Itaril

[Elfchick7]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

Enough was enough for me a long time ago...

I was ready to say the same, but then I saw this and I'm afraid I'm about to be sucked back in...

[Galadriel]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Or perhaps a wooden Legolas yearning to be a real boy?

I think a wooden Gollum would be better in that case But I loved the subtle ribbing you gave

[oddkins]

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/en...-15151475.html

Saoirse Ronan has revealed she will not be playing woodland elf Itaril in The Hobbit.
The Hanna star had been in talks to star in The Lord Of The Rings prequel, directed by Peter Jackson, who she worked with on The Lovely Bones, but has now signed up to star in The Host.

That's probably the best news I've heard all week - although of course it doesn't mean Jackson has dropped the idea of inrtroducing this Itaril character...

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by oddkins

That's probably the best news I've heard all week - although of course it doesn't mean Jackson has dropped the idea of inrtroducing this Itaril character...

Shame it isn't April 1st, or I'd have to make up a story about Scarlett Johansson replacing her.

[Mithalwen]

At least you can imaging Scarlett as a shield maiden. She could kick donkeys... But I am ecstatic it won't be her at least and I am hopeful they might scrub the idea like they did with Arwen Warrior Princess.

[TheMisfortuneTeller]

I've tried my level best to lampoon (in prose and verse) what I consider a truly terrible idea for a Middle Earth character: namely, the elf-chick/security-guard, Itaril. Still, even a complete cynic like me can't always conceive of just how bad ideas for movies have become. It seems, fellow Crimestoppers, that the actress Saoirse Ronan "stars" in a just released film called "Hanna," where -- I kid you, not -- the plot proceeds as follows:

"Storyline

Hanna (Ronan) is a teenage girl. Uniquely, she has the strength, the stamina, and the smarts of a soldier; these come from being raised by her father (Bana), an ex-CIA man, in the wilds of Finland. Living a life unlike any other teenager, her upbringing and training have been one and the same, all geared to making her the perfect assassin. The turning point in her adolescence is a sharp one; sent into the world by her father on a mission, Hanna journeys stealthily across Europe while eluding agents dispatched after her by a ruthless intelligence operative with secrets of her own (Ms. Blanchett). As she nears her ultimate target, Hanna faces startling revelations about her existence and unexpected questions about her humanity."

I have no idea what this can possibly mean, in regard to The Hobbit, but this Hanna character sounds awfully close to the original casting-call description for Peter Jackson's idea of a butt-kicking elf-babe love-interest like Itaril. Perhaps Jackson and Company have seen an advance screening of this movie, Hanna, and barely escaped choking to death while laughing and vomiting at the same time. Perhaps this near-death experience convinced them that they'd better rethink the whole stupid idea -- possibly just forget all about it. Or, they could have decided that the part would have worked out better if only another "more convincing" actress had done it, in which case something really awful could still lie ahead for us gullible viewers a year-and-a-half in the future.

I don't know. I feel sick. I'll have to give this a little more thought. After all, I haven't had my prescribed dose of masochism for the day.

[Galadriel]

Originally Posted by TheMisfortuneTeller

Perhaps Jackson and Company have seen an advance screening of this movie, Hanna, and barely escaped choking to death while laughing and vomiting at the same time. Perhaps this near-death experience convinced them that they'd better rethink the whole stupid idea -- possibly just forget all about it. Or, they could have decided that the part would have worked out better if only another "more convincing" actress had done it, in which case something really awful could still lie ahead for us gullible viewers a year-and-a-half in the future.

Or perhaps they merely (FINALLY) realised that they were butchering Tolkien's works enough, and that having Weaving cast as Elrond, making Gimli into a comic relief character, and creating Valinor into some universal heaven already did enough damage in the trilogy.

I think I'm being too optimistic.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Galadriel

I think I'm being too optimistic.

I think so too.

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by Galadriel

Or perhaps they merely (FINALLY) realised that they were butchering Tolkien's works enough, and that having Weaving cast as Elrond, making Gimli into a comic relief character, and creating Valinor into some universal heaven already did enough damage in the trilogy.

