In Defense of PJ

[the mortal elf]

I know we've talked about this a ton of times, but I just had to add my two cents after watching the appendices on the special edition dvd.<P>You know, we're really missing the point when we tear the movie apart and look for mistakes. (I'm not being hypocritical because I do this too, and I'm going to try to stop) The point is that Peter Jackson took the theme, or the meaning of LoTR and got it on the screen in what he thought was the most practical way.<P>Also, we're always complaining that he was the director. Thoughts of ourselves making a movie better than him often rise up, or just gripes about why couldn't it have been so and so. Think about it. What if PJ hadn't done LoTR? Where would we be then? What if some idiot who'd maybe read the book once and thought it could make a bunch of money had made it? I'm actually thankful that PJ made it.<P>I'm not imposing this opinion on anyone, it's just what I think. I just wanted to give him a little defense against all the bashing that's been going on. Feel free to disagree or post your own opinions

[Orual]

You're absolutely right. Though we may not agree with everything PJ did, we're really lucky to have someone who is so passionate about the books directing the movies. He's a real stickler for detail--"One day at a time, every day to perfection" is one of his mottos. We complain about Arwen's role. What if the rumours had been true, and he had added her to the Fellowship? Somebody who was really trying to "appease the femenists" as I and others have said on numerous occasions would have added a woman to the Fellowship. We ought to count ourselves blessed. Thank you, PJ!<P>~*~Orual~*~

[Diamond18]

Here, here. Y'all know I'm a PJ supporter already, but I have to add my 2¢ worth on the subject once again.<P>This guy is a BIG fan of Tolkien. He was looking forward to someone making the movie someday, so he could go see it. When that didn't happen, he put his money where his mouth was, and made it himself! (None of this, "I could make a better movie...you betcha" and that's all).<P>And the changes he made weren't willy-nilly. He thought about them at length. Plus, he wrote the screenplay with two other people, Fran Walsh and Phillipa Boyens. Can you imagine being in on that? All the differing ideas? I imagine at times it was something like these threads here at the Barrow-Downs. Maybe.<P>So even if you disagree with some changes, you've got to respect the man, along the other men and women who were in on the process. They did it as fans, and (I think) as very intelligent fans at that.<P>So when we get inclined to sound a bit self-righteous, like we're protecting Tolkien from some clueless jerk with dollar signs in his eyes, we should stop and think, "Have I devoted 5 years of my life to making this movie?"<P>I'm not saying we shouldn't compare or evaluate the movie at all. Just don't get too invective about it, and don't be so quick to say "I could do it better!" <P>Edit: Aha, bet you thought I was through, eh?<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Somebody who was really trying to "appease the femenists" as I and others have said on numerous occasions would have added a woman to the Fellowship. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Orual, that reminded me of this picture:<P> <P>Now, aren't we all thankful that the Brothers Hildebrandt were erroneous in what they expected the movie to be like? This picture is titled, "Arwen Joins the Quest".<p>[ November 18, 2002: Message edited by: Diamond18 ]

[Arwen1858]

oh my gosh! where did that pic come from?? I'm so glad the movie was nothing like that!! I like what you said, <B>the mortal elf</B>! I think PJ did a great job, and the movie really doesn't deserve all the bashing it gets. <BR>Arwen

[Mattius]

Man, that pictures just plain weird! Why is Arwen's sword a flame and Frodo?! He looks like the invisible guy from the Fantastic 4!

[Diamond18]

The picture was made by Greg and Tim Hildebrandt for the cover of <I>Inquest Magazine</I>. The mag. was doing an article on the upcoming movie, but they had no "references from the movie" to give the artists. So they just gave them photos of the those three actors. (Liv, Elijah and Sir Ian).<P>G.& T. Hildebrandt assumed that the rumors about Arwen having a larger role meant that she was joining the Fellowship. They thought this was wonderful, because, quote: (Greg) "There are so few women in Tolkien's book and none of them take part in any of the major action. I am glad to see that the film is building up the female characters of Middle-earth." (Er...Éowyn?)<P>I got this information from the book about the Hildebrandt bros. written by Gregory Hildebrandt Jr. "Greg and Tim Hildebrandt: The Tolkien Years". Some of you may recognize the name because they made three LotR calendars back in the 70's.<P>Well, that was sort of off topic. But not really. It's what might have been had someone other than PJ been doing this movie.

[Shanna]

I think that its a good thing that PJ made the film. We don't need another movie made just for the cash...<BR>*cough*Harry Potter*cough*

[WarBringer]

shana-lol! I gotta agree, PJ has done a good job with the movies-still, i could see spielberg making a really awesome LotR movie. Opinions?

