[Tirinor]

Maedhros<P>Your perspective of the film is admirable. I agree with much of what you have said. The books do not survive independently from one another, so why should we expect the movies to. We should exhibit a degree of patience when critiquing things such as character development and plot choices, withholding judgment until we see the whole picture. But that doesn't change the fact that some of those things are indeed weak in the first movie. I can't speak for Rhud, but much of my arguments are against people saying those elements are good as they stand. They may end up working well with the remaining movies, but right now we can't say either way. Just as we must wait to judge them as bad, there is not enough evidence to judge them for good.<P>Being that as it may, some cannot be rescued by the remaining movies. My biggest problem with the movie stems from missed opportunities. I believe Jackson missed the opportunity to connect with the audience on a human level by not letting the actors playing Bilbo and Galadriel act out their temptation scenes, and instead resorting to the scare'em with computer graphics method. I don't mind computer graphics aiding in scenes, but when the computer graphics carry the scene when the scene is much more human than that is a tragedy.<P>He missed opportunities to solidify characterization by neglecting scenes that would have strengthened the bonds between characters such as Legalas-Gimli, Aragorn-Frodo, Frodo-Sam, etc. Some have argued that this has been shown effectively because of a smattering of scenes that they use as examples. But just because it was shown, does not mean that it was shown effectively. This phenomenon stems from an interesting hypocrisy. Those that defend the movie by claiming that detractors cling to the book to tightly and fail to understand the strains of media transfer, commit the same error when they take characterization that they already have in their minds from the books and then claim that one line, or one scene does the same characterization in the movie. I would challenge those who think the characterization was satisfactory to look at it from a new comers view. Then they would see that the scenes where Aragorn and Frodo share a moment at Rauros has not been properly set up, and the same with Frodo and Sam, a great scene, but one that could have been even more powerful. And the Elves might have well been edited out of the first movie completely for all the substance they were imparted with. Many characterization scenes in the movie were in need of "builder" scenes before them, so the viewer knows why, or suspects what the character is going to decide. Characterization is about character movement, and rarely can one scene convey character movement properly. There needs to be a beginning to move from, not just the movement itself. I believe Jackson missed opportunities to accomplish those "builder" moments, and therefore his characterization suffered. <P>Back to what I first said, some characterization builder scenes were included and haven't been moved upon yet, I can understand and am happy about these because I trust they will come into play later and build character the way it should be done. But, scenes that have movement or decisions/choices but haven't been properly built up to, it is to late for them. They missed it. Those scenes do not carry the weight that they could have, and should have, and Jackson cannot go back in time with movies 2 and 3 to do that for the audience. <P>The elves, especially Elrond, were just plain misrepresented.<P>I think three hours is about max for length of a movie, and most of my gripes could only be remedied with more scenes, but I honestly believe that those missed opportunities could have been un-missed, in the same amount of time. An example that was in the movie was the conversation between Gandalf and Frodo in Moria about Gollum. Well done. An example of what could have been, is to forget about sending Bill off at the gates of Moria and instead have Aragorn say something to Frodo, or have Frodo and Sam talk, or Legolas and Gimli argue. Any number of things would have been better than a pointless scene involving a donkey that, as far as new comers are concerned and as far as the movie is concerned, has nothing to do with anything.<P>But, again, I am forgiving for now. The first movie, due to the amount of information, and the story having a one front focus (two with Saruman), makes for some very difficult movie making. The 2nd and 3rd movies should be easier, and I will wait until then to give my final verdict. Other than that this one could have been better. <P><BR>Regarding Rhudladion's post<P>Good points. I disagree about the staircase scene in Moria, but agree that Cave Troll brawl should have been shorter. Interesting idea about the Sauron battle and cutting Lothlorien. I liked Gandalf just the way he is, but agree with much of what you wrote.<P><BR>Lush<P>You will have to wait until tomorrow for the "good movie" essay. Sorry.