I think I'm being too optimistic.

Hugo was fine as Elrond. It isn't his fault they turned Elrond into a creepy dad.

[Thinlómien]

MisfortuneTeller - uh oh, I totally cracked up at this: "Uniquely, she has the strength, the stamina, and the smarts of a soldier; these come from being raised by her father (Bana), an ex-CIA man, in the wilds of Finland." Maybe I have to see it! (For your information, I happen to be from the said country.)

I hope they handle the "have to have a major female character" syndrome somewhow smartly. You can kill me for saying this, but having Bard/Barde the Queen of Dale rise to lead her people, co-operate with the King of Elves (and even having a love affair with him or his son for all I care!) and shoot Smaug would please me better than introducing some new totally random character to take up screen time.

[Kuruharan]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

I hope they handle the "have to have a major female character" syndrome somewhow smartly.

This is an oxymoron.

You can kill me for saying this, but having Bard/Barde the Queen of Dale rise to lead her people, co-operate with the King of Elves (and even having a love affair with him or his son for all I care!) and shoot Smaug would please me better than introducing some new totally random character to take up screen time.

Errggg...why not turn Fili and Kili into hot dwarf twin sisters?

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

Errggg...why not turn Fili and Kili into hot dwarf twin sisters?

Their noses are too big. But what about a Ms. Thorin? Thora, I daresay?

[Kuruharan]

Kilee's and Filee's noses are diminutive compared to hers...

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by TheMisfortuneTeller

Hanna (Ronan) is a teenage girl. Uniquely, she has the strength, the stamina, and the smarts of a soldier; these come from being raised by her father (Bana), an ex-CIA man, in the wilds of Finland. Living a life unlike any other teenager, her upbringing and training have been one and the same, all geared to making her the perfect assassin. The turning point in her adolescence is a sharp one; sent into the world by her father on a mission, Hanna journeys stealthily across Europe while eluding agents dispatched after her by a ruthless intelligence operative with secrets of her own (Ms. Blanchett). As she nears her ultimate target, Hanna faces startling revelations about her existence and unexpected questions about her humanity."

I have no idea what this can possibly mean, in regard to The Hobbit, but this Hanna character sounds awfully close to the original casting-call description for Peter Jackson's idea of a butt-kicking elf-babe love-interest like Itaril.

Perhaps the "startling revelation" is the discovery she's really an Elf?

I went and googled this, and it brings up a link to a "Guardian" review that begins thus: "It opens like The Tempest, with a rogue secret agent (Eric Bana) self-exiled to the Arctic waste of northern Finland with his innocent daughter, Hanna..."

Ah, yes. Just like "The Tempest".

[Thinlómien]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

Kilee's and Filee's noses are diminutive compared to hers...

You are aware that "filee" would be the Finnish spelling of "fillet", aren't you?

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Kuruharan

Kilee's and Filee's noses are diminutive compared to hers...

But remember, that fillet Kilee's nose was remarkably big - so much that they deserved a special mention in TH, unlike Thora's nosie... By "they" meaning the noses, not fillets and killets and whatever.

[Kuruharan]

Originally Posted by Thinlómien

You are aware that "filee" would be the Finnish spelling of "fillet", aren't you?

No, actually.

But remember, that fillet Kilee's nose was remarkably big - so much that they deserved a special mention in TH, unlike Thora's nosie... By "they" meaning the noses, not fillets and killets and whatever.

Dwarf noses grow with age and Thoria was as old as the hills. It stood to reason that her schnoz was humongous without having to stoop to the vulgarity of actually mentioning it.

[TheMisfortuneTeller]

Trying to remain focused on the subject of this thread -- namely, the horrifying possibility of a teenage elf-babe ninja assassin love interest in The Hobbit -- I recommend that all references to Dwarves henceforth relate in some way to the nubile female character in question. For example, one could address this topic from the point of view Snow White, a fairy tale metaphor exploited to fine comic effect in the movie Shrek, wherein the magic mirror on the wall intones:

"Just because she lives with seven other men doesn't make her easy."

