 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: Re: The Two Towers posted by KeithC on December 25, 2002 at 11:03:10:
Absolutely nothing, but as mentioned below by Harmonia the second book is almost unfilmable as written. Not to be patronizing, but I'm sure that you're aware that some books translate to film better than others; in some cases drastic editing and revision of what works on the written page is required to make a book into a viable film. It's a difficult balancing act for sure, but in order to complete the Ring trilogy in three book/movies some compromises were needed to make each installment of this epic sojourn cinematically satisfying. As Peter Jackson & company envisioned it, the first book transitioned well as Tolkein original wrote it and thus few compromises were required. The second book was another matter, and it's amazing that the Director & screenwriters found ways of achieving cinematic compromise without compromising the heart and feel of Tolkein's work. Yeah, some folks are going to be hacked off about any alteration of the classic written works, but what is more important is for the second film to hold it's own with the first so that the story flows evenly and consistently; the bottom line is that it wasn't perfect, but it was damn good. As a result, I have no doubts about the third film, and Keith, I hope you reconsider.Folks, I sense that we're witnessing film history being made. I'm of the opinion that Peter Jackson's epic series will be one of those rare classics for the generations that will stand shoulder to shoulder with the greatest heroic fiction ever filmed and please audiences for decades, if not centuries to come! Peter Jackson's take on Tolkein's LoTR has all of the power, majesty, charm and timelessness of classic films like the Wizard of Oz and the original Star Wars (i.e., Episode IV, and to a lesser extent V and VI). Furthermore, he has attempted to remain true to the original books where cinematically practical and to the spirit of Tolkein's vision the remainder of the time. FTR, I'm confident that the last film will live up to the high expectations of most fans of the books & first two films.
In short, these films are Hobbit forming! ;o)
Cheers,
AuPh
Follow Ups:
Aragorn shouldn't be at the battle of Helm's Deep - his journey along the Path's of the Dead leads to the capure of the Mordor fleet, and consequently the relief of the seige of Gondor.Faramir's release of Frodo is instrumental in his father's sending him out to get wounded, and his father's subsequent suicide.
Factionalism between Saruman's orcs and those of Mordor during the run/chase highlights agenda differences within the enemy alliance.
Less mawkish additions w.r.t. Aragorn and Arwen - presumably a romantic story line is mandatory - would enable the book to finish at the correct place.
The whole Rohan scene is completely re-written, even Grima is caricatured - he's supposed to be a smoothy, not the runner up in a Boris Karloff look-alike contest.
I'm not an habitual filmgoer - I went to see TLOTR as one who has been re-reading the books since the mid 60s - so I'm not really one to judge the overall quality of the film, but overall the plot of TTT has been dumbed down. I fail to see why a more faithfull screen play would not have been possible.
Hey Keith,I agree completely with you. I was also disappointed. I am not saying it is a bad movie, but as you said the story with Frodo was too short, important parts missing and the fighting scenes started to annoy me, they were going on forever. Golum was made well, but still I prefer actors or other sepecial effects over computer animation, I always feel like watching a nintendo game. You can just always tell when it is computer animated and it somehow does not really fit with the real parts.
Anyway I am glad the movie is a success since it is of great benifit to the country and the local filmindustry.Kia Ora
I'd hope we might agree that your not being a "habitual filmgoer" places you at a disadvantage in trying to fairly criticize the merits of what will and won't work in a cinematic sense. Heck, trying to second guess the appropriate screenwriting and direction of an epic like this is far removed from my experience as well even though my wife and I do see a lot of movies and also share some experience in the novel writing and screenwriting department! Take my word for it, novels and screenplays are totally different animals and with rare exception answer to different masters!At any rate, I enjoyed both films immensely and admire The Two Towers for what it is even when it strays from the original literary work. That's because when the film does vary from Tolkein's novels it does so artfully, without creating irreconcilable problems with the author's original vision. In other words, the story is nicely paced without sidetracks, dead-ends or unresolved plot points. If Peter Jackson had betrayed Tolkein's concepts and undermined the original vision just to leave his own "creative" stamp on it that would be different; we both know it would reflect badly on how the next film would be received by the public and critical press.
Few believed that Tolkein's Ring series could be filmed much less treated as respectfully as Peter Jackson has attempted to do; he has brought the characters and Middle Earth to life and if the "history" has shifted slightly in order that this epic tale be more visually accessable, perhaps we should give the Director the benefit of doubt. That's all I'm trying to say.
AuPh
Oops - Aragorn was at Helms Deep, but so was Eomer.Apologies.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
