![]() |
|
|
|
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
|
|
|
|
#1 | |||||||||||
|
Regal Dwarven Shade
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: A Remote Dwarven Hold
Posts: 3,594
![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
A sentiment confirmed by the next line… Quote:
This was NOT a mental picture that I needed to have in my brain! Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I’m honestly curious about that, if anybody knows. It seems to be that both would require a lot of work. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I’m surprised Arwen wasn’t just cut from the script as she now fulfills no purpose…unlike the Eagles who were cut but served a purpose. I wonder how Boorman proposed to get Frodo off Mount Doom? Quote:
![]() I have a feeling, though, this particular adaptation would have been embraced by the critics as being the greatest thing since Citizen Kane. It would have been the way the books should have been written. My question is, “Doesn’t this script reduce Middle earth down to the level of a lot of the trashy fantasy that has subsequently followed Tolkien?”
__________________
...finding a path that cannot be found, walking a road that cannot be seen, climbing a ladder that was never placed, or reading a paragraph that has no... |
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
#2 | ||
|
La Belle Dame sans Merci
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
peace
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
![]() ![]() |
I'm not sure the B/P changes bother me as much as the ones PJ made. Boorman's movie would have been so different from the book that I could have approached it as something entirely 'other'. The main problem for me with PJ's version is that it is so close to the books for so much of the time that the changes he does make stick out like sore thumbs.
Its certainly true that a lot of the ideas they had for LotR were taken up into Excalibur - which takes just as many liberties with Mallory as they took with Tolkien. Yet Excalibur worked, while this, imo, really wouldn't have. I'd still kind of like to see it though. Does make you wonder what we may be on the receiving end of when LotR does finally come out of copyright...... |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
Eidolon of a Took
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: my own private fantasy world
Posts: 3,460
![]() |
Hahahahahahahahahahaha!
My favorite part was them putting Gimli in a hole in the ground and beating him. Quote:
Also, I really don't understand why you would make Fellowship take up half of the film.
__________________
All shall be rather fond of me and suffer from mild depression. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | ||
|
Dread Horseman
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Behind you!
Posts: 2,744
![]() |
Very interesting! I'd heard Boorman's name in connection with LotR, but never knew it got even as far as a draft script.
Quote:
I have to say that prior to FotR, I ranked his Excalibur as one of the top two fantasy movies of all time (Conan the Barbarian being the other). Still, even that film wanders into some really strange territory towards the end, and he is after all the man who brought us Zardoz, which featured Sean Connery running around in this getup (WARNING: I assume no responsibility for any eye damage suffered as a result of clicking that link). The Golden Age of 70's cinema wasn't always what it is sometimes cracked up to be. Didn't he use the rainbow shot, if not the line, when Arthur is sailing away at the end of Excalibur? Interesting connection. I'll have to pop in my DVD to check. Quote:
Thanks for the interesting info, davem! |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Pilgrim Soul
Join Date: May 2004
Location: watching the wonga-wonga birds circle...
Posts: 9,461
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Suprisingly, this has grown on me sinceI read about it yesterday. I am not sure it isn't more honest to genuinely stream line the story this way for a single film than to convolute it to make minor elements more important in a long one. The Arwen Aragorn relationship is important to the greater history of Middle Earth but it isn't vital to the story of the Lord of the Rings. And I would rather have my darling Faramir omitted than disdained. Tolkien considered marrying Aragorn and Eowyn before he thought of Arwen so I can live with that. I think the Kabuki is a brilliant way to "cut to the chase". I certainly think that SFX can be overused or used pointlessly. In fact my major issues (apart from Legolas being once again designated village idiot) are the Dwarf beating and Galadriel and Frodo thing -whatever the connections to wider mythology ewwww!!!)
__________________
“But Finrod walks with Finarfin his father beneath the trees in Eldamar.”
Christopher Tolkien, Requiescat in pace |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Eidolon of a Took
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: my own private fantasy world
Posts: 3,460
![]() |
Personally, I prefer a version that's mostly close to the book with a few deviations than a vastly reworked one. There has always been much disagreement over PJ's deviations, indicating that fans have varying opinions on which of them were merited or unmerited, and which worked and didn't work. It has provided this forum with many robust discussions over the years, anyway.
With Boorman's adaptation, it promises to be SO vastly different that I would just prefer that he write his own fantasy rather than seek to make such drastic changes to LotR. There are a few which are okay, depending on your tastes, but as has been pointed out, the beating of Gimli and the intimacy of Frodo and Galadriel just take the cake.
__________________
All shall be rather fond of me and suffer from mild depression. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|
|
|