[GreyIstar]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> "There are so few women in Tolkien's book and none of them take part in any of the major action. I am glad to see that the film is building up the female characters of Middle-earth." (Er...Éowyn?) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>He obviously didn't read the books.<P>Ive watched the commentaries and extras on the DVD and they explain most of the changes and they are logical for the most part in a movie way. Most had to do with pacing and building up momentum. The last thing you want to do is have a movie stall in the middle. Mostly they said the took something that actually happened in the book and made it more dramatic that it actually reads like when Frodo gets stabbed by the spear in Moria.

[WarBringer]

true-and how can u leave out Glorfindel?!

[GreyIstar]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> true-and how can u leave out Glorfindel?! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Because then you have to bring in a new character who will only be on screen for a few minutes and then disappear unless you wanted Glorfindel to join the fellowship.<P>We are living in the real world not some idealistic place.

[WarBringer]

Then why not make Glorfindel save frodo and then be present at the council?

[GreyIstar]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Then why not make Glorfindel save frodo and then be present at the council? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Because you are setting up a major character who is only in maybe 10% of the entire trilogy. Trust me it works in a book, it doesn't in a movie.

[Aramacil]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Because you are setting up a major character who is only in maybe 10% of the entire trilogy. Trust me it works in a book, it doesn't in a movie <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>I agree, actually I think the main fellowship-characters (like Gimli/Legolas/Boromir) weren’t introduced properly, we all know who they were, but I don't think the non-Tolkien-readers really understood who those guys are.<BR>So introducing a new (15 minutes) character would be all that more confusing, and I actually think it was a good way to introduce Arwen(and the elves).

[Shanna]

Bleh...I think they could have least mentioned Glorfindel maybe? And just because they have him save Frodo, that dosn't mean he would have become a main character. I mean He could have had small appearences later on in the films, I know he got death a la Balrog in the books but the people who didn't read the books wouldn't know that, would they? Hmmm...

[thorondil]

I agree it could have been worse (the corruption of LotR), and I too am thankful that they were fans; but I don't necessarily agree with all of their decisions. <P>Everything doesn't have to be about introducing characters...what about introducing the Elven race? A race that was capable of getting Frodo out of trouble in a hurry, healing him, and then securing him in Imladris. And as for the film "flowing", Glorfindel flew like hell to the Ford. It was all about giving more time to Arwen...who PJ said didn't get much time in the books.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Because then you have to bring in a new character who will only be on screen for a few minutes and then disappear unless you wanted Glorfindel to join the fellowship.<P>We are living in the real world not some idealistic place.<P> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Does everyone seen in the movie have to join the Fellowship? And the "real world" was whatever they decided to make it.

[Orual]

::gapes at picture::<P>Eru almighty. THANK YOU PJ!!!!!!!!!<P>(By the way, could that possibly look much less like Elijah or Liv? That was the effect they had intended, given from the fact that they were doing this from pictures, was it not? Oi.)<P>~*~Orual~*~

[Diamond18]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> He obviously didn't read the books. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Well, of course they read the books. They're a couple of the better known Tolkien artists, as a matter of fact. Why Greg's quote is strange is this:<P> <P>This is another Hildebrandt picture, of Éowyn slaying the Witch-King. If that ain't main action, I don't know what is.<P>Anyway, why all the Glorfindel talk...again? Eru, don't we have entire threads devoted to that subject already? I have no idea why that is such a sticking point for some people. Arwen's scenes were exciting, she stood up to the Nazgul, and that whole chase was cool. The only thing we're missing is yet <I>*another*</I> male character. And I don't hear anyone lamenting the loss of Fatty Bolger night and day. Sheesh.<P>We were supposed to be dwelling on the positive aspect of PJ's film, anyway, instead of re-hashing old complaints.

[Mintyztwin]

I'M LAMENTING FATTY!!! Just kidding. My contrariness rose up and took control, Diamond! Apologies. <P>I think PJ did a excellent job. I think if I was other than I am, he had done it perfectly, but being what I am and none other, it is flawed! A little Shakespearian parody. <P>I do NOT think I could do a better job, and I'll shmuck myself across the face if I say I can! Yay PJ! <P>I think he did do a good job cutting characters. *sigh*. I didn't get everybody sorted out until I read it the 3rd time 'round. And reading it, you can go slow, and at your own pace. (Lemme tell ya', it took me forever to figure out who was Saruman and who was Sauron. Yeesh.)<P>I know I shouldn't say anything about the Arwen/Glorfindel thing so I won't. *sigh* I'll restrain myself. *sigh* BUT I DO HAVE A DEFINATE OPINION!!!!

