Microphones in Middle-earth...the BBC Lord of the Rings

[davem]

Originally Posted by Brian Sibley

I was disappointed that we weren't able to get the original cast back together (it was several years later and Ian Holm was already spending quite a lot of time in Hollywood) because, sadly, this meant that it could never really work for anyone who had listened to the original LOTR broadcasts and didn't make much sense on its own to anyone who hadn't!

I've said before that I've always felt that the Old Forest/House of TB/Barrow Downs section is pretty self contained, with a beginning, middle & end, & can be done as a stand alone story. Nigel Planer as Frodo took a bit of getting used to if you know him as Neil from the Young Ones.

I was pleased that in the LotR adaptation you took into account that we hadn't been told that Merry had a sword from the Barrow & that when he stabs the Witch King his sword only serves as a 'distraction' (I think the Witch King says something like 'Halfling, you sting like a flea!').

One thing I will always be grateful to you for is in showing (as with Faramir later) that this episode, & Tom in particular, can work in a dramatisation. It annoys me when people simply dismiss the possibility as an excuse for not attempting it. The fact is that an adaptor who knows what they're doing can make the episode work well. Its the same with Faramir - the movie makers' constant refrain that they 'had to change Faramir's character because he woudln't have worked in a movie' always irked me. Tolkien's Faramir does not have to be changed into a thug (the beating of Gollum) who's only concern is getting Daddy's approval in order to be believable. In short, I think your adaptation worked so well because you clearly both loved & trusted Tolkien, whereas the movie makers always seemed afraid to just do that, & as a result a lot of stuff was changed unnecessarily or simply invented as a way of avoiding taking any 'risks'.

And I'll always be grateful for the fact that the Balrog in your adaptation didn't have wings

[Brian Sibley]

Originally Posted by davem

And I'll always be grateful for the fact that the Balrog in your adaptation didn't have wings

It didn't?

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Brian Sibley

I think Dave and others have already said most of what can be said about this... What is lost? A fascinating character... A episode of unexpected dangers... A indication that TREES are not always what they seem to be... An oasis of peace at Tom's house providing a moment's respite on the trail... An opportunity to know that there are those (or at least one) who is untouched by the power of the Ring...

What is gained by cutting Tom? Keeping up the momentum of Frodo's flight and the Riders' pursuit... In Tales of the Perilous Realm, these chapters took TWO half-hour episodes, so, if it had been included in the original broadcasts, these scenes would have needed to be compressed to a point of being, probably, meaningless...

Now here's a thorny question. If you had been given a whole extra hour of Auntie's time, would you still have cut out Tom?

At least, speaking as an out and out Tom-nut, you did the cut coherently. What bothered me with the films was that where a change had to be made, it so often messed about with the integrity of narrative and character. It might be fun to listen to the early episodes but with the further adaptation of the three Tom chapters inserted into place.

[Brian Sibley]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Now here's a thorny question. If you had been given a whole extra hour of Auntie's time, would you still have cut out Tom?

Unfair!! I might have done, but a lot of other good material was also cut that - had there been time - might have cried out for reinstatement...

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

At least, speaking as an out and out Tom-nut, you did the cut coherently. What bothered me with the films was that where a change had to be made, it so often messed about with the integrity of narrative and character. It might be fun to listen to the early episodes but with the further adaptation of the three Tom chapters inserted into place.

I tried this - some years ago - but the changes in everyone's voices (and having 'Gandalf' as narrator) was just too distracting. However, content-wise, I think, it works...

[Sauron the White]

from davem

One thing I will always be grateful to you for is in showing (as with Faramir later) that this episode, & Tom in particular, can work in a dramatisation. It annoys me when people simply dismiss the possibility as an excuse for not attempting it.

One listens to the radio with their ears and supplies the pictures in their mind. That is a huge difference compared to a film in that we get the whole thing and the mind does not do much other than process it. What you see is what you get.

Tom Bombadil was a visual train wreck as written. On the screen he would have been a total disaster and that would have started with that dreadful costume. On radio, that visual handicap is removed quite nicely.

One cannot compare two different types of medium and draw conclusions about the quality of one based on the essence and features of a different one.

[davem]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

from davem
One listens to the radio with their ears and supplies the pictures in their mind. That is a huge difference compared to a film in that we get the whole thing and the mind does not do much other than process it. What you see is what you get.

But if a listener 'supplies the pictures in their mind' then they do experience the episode 'visually'. If the episode is not a 'visual train wreck' in my head when I read it/listen to the radio adaptation then I can't see that it would inevitably be so if it was put on screen.

Now, I accept that it wouldn't have worked in Jackson's movie, but I don't think that means it couldn't have worked per se. Talking eagles would not have worked (let alone singing ones) in Jackson's movie either. If you claim that 'x' couldn't work in a movie or other visual dramatic representation you're also saying, by extension that its impossible to visualise - because if a reader/listener can picture the episode as they read it/listen to it then it can also be put on screen. Now, you may not want to see it on screen, or want anyone else to see it on screen, but that is not at all the same thing as saying its impossible to put it on screen. Certainly I've heard plenty of people say that the Bombadil/Old Forest/Barrow Downs episode is impossible to dramatise in any form, but I think Brian's adaptation disproves that completely - because it does work[/i]. Of course, you'd have to hear it to appreciate how well it works. And I think if you do hear it you'll see that it could be translated into a visual form.

[Sauron the White]

Davem ... I have not one iota of criticsim of the radio play including Bombadil. And I take no issue with you at all that his inclusion worked in that medium. Kudos to Brian Sibley and the others responsible for that accomplishment.

I imagine if one were making a film of the LOTR as something rather surreal or an other wordly, other dimensional like Dr. Seuss then you could try to include Bombadil and it might work. But Jackson opted for a realistic world, and a more serious one which had no room for that character.

