The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post

Fordim Hedgethistle · 10-30-2006, 02:40 PM

Hmmm...I did a search for a thread like the one I want to start here but I couldn't find anything precisely the same. There was one that is awfully close to what I would like to suggest, but not quite close enough...I think.

We've all read the threads and posts that slam the movies, or that take issue with particular changes made by PJ et al. This is going to be different. I would like to find out what changes you think were made from the book that intelligently and artistically transferred the tale to its new medium. I'm not asking for things that you preferred in the movie necessarily, but changes that were made in the film because PJ et al found a really good way to make a point in film that they simply could not have made any other way.

For example: I really appreciate the reasons for having the Elves show up at Helm's Deep. There have been howls of protest over this choice from book purists and I agree that it radically alters the story in ways that perhaps weaken the characterisation of the Elves, and obfuscate the depth of the mistrust that exists between the Free Peoples...

but

PJ et al made an intelligent choice in doing this, insofar as it gave them a way of showing how the struggle against Sauron was not just carried out by Rohan and Gondor. If the Elves had not shown up, the presumption would have been that they were hunkering down in Lorien safe and secure while the Men did all the dirty work. They could have done some kind of montage or plot explication later telling everyone "Oh, by the way, the Elves fought a bit too," but that would lack dramatic imperative and not really make the point that the Elves were fighting for their lives and sacficing themselves as well.

Another change I think entirely justified was in shifting Shelob's appearance to much later in the narrative -- it maintained the chronology of events and gave Frodo and Sam a lot more to do (in filmic terms) than they would otherwise have had if the third film had simply shown them slogging it out toward Mount Doom. If the action had intercut between them (walking/suffering) and the War (action/heroism) the hobbits would have looked really, really boring and we would have had no sense of the struggle -- I mean, really, would you have wanted to watch 45 mins of Frodo saying, "It's so heavy!" and Sam offering to carry it?

OK -- so what else did they do really well? And remember:

No flaming the movies
Don't just say what you liked or was cool
Focus on changes that make filmic sense, i.e. that successfully translate a part of the book that could not have been "shown" otherwise
No flaming

10-30-2006, 02:40 PM	#1
Fordim Hedgethistle Gibbering Gibbet Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Beyond cloud nine Posts: 1,844	Good Changes Hmmm...I did a search for a thread like the one I want to start here but I couldn't find anything precisely the same. There was one that is awfully close to what I would like to suggest, but not quite close enough...I think. We've all read the threads and posts that slam the movies, or that take issue with particular changes made by PJ et al. This is going to be different. I would like to find out what changes you think were made from the book that intelligently and artistically transferred the tale to its new medium. I'm not asking for things that you preferred in the movie necessarily, but changes that were made in the film because PJ et al found a really good way to make a point in film that they simply could not have made any other way. For example: I really appreciate the reasons for having the Elves show up at Helm's Deep. There have been howls of protest over this choice from book purists and I agree that it radically alters the story in ways that perhaps weaken the characterisation of the Elves, and obfuscate the depth of the mistrust that exists between the Free Peoples... but PJ et al made an intelligent choice in doing this, insofar as it gave them a way of showing how the struggle against Sauron was not just carried out by Rohan and Gondor. If the Elves had not shown up, the presumption would have been that they were hunkering down in Lorien safe and secure while the Men did all the dirty work. They could have done some kind of montage or plot explication later telling everyone "Oh, by the way, the Elves fought a bit too," but that would lack dramatic imperative and not really make the point that the Elves were fighting for their lives and sacficing themselves as well. Another change I think entirely justified was in shifting Shelob's appearance to much later in the narrative -- it maintained the chronology of events and gave Frodo and Sam a lot more to do (in filmic terms) than they would otherwise have had if the third film had simply shown them slogging it out toward Mount Doom. If the action had intercut between them (walking/suffering) and the War (action/heroism) the hobbits would have looked really, really boring and we would have had no sense of the struggle -- I mean, really, would you have wanted to watch 45 mins of Frodo saying, "It's so heavy!" and Sam offering to carry it? OK -- so what else did they do really well? And remember: No flaming the movies Don't just say what you liked or was cool Focus on changes that make filmic sense, i.e. that successfully translate a part of the book that could not have been "shown" otherwise No flaming __________________ Scribbling scrabbling.