Pursuing this polyandry paradigm, if Gimli the Dwarf could fall irretrievably in love with Lady Galadriel, and if seven Dwarves could cohabit with the comatose Snow White -- which suggests necrophilia as an additional operative psychology -- then why couldn't thirteen Dwarves -- including Gimli's father -- do the same in regard to a thousand-year-old elf teenager with an insatiable appetite for stocky bearded miners about to become billionaires once they figure out how to regain their lost treasure from a giant worm with really bad breath? I mean, thirteen simultaneous palimony lawsuits ought to net the amoral calculating elf-chick enough riches to buy Lord Thranduil and make him her security guard. The mind boggles at the possibilities. Like:

"Itaril and the Thirteen Dwarves"

They say that she's not easy.
They say that she is hard.
They say she likes to grapple
And wrestle in the yard.

They say she grew up fighting,
Unlike the other girls.
About her every movement,
They say that mayhem swirls.

A tomboy in the tree house,
She hangs out with the guys
Who mostly fight for money
And everything it buys.

She hasn't any scruples,
Or so we hear it said.
She'll do it for a dollar
If that gets her ahead.

Her services she'll contract
To elves or dwarves or men.
For her, there's no distinction.
Not whom. Not where. Not when.

She lusted after Filli.
She had the hots for Gloin.
The merest thought of Bombur
Caused dampness in the groin.

And so she'll fit quite nicely
Into the scripted part:
Both innocent and deadly;
The ersatz maiden tart.

[TheMisfortuneTeller]

Oh, for crying out loud! Peter Jackson and Company just had to do it! I mean, just when I thought we had driven a wooden stake through undead heart of this ludicrous elf-chick-in-The-Hobbit idea, that awful, queasy feeling in the pit of the stomach returns:

"... the biggest news is LOST star Evangeline Lilly will be Tauriel. PJ describes Tauriel as a Woodland Elf, ‘Her name means ‘daughter of Mirkwood’ and, beyond that, we must leave you guessing! (No, there is no romantic connection to Legolas.)‘ "

Just for starters, the calendar entry in Appendix B of The Lord of the Rings for the year 1050 states:

"About this time a shadow falls on Greenwood, and men begin to call it Mirkwood"

So I must inquire why any elf of Greenwood Forest would have a name derived from what men only began to call the same forest after it became infected by the "evil power" that had "made a stronghold at Dol Guldur." I mean, wouldn't a real (and really old) elf have a name like "Daughter of Greenwood" and not something that -- etymologically -- sounds more like "Daughter of the Necromancer" or "Daughter of Sauron"? Wouldn't all of the other elves just call her "Mirky" for short, because of the shadow that seems to follow her everywhere she goes?

Come to think of it, if this newly-relabeled Itaril (I mean "Tauriel") has a name derived from what men called the forest after it became evil, then wouldn't that make the newly-relabeled elf-chick less than 1050 years old (assuming that elves get their names at birth) and a mere child among that immortal race? Just think about this for a minute -- and it shouldn't take much longer than that -- and you can see the sloppy thinking and disregard for Tolkien's created world that went into this bogus "name."

Furthermore, putting purely linguistic considerations aside (which Professor Tolkien would never have done), the forcible injecting of an unnecessary elf-chick into an adolescent English schoolboy story like The Hobbit sounds as heretical as letting Vicky Vale into the Bat Cave or Lois Lane into the Fortress of Solitude. Some things you just don't do without undermining the entire foundation of the genre.

The whole idea sounds stupid, and the stupid new name for "stupid" -- i.e., "idiotic" -- sounds just as dumb. A pseudonym by any other misnomer would stlll stink as badly.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by TheMisfortuneTeller

So I must inquire why any elf of Greenwood Forest would have a name derived from what men only began to call the same forest after it became infected by the "evil power" that had "made a stronghold at Dol Guldur." I mean, wouldn't a real (and really old) elf have a name like "Daughter of Greenwood" and not something that -- etymologically -- sounds more like "Daughter of the Necromancer" or "Daughter of Sauron"?

