 |
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
I thought that I remembered from the bookm that Helm's Deep was a fortress somewhat in between Edoras and Isengard, and that Aragorn et al. went there because they thaought that it was the next place that Saruman's army would strike. The movie has Helm's deep as the mountain refuge of the people of Edoras, the capital of Rohan. Which is right?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
hexagonian
|
 |
Gnawing on your mind...
Jun 1999
time: 23:24
|
|
FOTR was better...
Most of the weighty scenes in the 2nd book are going to be relegated to ROTK. (Minas Morgul, Shelob, Gandalf's confrontation with Saruman after the fall of Orthanc)
I guess I'm not locked into the whole idea that any deviation from the book is a bad thing. Seems to me that the general themes are still holding up well in the movies.
The change in Faramir's character did not bother me too much because it heightened the whole aspect that the Ring is a huge temptation for humans to use. If it was one thing that I did not like about Tolkien after repeated readings, it was his characters seemed somewhat two-dimensional in comparison to the rest of the world he created - and the characters seem to become even more two-dimensional later in the books. One thing Jackson has succeeded in so far is creating believable characters, (maybe not from the standpoint of their invunerability in battle), but in emotional weight.
Compare the characters in Lord of the Rings with ANY of the Star Wars movies, and there is no comparison at all.
The job Jackson did with Gollum is incredible. That was the highlight of TTT, and in fact is the high point so far of both movies.
To have Faramir wrestle with the dilemma of the Ring, as Jackson did, gave more weight to the power of the Ring, and makes the Ring even more of an entity. Ultimately, the end result is the same - Faramir releases Frodo to fulfill his quest - to face the wrath and disappointment of Denethor.
However...
Having Frodo up on the wall in Osgiliath with a Nazgul, and Faramir driving off that Nazgul with a single arrow is a stretch though. It was a totally contrived scene that made the Nazgul appear weak. These are some of the most fearsome creatures in Middle-earth, driven by the will of the most powerful being, and they are driven off by an arrow, especially when the Ring is in their grasp???? C'mon....
And it happened in the first movie when Frodo first meets the Black Rider. Tolkien creates a scene of menace without unduly stretching believability (The Rider is on the road, and Frodo/Sam are off to the side, but the Rider is not 12'' away right above the hollow, merely to be distracted by a thrown stick.)
Many of the battle scenes at Helms Deep stretched credibility, from the last charge of Theoden/Aragorn out the gates (where are the orc archers when you need them) to the charge of the Rohannin thart defies the laws of physics. (steep incline, and no Rohannin were killed in the filming of this scene, despite those extremely long pointy sticks the orcs were holding - yeah many were in the act of lowering them because of the light, but please, have some Rohannin die anyway...)
Still, the movies have exceeded anything I had hoped for. I've already seen TTT 3 times, so I must like it. And despite the stretches of credibility, Helm's Deep looked cool from a visual standpoint.
It's a very long wait until next December 
Last edited by hexagonian on 06-01-2003 at 10:33
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Demerzel
|
|
no it was Sam's little speech that is supposed to have swayed Faramir. I felt that the scene in Osgiliath did indeed weaken both Faramir & the Nazguls. Especially the Nazgul, men are supposed to flee in terror at the sight of them not just ignore them. The whole scene could have been dropped imho and the time used spent more profitably elsewhere.
The arrow shot is probably ripped from the bit in FOTR where Legolas shoots down the flying beast that the Nazgul rides when they are canoeing down the river. A lot of scenes are melded together in this manner.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lars-E
|
|
Saw it Dec 26th 2002.
Too much war. Nr 1 was much better and more exciting.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DanS
|
 |
Kickball Capital of the World
Jan 1970
time: 00:24
|
|
Actually, I'm not too down on the film for Faramir. By dwelling on the pull of the ring, Faramir comes out on par with Aragorn, who also "refused" the pull of the ring at the parting of the fellowship.
In the books, it was almost like the pull of the ring was nonexistant for Faramir--he says he would have never taken it anyway. In the book we have the luxury of being able to fill this stuff in, but a film has to make much more explicit.
I loved the line that they kept in for Faramir, but it was much more menacing in the movie... "A chance for Faramir, captain of Gondor, to show his quality."
Edit: I do think it important to show Osgiliath in this movie, since it will link it in place using the battle map. Plus, I think Osgiliath was done super well. Like the ruins of Rome, but better.
Last edited by DanS on 07-01-2003 at 00:30
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lars-E
|
|
Is the dvd collection with the extra scenes worth buying?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Rogan Josh
|
|
A agree that Faramir was much better in the book. I leaned over to my wife when Faramir appeared and confessed he was my favourite character from the books. I looked pretty stupid until I had explained that they had changed him so much.
It seems to me that there will be a lot more to cram into the ROTK than you all think. Things life the slaying of Theoden by the Nazgul who is subsequently wiped by Eowyn; the two big battles; Aragorn's transformation to King; the splendour of Minas Tirith. And lets not forget Shelob! (I suspect the end scene in Mt Doom will be very powerful...)
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
hexagonian
|
|
Gnawing on your mind...
Jun 1999
time: 23:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Arrian
After I got home from watching TTT, I re-read part of the book where Frodo, Sam and Faramir have their conversation, and it's just infinitely better the way Tolkein wrote it. Several lines are word-for-word or very close to it, but construed differently in the movie. |
Someone at onering.net had a good commentary about that passage of the book, breaking down the passage and viewing Faramir as a crafty interrogator. (He also favored the way Tolkien handled it over the movie.)
I guess I'm more bothered by how Jackson used the Nazgul to finally bring about Faramir's change of heart. Sam's speech moved him in that direction, but it was the Nazgul confrontation that finally swayed him in the film - and its just that the scene was too contrived for me. If he had left it with Sam's speech, that would of been more natural.
Jackson probably thought he needed something more tangible and visibly dramatic than a speech/conversation to show the change in Faramir.
The whole idea of the power of the Ring and more importantly, the temptation that it presents is what I like about the movie - its a theme of the book, but Jackson is giving it more weight in the movie. I really sense the malevolence of the Ring - from when it drops on the floor, it sits on a table, or caressed by a hobbit.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24.
Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-01-2003 09:58
|