Why Can't Movies Be Like Books?

[Imladris]

"Please, lets get it through our collective heads --- a book is one thing while a film is quite another. What works in one medium does not always work in the other."

I quoted this from another thread, and I have ran across many statements written like this, and always as a statement of fact.

It's more of a general rule of thumb than a fact -- to overquote a movie, it's more of a guideline for discussions than a rule. Eg -- books written in the first person would be rather difficult to turn into a movie since it's about interior thoughts of the narrator and that is very difficult to show without narration...and most people view that as bad form. LotR is easier -- except for the massive amount of detail that is both needed and rather unnecessary.

Please remember that directors have to report to another higher authority than just themselves. They don't have the final say. For example, I believe when I watched the commentary (which was a very long time ago so I am liable to misremember) -- they wanted Jackson to do it in two movies and, iirc, he fought very hard to keep it at three. There are also the matter of funding and all sorts of troublesome things. Sure a book can be turned into a movie, but at what cost? And if the higher ups deems it'll cost too much...well compromise must be made.

And everybody has a different vision or interpretation of the work. Just because it doesn't match yours doesn't mean it's necessarily false. I had read Tolkien's work many times before the viewing of the movie and I didn't think that Borormir's character was all that "changed", just that different aspects of his complexity were emphasised.

[davem]

Originally Posted by StW

As I wrote in my previous post

That seems to cover the line of reasoning you predictably used in your last post davem.

Ok, so your position is that rather than setting out to write a three-dimensional, morally complex, character & succeeding, Tolkien actually set out to write a two-dimensional, morally simplistic, character & failed? Any reader who percieves Boromir as a complex, flawed, selfish character motivated by desire for personal glory is reading that complexity into the character, because Tolkien was actually trying to write a stereotypically 'good' character for the reader to cheer on?

Now, would you argue the same for Turin? Tolkien actually intended to make Turin a 'simple' good guy but was so incompetent a writer that he ended up producing a complex, introverted, often amoral, selfish, tragic figure?

[Sauron the White]

from davem

Ok, so your position is that rather than setting out to write a three-dimensional, morally complex, character & succeeding, Tolkien actually set out to write a two-dimensional, morally simplistic, character & failed?

NO. My position is this. JRRT wrote the LOTR with Boromir being one of the least successful characters of the Fellowship. Jackson improved upon the character of Boromir making him a character which worked much better on screen than he did in the book.

Where do I get this from? The posted observations of many people over the last several years in this forum, TORN, B-77 and others.

Clear on that?

[davem]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

NO. My position is this. JRRT wrote the LOTR with Boromir being one of the least successful characters of the Fellowship. Jackson improved upon the character of Boromir making him a character which worked much better on screen than he did in the book.

No, Jackson completely re-wrote the character.

Where do I get this from? The posted observations of many people over the last several years in this forum, TORN, B-77 and others.

Clear on that?

Many people? Well, it must be true then.

[Sauron the White]

Your opinion is worthwhile and I respect that. However..... (here comes the zinger
) ... after a while it reminds me of that old story about the proud mother watching her son play tuba in a marching band during a town parade. the boy was clearly marching with his footing opposite every other member of the band. Without skipping a beat the proud mother proclaimed "everybody is out of step but Johnny".

[Folwren]

My dear fellow...your are exagerating quite a bit. Davem's opinion is not the only one like that out there.

I believe that Tolkien meant Boromir to be a very complex character and I believe that he succeeded. I have never read any other book wherein two readers have opposite opinions about the same character. I read the LotR, wept at Borommir's death, and thought he made an honorable character in the end. I then talked to my best friend who was reading the book at the same time and found that she did not like Boromir at all and that she in fact disliked him. The opinion on Boromir varies from person to person. Many people dislike him. Many others like him. We're all reading the same book. We're all reading the same words. And yet Tolkien has created such a deep, complex character that some readers can latch onto him and like him, and others latch onto his other side - his worse side.

I don't have longer to make this post flow more. So sorry.

-- Folwren

[Sauron the White]

from Folwren

My dear fellow...your are exagerating quite a bit. Davem's opinion is not the only one like that out there.

You are 100% right. Davem is not alone. And it seems the lions share of his compatriots are right here. I have frequented many Tolkien sites which share both book and film fans. I must say, with all due respect, that this particular site seems to have a gross imbalance of those who have the strongest negative opinions about the films and the most "bowing before the altar" attitudes toward the books. That is simply my observation after being here several months and several years on other sites.

When we compare the opinion against the film that is voiced here and among Tolkien literary circles, and compare it with the hundreds of millions who purchased tickets to see the film, the numbers speak for themselves.

Fowren, I do think you have an excellent point about the complexity of Boromir in the book. I respect that. I do honestly feel that there are some here who have an almost religious attitude towards the writings of JRRT and can find no fault, or at least publicly to finding no fault with his creations. They defend nearly everything with the zeal of a True Believer. It seems to have become far less a contest of reason than it does a test of ones faith.