That's a valid point, but you don't really expect small details like that to get in the way of the Powers That Be, do you?

Originally Posted by TheMisfortuneTeller

Furthermore, putting purely linguistic considerations aside (which Professor Tolkien would never have done), the forcible injecting of an unnecessary elf-chick into an adolescent English schoolboy story like The Hobbit sounds as heretical as letting Vicky Vale into the Bat Cave or Lois Lane into the Fortress of Solitude. Some things you just don't do without undermining the entire foundation of the genre.

Like having Faramir do in the Two Towers movie the opposite of what he did in the book?

[Galin]

Tauriel would mean 'forest-daughter', not really green or mirk.

Not to defend such a possible addition...

[TheMisfortuneTeller]

Originally Posted by Galin

Tauriel would mean 'forest-daughter', not really green or mirk.

Not to defend such a possible addition...

Linguistic point taken. Too bad Peter Jackson and company couldn't have considered that. Something about "Mirk" -- or "murk" -- seems completely un-elvish, to say the least. Legolas Greenleaf, on the other hand, seems like an appropriate elf name, not that I especially want to see any more slashing and hacking and stabbing and shooting by You-Know-Him, any more than I want to see such mindless crap from You-Know-Her, either.

Of Pseudonyms for Misnomers

They tried to name her "Itaril"
But when that wouldn't stick,
They changed her name to something that
They thought would do the trick:
A pseudonym called "Tauriel"
Which sounded just as sick

They found an actress for a part
That Tolkien never wrote
In hopes that elf-chick T-and-A
Would cause fans to emote
And blindly purchase products
That a brain would scarcely note

[Inziladun]

Pfft. They might as well just call her Arwen. The motives for greatly exaggerating her part in LOTR and making up a female elf character for The Hobbit would appear to be the same.

[TheMisfortuneTeller]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

... you don't really expect small details like that to get in the way of the Powers That Be, do you?

To paraphrase Inspector Clouseau: "I expect nothing [good] and I expect everything [bad]." Therefore, I occasionally find life a pleasant surprise. Optimists, on the other hand, have little to look forward to but perpetual disappointment.

Originally Posted by Inziladun

Like having Faramir do in the Two Towers movie the opposite of what he did in the book?

Regarding Faramir's behavior towards the Ring and the Ring-bearer: the movie did deviate markedly from the book -- pretty much to drag out the Ring-bearer story line so as to better inter-cut it with the Helm's Deep and Isengard thread endings. Otherwise, the book's consolation-prize pairing of Faramir and Lady Eowyn does get a brief nod in the film at the King Aragorn coronation. Regardless, none of this Faramir meddling -- and much else besides -- can compensate for losing The Scouring of the Shire and the proper demise of Saruman at the hands of the Hobbits whom he victimized. The inflated romance between Aragorn and Arwen -- which Tolkien relegated to the Appendices -- adds nothing to compensate for this loss in the films. And I have every suspicion that this whole-cloth elf-chick invention of Peter Jackson's will do equally nothing but detract from the story of the hobbit Bilbo Baggins, ostensibly the [anti-] hero of these films.

If nothing else, though, I now know when to get up and take a bladder break during the films.

[Galadriel55]

I don't care what they call her: she remains the same nauseatingly-obnoxious detestable story-ruining -...you-name-it...- extra useless character that has no business in the real TH.

[LadyBrooke]

I think PJ is prejudiced against elves, and wants to make everyone else hate them too. That's the only explanation for all of this, unless he believes that people are so shallow that women only go to movies with strong female characters (I've never understood this idea...) and that guys have to be tempted by hot female actors to go see a movie.

