*TTT - Faramir (David Wenham)*

[Arwen Imladris]

There is an article/discussion thing about Faramir's character <A HREF="http://www.theonering.net/perl/newsview/8/1040683523" TARGET=_blank>here, </A> and <A HREF="http://www.theonering.net/perl/newsview/8/1044845092" TARGET=_blank>here.</A>

[Arwen Imladris]

Today, September 21st, is David Wenham's (Faramir) birthday! David was born on September 21st, 1965 in Sydney, Australia. That makes him 38 years old today! Happy Birthday David!<P>Sorry about double posting!

[LadyElbereth]

oOo, happy b-day David! <BR>You know, I'm stil moody about what PJ did to Faramir (I refuse to watch that part in TTT), but I read those articles that Arwen Imladris so kindly linked us to and I must say, they have some interesting points. I also agree with Mattius, yet, I still like the Faramir in the books better! Well, David is a wonderful actor anyway and I definitely wouldn't want anyone else to play Faramir but him!

[Eomer of the Rohirrim]

<B>maikafanawen</B>, you asked for some similarities between Book-Faramir and Movie-Faramir. Perhaps you haven't read the whole thread but a few similarities have already been given.<P>Including;<P>1) Faramir captures the Hobbits.<P>2) Faramir subjects Frodo to harsh interrogation<P>3) Faramir threatens the Hobbits with military intimidation.<P>4) After unsatisfactory interrogation, Faramir takes the Hobbits prisoner to a Gondorian stronghold.<P>5) Faramir releases the Hobbits and the Ring, endangering his own life.<P>The only thing that was really missing, in my opinion, was the deep relationship that Frodo had with Faramir.

[Elentári_O_Most_Mighty_1]

That, and wasting an awful lot of screen time by dragging them off to Osgiliath.<BR>But hey...<BR>But these points have certainly lessened the strength of my views, so thank you for that, it was bugging me.

[Neferchoirwen]

I knew I should've gone to this thread a little bit earlier...my terribly looong absence was triggered by hiding from possible Faramir portrayal confrontations, and so I am here, raising my hand so that the "minority" will recognize that I agree with the movie Faramir as much as they understand him.<P>*raises hand*<P>More thoughts to come soon...problem looking for them in another Tolkien emailing group...

[The Only Real Estel]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>The only change here was that afterwards Faramir did not give in to the temptation of the Ring<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>The <I>only</I> change? Sounds like a pretty big one to me .

[Lathriel]

The first thing I remember when I saw Faramir on-screen were his eyes!<BR>Then came the character. I remember that it did bother me that Faramir seemed so tempted by the ring because in the book he shows no sign whatsoever.<BR>I was puzzeling this. Then came the savior, The EE. That made it much more understandible for me. It showed that Faramir was under a tremendous amount of pressure from his father Denethor which in turn made it clear why Faramir so desperatly wanted to bring the ring to Minas Tirith. He wanted to show his father he was worth something.<P>To show his true quality so to say.

[Neferchoirwen]

I agree, <B>Lathriel</B>! <P>His eyes at his close up when discussions about the territory of Ithilien being slowly invaded. That was major stress on him right there!<P>I think that the fact on whether or not he was tempted was blurred, but he never took it himself to bring to his father. I guess he recognized its power, but would not choose to handle it himself.<P>Sorry, I van never get Faramir out of my head!

[Lyta_Underhill]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>The only thing that was really missing, in my opinion, was the deep relationship that Frodo had with Faramir.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> After much consideration and time, I came to the realization that there was still something in the back of my mind that stuck wrong with regards to PJ's version of Faramir, even after the Extended Edition made him more likeable and understandable. That is his connection to Gandalf, the fact that Faramir is a "wizard's pupil" and takes more stock in the opinions and teachings of Mithrandir than in his own misguided father. I think the conflict in Faramir's mind with respect to pleasing and living up to Denethor's expectations would have been enriched by the inclusion of an understanding here such as was included in the book. This, I think, was one of the strongest threads in the Frodo-Faramir connection, the long reverence for the teachings and example of Gandalf. If only there had been a hint of this on Faramir's side, even a mention with a small double take on Frodo's reaction to it, there would have been the necessary depth to Faramir's character that I seem to miss. Without it, he merely seems to be a child striving to please a harsh father, a tragic figure but also a weakened one. And I suppose that is what I truly missed about the movie characterization of Faramir. <P>Cheers!<BR>Lyta

[Macphisto]

Oh, how I love this topic of conversation.

