high, purged of the gross: the movies

[Gorwingel]

Well I just have to bring this up (I know this has been discussed before). In my opinion I personally think that Tolkien would have gone crazy over the entire "Faramir taking Frodo and Sam to Osgilith" scene. It is just that I thought (as many others did also) this part went terribily against the spirit of the book, the characters (it very much made Faramir for me much less of an honorable person, because he did something I would never, ever expect the book Faramir ever to do), and it had some terrible lines to boot!

I also believe that Tolkien would have disliked the length of many of the battle scenes just because they took away from the language, and the actual communication of the characters in the book. In addition the battles also allowed the addition of much of the modern language in the films (quotes in posts above).

But Jackson did a wonderful job, and probably the best of jobs expected

[PaleStar]

If we think about this..
Perhaps Tolkien would've been happy to see an adapation of his books not directed by Ralph Bakishi, but I can tell that, while he would not have been as upset as the estate is, it seems highly unlikely that he would regard the movies highly, if, indeed he ever saw them at all.
let's remember that, if Tolkien were still alive to see the movies, he would've been over one hundred years old, and perhaps not be able, physicly, to sit through them. Plus, there's the thought of how he'd be mangaging mentaly; no doubt that he'd still be sad, however much, but the loss of his wife Edith.
Besides, he wasn't one for the modern conviences; after all, he's the creator of a world with almost no recognizable technology, save a windmill in the Shire and the crude seige machinery of the orcs. Even if he was well and able enough, i think he'd just refuse to go. Or perhaps not; he'd be upset with a majority of FOTR, that's for sure. It definetly suffered the worst adapatation out of all three parts, but I'm not him, so I don't know his reaction.

Sorry if that seems to be taking the question too literally; but it does answer the question, right?

[mark12_30]

Gorwingel wrote:

this part went terribily against the spirit of the book, the characters (it very much made Faramir for me much less of an honorable person, because he did something I would never, ever expect the book Faramir ever to do), and it had some terrible lines to boot!

Interesting. (And I agree, it annoys me too.)

Why is it so annoying?

Why did he develop Faramir as such an extremely honorable person, I wonder? Is Faramir a caricature of honor, or are there really human beings like that?

[Essex]

Faramir is a man of his WORD. He did not know it was the Ring of Power when he stated he would not pick it up if it were lying on the road. Once he realised what it was, he felt bound to his word, and let Frodo go.

[mark12_30]

[QUOTE=PaleStar]If we think about this..
Perhaps Tolkien would've been happy to see an adapation of his books not directed by Ralph Bakishi, but I can tell that, while he would not have been as upset as the estate is, it seems highly unlikely that he would regard the movies highly, if, indeed he ever saw them at all....
Besides, he wasn't one for the modern conviences; after all, he's the creator of a world with almost no recognizable technology, save a windmill in the Shire and the crude seige machinery of the orcs. ...
Or perhaps not; he'd be upset with a majority of FOTR, that's for sure. It definetly suffered the worst adapatation out of all three parts, but I'm not him, so I don't know his reaction.
QUOTE]

Palestar, I've been thinking about your post for a bit and you 've come up with some interesting points. Aside from his being disinclined to sit in a movie theater for hours on end, do you think he would have been pleased with the way that the movies told the story, and whether the movies fulfilled his story-ideals and story-hopes in the sense that his books did?

[The Saucepan Man]

... do you think he would have been pleased with the way that the movies told the story, and whether the movies fulfilled his story-ideals and story-hopes in the sense that his books did?

Related link:

Do you think Tolkien would be insulted by the LOTR movies?

[mark12_30]

Thanks for the link, Saucie.

When I say "do you think he would have been pleased" with the movies, what I am getting at is, would Tolkien find that the movies succeeded in portraying Middle-Earth as:

...the fair elusive beauty that some call Celtic .....'high', purged of the gross...steeped in poetry... great tales in fullness... majestic....

...etc?

[Nurumaiel]

Helen encouraged me to jump in and join the discussion, and I'm doing so now that I have a spare moment. I'd like to briefly add my view on the topic of FARAMIR.

Back when TTT came out, I was one of those who believed Faramir could have been better but thought he was still okay. I've changed my view since then, because of two things I will just mention so as not to bore you with lengthy, off-topic details: an RPG character called Liornung and the Chapter-by-Chapter discussion, which brought recollections of hearing LotR for the first time as a very small child and pondering why I was so attracted to him and thought him one of the best characters in the entire book.

I shan't go so far as to say his character was totally butchered, for it seems to me he did retain at least some honor and nobility, but there is surely a world of difference between movie Faramir and book Faramir.

Faramir in the book has always been to me high and purged of the gross. I defined him as the following: noble, honorable, and simple.

Noble because of what he was. His actions and manner of speech towards Frodo and Sam and others he came in contact with were noble and kingly. Not in the sense of superiority, that is that he was of noble birth and made others realize it and make themselves feel low. From the dictionary: "Having or showing qualities of high moral character, such as courage, generosity, or honor: a noble spirit." That seems to describe Faramir rather well.

Honorable because, as Essex pointed out, he was a man of his word. When he said he would do or would not do something, he kept his word. He was highly moral and I think has earned respect from readers for this. He possessed honorable traits, such as keeping his word.

Simple is a word often used for one who is 'stupid,' but I use it in a different meaning here. Faramir was not concerned with gaining high ranks and having all that would give him luxury and power. This is why he didn't take the Ring, I think. He was tempted by it, but he did not care perhaps for the things it offered; power, fame, etc. One of the definitions dictionary.com provides is "humble or lowly in condition or rank," but simple can also be used to mean that one is not obsessed in gaining higher rank and power. Another definition it gives is 'not guileful or deceitful; sincere.' Again, sounds like Faramir. The same site defines 'simplicity as "Absence of luxury or showiness; plainness." The same thing can apply here, as well: simplicity as the lack of desire to have luxury and to be showy. Helen, perhaps we should add 'Simplicity' to our list?

Sam told Faramir that he had shown his quality; the very finest. I agree with Sam. Yet these words cannot ring true in regards to the movie Faramir.