Also, I'm more scared now then I was when I thought Itaril/Tauriel was Legolas's love interest...if she isn't his love interest, then she's likely someone else's. Which quite frankly scares me. If she ends up being Thranduil/Bilbo/Bard's love interest, I'm taking a knife to the screen. Same if she ends up being the one to slay Smaug/sneak the dwarves out of the dungeons/rescue them from the goblins.

[TheMisfortuneTeller]

It seems clear to me that this re-branded demographic loss-leader of a "character" suffers from Popeye's Existential Conundrum:

"If I'm not me, who am I? And if I'm somebody else, then why do I look like me?"

Recruiting this actress from the cast of the TV-movie "Lost" does seem rather appropriate, though, if one has a taste for unintended irony.

[Mithalwen]

Originally Posted by LadyBrooke

Also, I'm more scared now then I was when I thought Itaril/Tauriel was Legolas's love interest...if she isn't his love interest, then she's likely someone else's. Which quite frankly scares me. If she ends up being Thranduil/Bilbo/Bard's love interest, I'm taking a knife to the screen. Same if she ends up being the one to slay Smaug/sneak the dwarves out of the dungeons/rescue them from the goblins.

The only comfort is that Bard is now cast - so maybe that is significant that maybe Itaril was going to take Bard's role but this creature isn't? However I note that Galion and the Gaoler haven't been which is concerning.

When I heard the new name I thought of the geometrical shape a toros (like a ring doughnut) . Is maybe not inappropriate - a shape without proper substance and a heart and torus being Latin for cushion - I mean this is part of the padding needed to turn a short book into two long films. KERching!!!

[Morthoron]

Tauriel? Tauriel!
No elven name can hide the smell.
That sulfur stench from fan-fic wells
Up from Jackson's scripting Hell.

[Hilde Bracegirdle]

Well, maybe I shouldn't see the movies! What the?!

[TheMisfortuneTeller]

Originally Posted by Hilde Bracegirdle

Well, maybe I shouldn't see the movies!

You may have a valid reason for staying home with a good book, given the truly depressing speculation currently taking place at the OneRing site:

http://www.theonering.net/torwp/2011...in/#more-45330

"Just who is Tauriel?" Short answer: "Nobody."

I'd like to see Bilbo Baggins and Smeagol/Gollum doing "Riddles in the Dark." That will no doubt happen. Bilbo and Smaug will also have their little verbal duel over a pile of looted treasure. Bilbo and Thorin will fall out and reconcile over the Arkenstone. Perhaps Christopher Lee will get sufficient screen time to show the slow-motion corruption of Saruman the White. I'd like to see that on the big screen. But having to endure this needless elf-chick thing when so many other tales need telling, well, that I resent -- bitterly.

[Mithalwen]

I suppose at best she might be one of the raft elves unnamed in the book. But every bog name they get for small? roles just seems to say they have no confidence in the screen play on it's own merits and htey hope we will be too busy star spotting.

[LadyBrooke]

Originally Posted by TheMisfortuneTeller

Perhaps Christopher Lee will get sufficient screen time to show the slow-motion corruption of Saruman the White. I'd like to see that on the big screen.

Christopehr Lee is the one thing making me go see this movie after all the new Tauriel stuff - if he get cut, I am 99% positive that I am not going to see this movie.

[Inziladun]

Originally Posted by Mithalwen

I suppose at best she might be one of the raft elves unnamed in the book. But every bog name they get for small? roles just seems to say they have no confidence in the screen play on it's own merits and htey hope we will be too busy star spotting.

Really! What's the point of doing book-to-movie adaptations if they're just going to monkey around with it for the sake of making the story "cinematic"? What's the need for creating characters like Lurtz and Tauriel? What's the need for adding new scenes or characters for "drama" or "extra tension"? I see today's movie makers as having a deal of contempt for the viewer, who isn't advanced enough to appreciate movies unless there are explosions, odious comic-relief, and high-visibility romantic subplots. I know there's the rare book that translates fairly well to the screen (Richard Matheson's Hell House and the Harry Potter series come to mind), but to me Tolkien's work just isn't suitable for movie treatment.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by Inziladun

I know there's the rare book that translates fairly well to the screen (Richard Matheson's Hell House and the Harry Potter series come to mind), but to me Tolkien's work just isn't suitable for movie treatment.