If you claim that 'x' couldn't work in a movie or other visual dramatic representation you're also saying, by extension that its impossible to visualise - because if a reader/listener can picture the episode as they read it/listen to it then it can also be put on screen.

Just because some people can see it in their minds eye does not mean it can be put on film successfully. A person can read the most disgusting description of violence but process it so that it is softened and they can accept it. The same with anything else they read. On a film screen that does not happen because it is all there for you and your only choice is to look away or reject it by laughing at its absurdity. I am afraid that when you combine the visual of TB along with his doggerel poetry, the result would have been the latter one in theaters around the world. And that does not make for a successful film.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Brian Sibley

Unfair!! I might have done, but a lot of other good material was also cut that - had there been time - might have cried out for reinstatement...

Hmmm, does this mean there are some 'out-takes' and deleted scenes lurking in the cellars of Broadcasting House?

No, the trolls were omitted. Sorry. I remember being envious when I first saw the Trollshaws figures created for the Jackson film and thinking that he's done something visually that we hadn't done... But in the end, I believe, we had to wait for the extended version to see them!

I think that leaving them out was a sensible move myself. The stone trolls don't 'do' anything beyond prompting more tales and to try to portray them coherently in an audio format would have taken up far too much time I think. The one benefit of film/TV is that you can simply make a sculpture of something like that (or the fallen 'head' decked in flowers at the Crossroads - for another example) and have it sitting in the background while dialogue or action is happening.

Of course the listener to the radio version is always free to imagine the things the group might be passing on their way to Rivendell.

Anyway. I'm intrigued about these radio plays of the Gormenghast books now and I'm going to have to see if I can find a copy of those! I hope I can - and maybe they will become more widely known because one thing I've noticed is that Peake's work is finally getting a bit more recognition these days - he even shares double billing with Tolkien in next week's episode of The Worlds of Fantasy!

[Brian Sibley]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Hmmm, does this mean there are some 'out-takes' and deleted scenes lurking in the cellars of Broadcasting House?

I wish! None of that material was kept and all the music tracks were later 'wiped'...

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

I'm intrigued about these radio plays of the Gormenghast books now and I'm going to have to see if I can find a copy of those! I hope I can - and maybe they will become more widely known because one thing I've noticed is that Peake's work is finally getting a bit more recognition these days - he even shares double billing with Tolkien in next week's episode of The Worlds of Fantasy!

The BBC never issued the plays on CD, but there are still copies of the audio cassettes. You'll find details on my website (on this page - towards the bottom!) Brian's CD and Cassette recordings. The plays starred Sting (as Steerpike) with Freddie Jones, Bernard Hepton, Sheila Hancock, Eleanor Bron, Judy Parfitt et al...

Now... BACK TO MIDDLE-EARTH, PLEASE!!

[TheGreatElvenWarrior]

Originally Posted by davem

And I'll always be grateful for the fact that the Balrog in your adaptation didn't have wings

How do you know that? I don't think it said...

I was thrilled when I listened to the BBC radio adaptations, my mom was gracious and bought them for me for Christmas... I think I converted my cousin... we listened to TH and FoTR! She loved it, I on the other hand, was amazed at the closeness to the book! Although I was disappointed that there was no Barrow-Downs, but that is understandable, and one of my favourite parts of the book (The journey to Crickhollow) was there too!!!!

[davem]

Originally Posted by TheGreatElvenWarrior

How do you know that? I don't think it said...

Well, the Balrog may or may not have had wings in the original broadcast, but if so they must have been digitally removed when it was re-edited into 13 episodes - I've checked my cd's & there isn't a sign of wings on the Balrog - even when I use a large magnifying glass. Actually, I don't remember there being wings on the Balrog back in 1981 when I first heard the series - though I only had access to a small transistor radio at the time. I haven't heard the re-edited/remastered version which came out at the time of the movies, so I can't say whether wings have been added for that version to bring it in line with the Jackson films - they may have.

Apparently there were some Moria scenes in the original broadcast where the real Boromir was missing due to the actor having other commitments (apparently a passing cleaner had to be brought in to stand behind Aragorn to make up the numbers but luckily he didn't have any lines), & there was one infamous scene during Helm's Deep where Legolas is facing the wrong way & it appears he is shooting at his own side because the producer had inserted the audio tape in the wrong way round during a late night recording session. I've heard that these problems have been fixed for the latest version, but I can't be certain of that.

Of course, none of that may be true....

PS, to get serious again, I'll be starting the discussion on Episode Four tomorrow, so if everyone wants to get listening ASAP....

[Brian Sibley]

Originally Posted by davem

Well, the Balrog may or may not have had wings in the original broadcast, but if so they must have been digitally removed when it was re-edited into 13 episodes - I've checked my cd's & there isn't a sign of wings on the Balrog - even when I use a large magnifying glass. Actually, I don't remember there being wings on the Balrog back in 1981 when I first heard the series - though I only had access to a small transistor radio at the time. I haven't heard the re-edited/remastered version which came out at the time of the movies, so I can't say whether wings have been added for that version to bring it in line with the Jackson films - they may have.

Apparently there were some Moria scenes in the original broadcast where the real Boromir was missing due to the actor having other commitments (apparently a passing cleaner had to be brought in to stand behind Aragorn to make up the numbers but luckily he didn't have any lines), & there was one infamous scene during Helm's Deep where Legolas is facing the wrong way & it appears he is shooting at his own side because the producer had inserted the audio tape in the wrong way round during a late night recording session. I've heard that these problems have been fixed for the latest version, but I can't be certain of that.

You DO know a lot about that series, don't you!

Thanks for LOL!