not have a woman ruler of Laketown? Surely because she would be older and morally ambiguous and wouldn't be hawt enough for the desired demographic. Don't be under any illusion that Tauriel is there for the girls. If there had been a genuine place for a female role model the role wouldn't have changed with the availability of the actress.
I don't get the problem with the Girdle of Melian. We aren't talking about Spanx. If you take the verb formof gird it has rather more positive associations with Knighthood which incidentally I think the gifts in Lorien to Boromir and the younger hobbits are more significant than they may fiirst appear (I am very slowly writing a paper on this so I will spare you further ramblings). Idrll is perhaps the one female character who is unreservedly admirable and it is her wisdom and preparedness that save some of her people and without which even the valour of Glorfindel et all would have been futile. Finally I reject the suggestion that objecting to Tauriel makes me somehow anti feminist. I care about the story not the gender of the protagonists. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Hmmn. Seems I’ve got myself out on a limb here. Ah well. |
Quote:
I have a philosophical objection to the idea that one can barricade or wall oneself in from danger or evil. I know this was well the case with many medieval walled cities and indeed with many 'gated' communities in the US these days. I believe that action simply exacerbates the social problems. The moment we claim some places are bad, we also fall prey to treating everyone there as bad and start expecting trouble. And vice versa, everyone in a good place as good. It's not a concept that resolves the difficulties but which makes rapproachment more difficult. So it is hard for me to see this as a positive activity and to regard the character who does it as a champion. There is in LotR--well, I think so, anyway--some suggestion that Galadriel's attempt to hold back time in Lorien was a mistake. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Yes, that's what I meant. The conversation is more a plot device that an expose or exploration of their characters. Quote:
|
But it has been implied that it is the only way that a woman can be strong inthis film. I don't have a problem with female warriors per se and I certainly haven'T conformed to them in my own life (am I a strong woman because I played rugby but a weak one because I embroider and knit?). But i had the blessing to be born at about the first moment n time when having two x chromosomes wasn't such a limiting factor though I was born a little to soon to be able to realise my unlikeliy childhood ambition of being a RAF pilot and it is still unusu for women to chose frontline military roles. My Naval cousin observed that the women in his cohort at Dartmouth chose logistics not Warfare. Female warriors are not a usual part of Tolkien's universe and unless Tauriel is somme Jeanne dArc type figure it makes little sense for there to be a female captain if there are no women in the rank and file. I just think it ts the worst kind of facile tokenism and as such insulting to women.Makes about as much sense as having the Tom Hanks character in Saving Private Ryan played by a woman. Maybe PJ is salving some lingering resentment that he never worked on Xena. Dunno but I don't see how this character will be an improvement. If they were serious about it there would have been no need for a recreation when Ronan was unavailable. Too many changes seem to have been made to accommodate Jackson's pet actors for me to have an iota of faith that there is any real vision or integrity. It just seems to be pure self indulgence and the lack of female characters in the original a convenient but unconvincing excuse.
|
We do not hear enough of Idril but she is far more proactive than any other woman. and can manage Daddy so she marries the lover of her choice AND is the only woman that does anything altruistic the only one who shows any leadeship and awareness of the wider context rather than forcing others into danger by wilful behaviour. Unlike certain others who we never hear the end of who are essentially only motivated by self interest.
|
Quote:
Also, a brief hiccup of a thought: Quote:
...they [all good folk] cannot stop Morgoth, only escape from him, which reads rather like the entire Silmarillion in microcosm--though Túrin's story, at least, suggest that the flight is ultimately impossible (and Gandalf says as much about the recurring waves of evil). And this makes me think about the chief contrast between Idril and Lúthien--or is it their point of convergence?--namely that she does the complete opposite of her mother: where Melian guards against Morgoth, she goes on the attack. Not, obviously, in a military manner, but certainly in a proactive one. |
Quote:
|
Melian at least protects her people her selfish daughter sits in a tree until it is in her own interest to get off her backside. Her proactivity is merely to satisfy her own desires and gets Felagund killed. I despise her and we hates her forever! Precioussesss
|
So straw poll...does Tauriel look more like Peter Pan, Robin Hood or....?
|
Firstly, for all you Betchal testers - what think ye of Morwen and Nienor and the "generation war for independence"? ;)
Quote:
There could be strong female characters even if the Bechdal test is not satisfied (and by strong I mean both a strong character and a strong impression on the reader/viewer). The classic Love Story movie is an example. Jennifer is, to my memory, the only female character who even appears on screen for any considerable length, and she doesn't even do anything spectacular, yet she's a strong person in all the meanings of the word. Lately, though, in many cases women who are presented as "female Harry Potters", for lack of a better term - noble, brave, overcoming unfairness, fighting, etc - end up becoming rather weak-charactered Mary Sues. You don't need a bow in your hand to be a strong character. Giving a bow to a person who has a weak character and/or impression makes it look like one of the over-the-top demonstrations of feminism which quickly turn into something akin to REB. My concluding thought: Either have a character who will leave the reader/viewer with a strong impression - a deep character, of any gender - or don't disgrace yourself with a shallow desperate fighter character of any gender. And, by the way - even with Tauriel TH movie still doesn't pass the Bechdal test, so what's the argument about?... :p Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
*Only kidding, Ms. Lilly. |
Quote:
And here's the picture again since the original link isn't working: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...yAsTauriel.jpg The longer I look at it, the more inspiring Mith's words become. Someone smack me on the head. Now. Edit: xed with Zil. That's a good one! |
I have now got Robin Hood riding through the glen as a ear worm. But she looks like the principal boy in a Vulcan pantomime. For those not familiar with the tradition the juvenile male lead is traditionally played b a woman and the lead older female role , the Dame, by a man
It is bit sad if production values have sunk so low. Gil.galad was on screen for abou three seconds and his costume was gorgeous. ztauriel is being given a starring role and she looks like .well THAT... |
Quote:
Quote:
I've seen a lot of female characters thrown into books, video games, and films/TV just to have one because one was previously lacking. They tend to be cold, skilled fighters, and just in need of a hug. If this elf-lady addition falls into that and serves the purpose of just being female then she's better left out. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:46 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.