Some books just aren't meant to be movies. They weren't made to become movies. When it comes to those, it's better not to make any movie at all than to do what PJ&others are doing with TH (and what has been done with LOTR).

[Tuor in Gondolin]

Or maybe Tauriel is leader of a feminist Amazon band of
elves who roam through Mirkwood righting wrongs who
is wounded in a skirmish before the Battle of Five Armies
but is awakened by her horse and then reappears to the
relief of her uncle Thranduil and cousin Legolas. Hmmm?

Or her band of female elves help Gandalf (attacked by orcs)
and rides with him to the relief of the good guys in the
Battle of Five Armies.

[TheMisfortuneTeller]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

Some books just aren't meant to be movies. They weren't made to become movies. When it comes to those, it's better not to make any movie at all than to do what PJ&others are doing with TH (and what has been done with LOTR).

On the contrary, The Hobbit follows the standard formula of the monomyth -- There and Back Again -- as described by Joseph Campbell in The Hero with a Thousand Faces:

[No matter what tale we hear told, in no matter what language or culture] “... it will be always the one, shape-shifting yet marvelously constant story that we find, together with a challengingly persistent suggestion of more remaining to be experienced than will ever be known or told.”

“The standard path of the mythological adventure of the hero is a magnification of the formula represented in the rites of passage: separation—initiation—return: which might be named the nuclear unit of the monomyth.

A hero ventures forth from the world of common day into a region of supernatural wonder: fabulous forces are there encountered and a decisive victory is won: the hero comes back from this mysterious adventure with the power to bestow boons on his fellow man.”

If you can't make a movie out of that timeless tale, then you can't make a movie out of anything. No. The issue doesn't involve making a movie out of the standard heroic adventure -- countless film-makers have done that and will continue doing that -- but rather, making the movie well. The danger here lies in trying to blow up the central narrative of Bilbo Baggins' adventure into a sprawling amalgamation of sub-plots and marginal characters designed specifically to lure various consumer-demographics into the theater (and nearby toy stores) on the "tent-pole" presumption that each age-group and gender tribe will want to see -- and consume products related to -- certain celebrities famous for their fame.

In the case of The Hobbit, trying to make two mega-movies out of material properly suitable for only one, at best, can do little but bloat the essential story beyond recognition. In trying to adapt The Lord of the Rings to film, Peter Jackson had too much material for only three movies -- an embarrassment of riches. In trying to adapt The Hobbit, he has barely enough material for one -- and should pridefully protect such priceless poverty.

[Galadriel55]

Point taken, but I still think that some books should be left as books. Harry Potter can (and did) make a relatively good movie that did not stray too much from the original because what was in the book suited what people want to be in a movie. It did not lose/change its overal "spirit". On the other hand, Narnia was changed quite a bit, because otherwise it wouldn't make a good movie. I can't speak about the plot changes, because I haven't read it in ages and hardly remember what happened, but I can say for sure that the mood, or "spirit" of it changed. If the books were a simple, kind, straight-forward-ish story for both children and adults, the movies are definitely not for small children, and they have a HP-esque mood.

What has befallen Narnia is befalling TH. It is a work for children - although adults also enjoy it, but on a different level - that is made into an overcomplicated intrigue tangle. Children will not (most likely, considering the news that we hear) be able to get the message of the book through the movie. It's a question if they'll be able to undertand it. TH lost it's "spirit".

Originally Posted by TMT

In trying to adapt The Lord of the Rings to film, Peter Jackson had too much material for only three movies -- an embarrassment of riches. In trying to adapt The Hobbit, he has barely enough material for one -- and should pridefully protect such priceless poverty.

