The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/index.php)
-   The Movies (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/forumdisplay.php?f=12)
-   -   Parts of the movies criticized that you liked anyway (http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showthread.php?t=19152)

Rhun charioteer 10-27-2017 07:20 PM

Parts of the movies criticized that you liked anyway
 
So for Tolkien's book fans the Peter Jackson movies have had a mixed reception.

So what criticized movie scenes and ideas does anyone not have a problem with.

Personally I didn't mind the elves at Helm's Deep-yes I know it doesn't fit the story thematically but for it does show the elves in combat, I loved the entry music, and it shows why the elves are so special at least in terms of combat.

I enjoyed the Saruman-Gandalf duel-it was fun to both Wizards cut loose and fight.

I also liked the taller Balrog-it was more intimidating and awe inspiring than how it was described in the book.

So what movie scenes, events, and characters that received criticism were you fine with.

William Cloud Hicklin 03-06-2019 10:43 AM

In general, I found that the movies took a step-change up in quality whenever they used Genuine Tolkien Text(tm). This applied even when the GTT was moved to different scenes and different speakers, such as Wormtongue using Gandalf's words about Eowyn to Eowyn. Also Elrond's warning to Arwen, Theoden's composite speech before the Pelennor and so on. I even found myself moved, in spite of myself, by Gandalf using the "white shores" description to Pippin, notwithstanding the complete cosmological bogusness of it (The "white shores" were Tol Eressea, not whatever afterlife Men and Hobbits go to).

I had no problem with the basic idea of swapping Glorfindel for Arwen- way too many characters already to introduce a guy who only appears for five minutes, and even harder in the movies than in the books to explain why this kickass High Elf Balrog-slayer wasn't included in the Fellowship. And Arwen's intro shot through Frodo's eyes was very good. That however is no excuse for bigging-up Arwen at Frodo's expense, turning him into luggage.

But about the only pure PJ invention that I actually liked, or thought was an improvement on the books, was Boromir's last stand.

Galadriel55 03-06-2019 02:10 PM

One change that I like about the movies is a little minor word swap that I think makes the quote sound better. In the book Gandalf says "You cannot pass", while in the movie it's "You shall not pass". I think the latter sounds better, and in a way is more true in their situation. Gandalf doesn't know if the Balrog can or can't pass, the whole point of their duel was that the Balrog was an evenly matched if not more powerful adversary, and it required all of Gandalf's power to not let him win. Gandalf could be speaking with more knowledge and authority than his limited mortal form - perhaps believing that Eru would not allow the Balrog to destroy the mission or some such, but I think it's a stretch and it takes away from Gandalf's own sacrifice. "Shall", on the other hand, is a promise rather than a statement; even though the Balrog may actually be able to pass, he still will not. As a byproduct, this phrasing also puts more emphasis on Gandalf's heroic role in the scene.

So yes, this is the only quote I can think of that I like better in the movie than the book.

denethorthefirst 03-19-2019 12:10 PM

- I liked that FotR shortened the timeline in the beginning. In the books 17 years went by (T.A. 3001 - 3018) till Gandalf figured out that the Ring might be the One. I never found it believable that Gandalf was so slow and took so long to figure out the nature of the Ring. 17 years! The shortening of the timeline creates the necessary tension, a feeling of danger and immediacy thats a bit lacking in the slow moving beginning of the book.

- I did not mind that Tom Bombadil was cut. Yes, he is an interesting part of the world, but I really cant imagine how he would have worked in a movie. He would have slowed the pacing down too much. Maybe his inclusion could work in a TV-Miniseries-adaptation, but even then I remain sceptical.

- Although I think that the Balrog was too big overall, I liked the design of him.

- I did not mind the expanded role of Arwen. It gives her something to do and introduces her character. Compared to the later changes in TTT and RotK thats mild and rather defensible.

William Cloud Hicklin 03-19-2019 06:06 PM

I did like making Bilbo more than a bit tipsy at his birthday party.

Rhun charioteer 03-26-2019 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Galadriel55 (Post 713717)
One change that I like about the movies is a little minor word swap that I think makes the quote sound better. In the book Gandalf says "You cannot pass", while in the movie it's "You shall not pass". I think the latter sounds better, and in a way is more true in their situation. Gandalf doesn't know if the Balrog can or can't pass, the whole point of their duel was that the Balrog was an evenly matched if not more powerful adversary, and it required all of Gandalf's power to not let him win. Gandalf could be speaking with more knowledge and authority than his limited mortal form - perhaps believing that Eru would not allow the Balrog to destroy the mission or some such, but I think it's a stretch and it takes away from Gandalf's own sacrifice. "Shall", on the other hand, is a promise rather than a statement; even though the Balrog may actually be able to pass, he still will not. As a byproduct, this phrasing also puts more emphasis on Gandalf's heroic role in the scene.

So yes, this is the only quote I can think of that I like better in the movie than the book.

That has to be my favorite change as well.

And I agree this scene really underlies Gandalf speaking with authority-he introduces himself, and commands the Balrog to "go back to the shadow".

Nerwen 03-27-2019 05:23 AM

Rhun charioteer, I take it you mean aspects of the films that are often targets of criticism? Well, I'll second a couple of other people: losing Tom Bombadil and Glorfindel- not because I have anything against either of them but because it was a good idea to reduce the number of characters and subplots rather than trying to cram them all in.

There's a lot of little changes that mostly go unnoticed and undiscussed rather than criticised, but I guess that's not what you're talking about?

William Cloud Hicklin 03-27-2019 03:41 PM

On the other hand, there was a minor word-change that irritates me: the replacement of Tolkien's consistent beer with D&D/Renfaire-speak ale.

And, please don't come over on me with the post-medieval date of lagering or the fact that traditional British beers are ales or that ale is an Anglo-Saxon word: Tolkien didn't use words by accident and he chose to use beer. That PBJ "knew better" is just one indicator of their tone-deafness overall.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:33 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.