I hated what PJ had done to my precious Faramir when I first saw that movie. And the second time. And then the third time I made myself really watch. And I agree with GreyIstar (I think) who said that his facial expressions don't match the lines. I think that's fantastic, and I really respect David Wenham for it.

For anyone who hasn't seen the Extended Edition of the Two Towers, I think that is a HUGE improvement on movie Faramir. I suppose I would prefer he had remained a nice guy, but wow, everything just makes so much more sense.

Of course, after watching that, all I could say was 'HOW COULD THEY HAVE POSSIBLY TAKEN THAT OUT BUT PUT IN ARAGORN'S FAKE DEATH!?'

I think that was the true evil of The Two Towers movie. The sacrifice of development on the reworked Faramir for Arwen. If they had just taken the time to explain his relationship with Denethor and Boromir... Did Aragorn really have to fall off that cliff? Was that really necessary!?

That's what really ****ed me off. It would have saved me hours of ranting about how they ruined Faramir if they had just put in a few more of those cut scenes, like the one where he's talking about the Haradrim soldier (Sam's train of thought from the book), or seeing Boromir's body, or leading Frodo and Sam to the sewers at the end...

Sacrificed... for Arwen! I can't stand it.

[Theron Bugtussle]

Originally posted by GreyIstar
...it was posted that Phillipa Boyens said that in the book Faramir was a static character and they wanted to give Faramir a journey in the film to find himself.

How about a character with the patience, wisdom, and judgment to think and question before he acts? Is that 'static'? Or is this just an expression of the failure of the screenwriters and the director to take Tolkien's subtlety and good "quality of character" invested in Faramir and depict it on the big screen?

Which is easier:

(A) to open up the book Faramir character to the screen audience, showing a leader with strength and command, but the restraint to inquire for wisdom before judging and taking a risk to do good thereby; or

(B) have a character shove a sword in someone's eye? (In reference to the ease of depicting lengthy battle scenes in the movies.)

I think we know what answer PJ and Co went with.

In my opinion, they needed no more characters trying to find themselves. Speaking of characters finding themselves in the movie, Gandalf found himself - "Gung Fu Gandalf" (concerning the Denethor encounter.)

Did Aragorn ever find himself in the movies? I forget...

Oh, and PJ totally lost Saruman--he just disappeared. But that's okay, really. Because at least the elves were able to find themselves...in the Battle of the Hornburg at Helm's Deep.

And anyway, talk about making 'static' characters... Was Denethor more static in the movie or in the book? In the movie, there was less appreciation than in the book of the subtleties of the different competing thoughts and influences that led to his demise. Can anyone say, "Mean old tyrant?" How about Gimli, the romantic warrior poet? Reduced to "comic sidekick" cardboard cutout. You can probably come up with more examples.

Or is this another instance of "modern" inability (lack of ability or lack of appreciation?) to depict "good," and preferring that every character has to have some internal, psychological imbalance?

[Memory of Trees]

Okay, let me do this as calmly as possible. THEY RUINED FARAMIR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! *panting*

Sorry, I just HAD to get that out of my system. Here's my more detailed opinion.

David Wenham is an excellent actor (handsome, great accent, and a excellent costume designer). He could have made a WONDERFUL Faramir, just like Tokien wrote him to be. This crisis is completely the fault of Peter Jackson.

In the book, Faramir is a sweet, caring person whom I always liked. He treated the hobbits gently, with respect and politness.

Needless to say, he was completely different in the movie. I won't even go there, because all of you saw it too. Horrible, no?

I have a friend who broke down in sobs in the middle of the theater because he was so dissapointed.

By the way, what was the whole thing with Faramir taking the hobbits to Osgiliath? It didn't make sense to me.

[The Only Real Estel]

By the way, what was the whole thing with Faramir taking the hobbits to Osgiliath? It didn't make sense to me.

I'm sure if you feel like reading some posts, you'll find opinions there, but the Faramir topic has been touched on so often I doubt you'll get a lot of response now.