Picky, Picky, Picky. - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

narfforc · 01-06-2005, 03:06 PM

Here`s one for you, as a member of The Tolkien Society I object to the sewer scene`s, I thought they should have smelled more ghastly, I couldn`t smell anything

elfearz1 · 01-06-2005, 03:17 PM

I agree, most of it seems like nit-picking, but there were some changes that I was dissapointed in. Like how Faramir takes Frodo to Gondor. Honestly, where did that come from?

If I remember correctly, he wasn't even tempted by the ring was he? I think it ruined Faramir's character and made it seem that all men are easily corrupted which isn't true. That's just my $0.02 anyway.

who knows, maybe I'm nit-picking too.

AbercrombieOfRohan · 01-06-2005, 03:22 PM

Well don't forget that Aragorn turns the ring away in Fellowship at Amon Hen, but I understand what you're saying.

narfforc · 01-06-2005, 03:55 PM

The One Ring is the ultimate corrupter, it use`s the desire for power. Boromir was doomed the moment he saw it, he wanted to destroy Sauron so much, to save his city, he wasnt a bad man, he was just weak. The desire for the Ring was enough to corrupt Saruman. It would have destroyed Denethor. Inner fortitude and morality were the reasons for saving Aragorn and Faramir, neither of these two wanted great power, and for reasons of good old down to Middle-Earth sense, Samwise Gamgee saw straight through the temptations the Ring gave him. The old saying power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. If any of The Wise should with this Ring overthrow the Lord of Mordor, using his own dark arts, he would set himself on Sauron`s throne, and yet another Dark Lord would appear.

The Only Real Estel · 01-06-2005, 07:07 PM

Quote:

but there were some changes that I was dissapointed in. Like how Faramir takes Frodo to Gondor. Honestly, where did that come from?

If I remember correctly, he wasn't even tempted by the ring was he? I think it ruined Faramir's character and made it seem that all men are easily corrupted which isn't true.

I think the TTT EE version did a pretty good job of explaining things, and I have mostly gotten over the Faramir business (if only because I'm trying to keep the movie & book versions seperate, for the most part). But I am not interested in Philipa Boyen's (one of the writers) explanation. She esentially says that they couldn't have Faramir the way he was in the book because they'd spent all of the first movie & a half trying to show how powerful the Ring was, & how Frodo could barely resist it; and if Faramir was like he was in the books, it would strip the Ring of all the power they were trying to build up. I disagree with this on several counts. Most importantly, it did nothing of the sort (for me) in the books. Granted, literature and film are two completely different things, but I think that excuse doesn't apply in this particular case. Secondly, as was already brought up, they had Aragorn refuse to take it (barely) at the end of the Fellowship, so Faramir would not join any exclusive club. Add on to that that the Ring does not hold nearly as much power over anyone when he (or she) has not spent a great deal of time around it (it took It a long time to finally wholly corrupt Boromir, if only for a fateful moment), & you see that it is no great stretch for Faramir to pass on it. Having said all that, I repeat that it is the writer's 'reasons' (excuses) for movie Faramir that bother me the most about the character.

**The Saucepan Man** · 01-06-2005, 07:24 PM

Although I have no problem with Faramir taking the Hobbits to Osgiliath (he let the Ring go eventually, after all, even if it was for rather strange reasons), I would hardly describe this as a nit-pick. It is an issue that merits (and has received much) substantive discussion in any analysis of the differences between the film and the book.

Gurthang · 01-07-2005, 04:14 PM

Here's some other nit-picks:

"The Hall of Meduseld was gold in the books, why didn't I see any gold in the movies?"

"Everybody knows that Wormtongue cut Saruman's throat; he didn't stab him in the back like the movies shows."

01-06-2005, 03:06 PM	#1
narfforc Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Muddy-earth Posts: 1,297	I am going to sewer Jackson. Here`s one for you, as a member of The Tolkien Society I object to the sewer scene`s, I thought they should have smelled more ghastly, I couldn`t smell anything

01-06-2005, 03:17 PM	#2
elfearz1 Shade of Carn Dûm Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Mirkwood Posts: 259	I agree, most of it seems like nit-picking, but there were some changes that I was dissapointed in. Like how Faramir takes Frodo to Gondor. Honestly, where did that come from? If I remember correctly, he wasn't even tempted by the ring was he? I think it ruined Faramir's character and made it seem that all men are easily corrupted which isn't true. That's just my $0.02 anyway. who knows, maybe I'm nit-picking too. __________________ I didn't eat Merry, i just ate his waistcoat!-Horse maidens dream 915/920 miles. On my way to Lothlorien! ^^Elfearz^^

01-06-2005, 03:55 PM	#4
narfforc Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Muddy-earth Posts: 1,297	The mere desire can corrupt The One Ring is the ultimate corrupter, it use`s the desire for power. Boromir was doomed the moment he saw it, he wanted to destroy Sauron so much, to save his city, he wasnt a bad man, he was just weak. The desire for the Ring was enough to corrupt Saruman. It would have destroyed Denethor. Inner fortitude and morality were the reasons for saving Aragorn and Faramir, neither of these two wanted great power, and for reasons of good old down to Middle-Earth sense, Samwise Gamgee saw straight through the temptations the Ring gave him. The old saying power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. If any of The Wise should with this Ring overthrow the Lord of Mordor, using his own dark arts, he would set himself on Sauron`s throne, and yet another Dark Lord would appear.

01-06-2005, 07:24 PM	#6
The Saucepan Man Corpus Cacophonous Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: A green and pleasant land Posts: 8,390	No nits picked here Although I have no problem with Faramir taking the Hobbits to Osgiliath (he let the Ring go eventually, after all, even if it was for rather strange reasons), I would hardly describe this as a nit-pick. It is an issue that merits (and has received much) substantive discussion in any analysis of the differences between the film and the book. __________________ Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind!

01-07-2005, 04:14 PM	#7
Gurthang Sword of Spirit Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Oh, I'm around. Posts: 1,401	Here's some other nit-picks: "The Hall of Meduseld was gold in the books, why didn't I see any gold in the movies?" "Everybody knows that Wormtongue cut Saruman's throat; he didn't stab him in the back like the movies shows." __________________ I'm on a Mission from God.

01-06-2005, 03:22 PM	#3
AbercrombieOfRohan Shade of Carn Dûm Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 311	Well don't forget that Aragorn turns the ring away in Fellowship at Amon Hen, but I understand what you're saying.