True. However, there was enough space in the 3 LOTR movies to have Aragorn almost killed by the wargs and Arwen resurrecting him. There was enough space for the mad-idiot-Elrond. And for the Boromir-like Faramir dragging Frodo to Osgiliath, and for Denethor the Insane being insane. That's not to mention a gazilion other changes PJ didn't have to make.

When I said that TH and the trilogy are suffering the same fate, I meant that there's hardly anything left from what Tolkien wrote it to be.

Every book has to be tweaked a little bit before it becomes a movie - usually because there's too many things in too short a time, and some have to be cut out. I can understand that, and that's why I don't hold any grudge against the LOTR movies for not having anything from Crickhollow till the Downs. But one thing is tweaking, and another is using the athor's names to shape a totally different creation.


I'm sorry about the rant.


EDIT: I was typing that late at night, so just to add my final point - when what is in a book somewhat fits what the audience expects to be in a movie, then the movie is good. But when it doesn't - that's when the movie either doesn't work out properly or it isn't really about the book.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

Every book has to be tweaked a little bit before it becomes a movie - usually because there's too many things in too short a time, and some have to be cut out. I can understand that, and that's why I don't hold any grudge against the LOTR movies for not having anything from Crickhollow till the Downs. But one thing is tweaking, and another is using the athor's names to shape a totally different creation.

Oh, but I think the omissions, given the additions, suggest very much what PJ is unable to appreciate in Tolkien. I don't think he respected the elements of Fairie enough--hence ignoring the Bombadils and the Barrow Downs--and too much sought after the action flick.

As with any artist, he has the right to his interpretation, but he can't go calling it Tolkien.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Oh, but I think the omissions, given the additions, suggest very much what PJ is unable to appreciate in Tolkien. I don't think he respected the elements of Fairie enough--hence ignoring the Bombadils and the Barrow Downs--and too much sought after the action flick.

As with any artist, he has the right to his interpretation, but he can't go calling it Tolkien.

Personally, I would have much preferred the inclusion of the sons of Elrond and the Rangers of the North, instead of that whole army of Lorien walking a hundred miles through enemy-occupied territory to Helms Deep and then suddenly disappearing by the end of the battle. What, every last one of them got killed? So much for the vaunted skill of the Elves.

I still say, when PJ stuck with the original plot, the movie was magical. Even when dialogue of one character in the book was stated by another character in the movie, it was moving. But everytime PJ strayed away with his fancies, the sequences were farcical. Think about it:

1. Arwen summoning the river to drown the Nazgul (and then looking utterly surprised when it happened).

2. Elrond whining about Arwen dying. Elrond whinig about the list of allies growing thin. Elrond whining in general.

4. Elrond riding several hundred miles to deliver a sword.

5. The warg attack, Aragorn falling off a cliff and then frenching his horse in a torrid beach scene reminiscent of Burt Lancaster and Deborah Kerr in From Here to Eternity.

6. Faramir dragging the Hobbits (and what was left of his character) to Osgiliath, just so Frodo could climb a tower to show the One Ring, the ultimate object of desire, to a flying Nazgul -- AND YET ALL THE NAZGUL AND THE ENTIRE ARMY OF MORDOR DIDN'T SURROUND THEM INSTANTANEOUSLY AND CRUSH THEM! No, the Nazgul simply flies away, Faramir has a change of heart and Sam gets to give a teary-eyed soliloquoy.

5. Nutty Denethor sets an olympic record in the mile run, while on fire.

6. Dull-witted Treebeard gets outwitted by clever Hobbits.

7. Frodo tells Sam to "Go home", even though he's a thousand miles from home, in Mordor, surrounded by thousands of Orcs. Some friend.

8. Green Scrubbing Bubbles not only destroyed Orcs, but gave the walls of Minas Tirith a streak-free shine. Look, I can see myself!

I could go on and on, but I've given myself a headache. I would prefer that such shenanigans not occur in The Hobbit, but I have given up hope that (Itaril) Peter Jackson will restrain (Tauriel) himself from (Orlando Bloom) outlandish (the White Council) scripting. Bah.