[Mintyztwin]

By the way Diamond, scaaaaaaaaaaaaaaary pics! Very, very, very scary! I don't even want to THINK of LotR in a non-fan's hands! We have the old cartoon of the hobbit, and it marred ME for me for a looooooong time. The elves were UGLY for cryin' aloud!!! And so was everything else!! Yiminy. I will repeat myself: Yay Peter Jackson!

[Helkasir]

I liked the cartoons. I liked PJ's job as well, but it's always fun to bash people...

[Diamond18]

I know it's fun to bash people...probably why I posted the "Arwen Joins the Quest" picture. To further bash the Brothers Hildebrandt...notice that in the picture of Éowyn and the Witch-King, there is no trace of Merry. Naughty H. Bros...<P>In this case it bothered me to see Glorfindel drop out of the sky and redirect the discussion. I think people get more upset about him than even Tom Bombadil (or dear Fatty...) just because he was replaced by a female. I read someone once say that the cartoon was better because it had Legolas replace Glorfindel. What? No "I hate Legolas where was Glorfindel" rants? I'm not a proponent of feminist re-writes, but I get annoyed by anti-female sentiments as well. And yes, I do believe that females can and do express anti-female sentiments.<P>What I mean to say is, you (I use the term generally, becuase I know it's a popular complaint) can certainly dislike the change, but at least admit that there was some rational behind it. I.E. Arwen is more important later on than Glorfindel. It wasn't purely motivated by appeasing feminists, because it wouldn't appease them totally.<P>Anyway, here I go writing about the ol' Glorfy debate when I didn't mean to. Drat.

[GreyIstar]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Does everyone seen in the movie have to join the Fellowship? And the "real world" was whatever they decided to make it.<BR><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>My real world comment was because they are making a movie and would have to pay another actor not to mention have special effects because as Tolkien puts it "a shining figure of white light; and behind it ran small shadowy forms waving flames, that flared red in the grey mist that was falling over the world." An elf seen in all its power. All costs money and is not that necessary to tell the story.<P>I personally miss more than Glorfindel, is the lines of the Nazgul and Frodo's answer back. That I miss a lot and because of that that scene is the weakest part of the movie. But by no means come close to ruining it.<P>If you want exactly like the book, read the book. I just finished the Fellowship yet again and am going to try to read the Two Towers before the movie comes out.<p>[ November 20, 2002: Message edited by: GreyIstar ]

[Birdland]

I have no problem with Arwyn replacing Glorfindel (Do you know what they must have paid Liv Tyler to appear in that film? They had to get their money's worth.) What I did miss was Frodo standing up to the Nazgul. They made him so "sick" in the film that he couldn't have stood up to a stiff breeze.<P>But I suppose that it would have been hard to follow that particular plot twist in a film version. You would have had to cut between the Nazgul, Frodo, <I>and</I> Arwyn giving the river the command (Ooops! "Request") to rise up. It would have taken some very clever editing not to make that confusing. <P>Good points, Diamond! I frankly don't miss Bombadil, myself, or the Gaffer. (Nobody mentions him, either) P.J. did an incredible job of keeping to the spirit of the book without rendering it into a "page-by-page" opus, which nobody could possibly do.

[Diamond18]

It is regretful that Frodo didn't get to say his defiant line: "By Elbereth and Lúthien the Fair, you shall have neither the Ring nor me!"<P>But then again, I liked the extra tension Frodo's extreme sickness added. Because in the book they trudge on for weeks, and have time for jolly poems and everything. In the movie its a race against time every second. I find that I can appreciate both aspects, the strong Frodo and the terminally ill Frodo.<P>Plus I really get a kick out of the shot where the Nazgul reaches out its hand and Frodo looks at it in a daze.

I liked the fact that they gave the women bigger parts, the women didn't have much of a part in the book. I personally don't really miss Tom Bombadil or Fatty because they didn't play much of a part in the book. When I first saw FOTR I hadn't read the book yet, but I had read the hobbit. I loved the movie, and I can't wait till the next one comes out. My little sister is one of those people who doesn't like fantasy and said that the books were boring . I just ignore her and carry on with my happy life. This is my first post so forgive me if it doesn't make complete since. I read all the pages about the people who don't like the movie, and all the other arguments, so I just posted my overall opinion.