Topic: Has any one else herd chirs lee has been edited out (Read 28804 times)

Harlax · « **Reply #20 on:** November 15, 2003, 02:13:48 am »

Quote:

The director\suits proberly thinks his\thier revisionist version is "better' then Tolkans version. And They proberly think they are successfull on thier own merit, and not the true reason. Tolkan was a Genius when he wrote his morality play. And if they were smart.They would leave the book the way it is and was.

Ding Ding Ding Ding!

Give that man the prize. Ok Jackson was never going to make Tolkien fanatics happy. Impossible task. But...

The whole "men are weak," thing leading to Aragorn doing a Hamlet and Faramir acting totaly out of character was a totally unnecesary revision that ensures that all, rather than most, Tolkien fanatics will despise him.

I'd start on my Ents, Rohan, and "what in Arda are those Elves doing at Helms Deep" rant, but that would risk consigning this thread to the Equine Graveyard section.

Yeah, Jackson has his own "vision" of what LOTR should be. Omissions I can handle, there is only so much that fits even in an extended version. Wholesale revision? Well thats why my 8 year old son is not allowed to watch the movie until we have finished reading the books.

Strafer · « **Reply #21 on:** November 15, 2003, 03:05:05 am »

I caught something earlier this week on Aint-It-Cool-News regarding this:

The Saruman scenes were initially set to appear at the very start of ROTK for like 7 minutes, but spoiled the flow to push the new story forward. They were basically the fall of Isengard, recap style. Scene was cut, and film edited in a more "moving on along" theme.
Those scenes will however be included in the ROTK:EE as home viewing isn't as crucial for flow.

So, Mr. Lee can decide to not attend the premiere, but in a year when the Ext. ver. comes out, he may decide to appear at his local movie megastore.

Demandred · « **Reply #22 on:** November 15, 2003, 07:46:56 am »

I've heard the reason for it is that the film was already 3 hours and 20 minutes long, and if it was any longer they would have to have a break for technical reasons.

dangadget · « **Reply #23 on:** November 15, 2003, 02:51:01 pm »

already confirmed that Saruman's and Wormtongue's commupence scenes have been cut from the theatrical release of ROTK, but will be included in the extended DVD edition to be released next year.

Peter Jackson states that the reason for this was pacing, as the scenes as filmed felt like a wrap up to TTT rather than an introduction to ROTK, which is what they needed.

and yes, it has been known for a very long time by people closely following the films that there would be NO scouring of the Shire.

purists may wail and gnash their teeth all they want, but refusing to acknowledge the facts that an almost literal translation of LOTR to film was an impossibility changes nothing.

the films still stand on their own as great _interpretations_of Tolkiens books, and I for one am looking forward to the concluding film(and looking forward even more to the last extended DVD)

Commander Xizor · « **Reply #24 on:** November 15, 2003, 04:05:52 pm »

Kind of on a related note, I am trying to decide if I should read ROTK before the movie comes out. After watching FOTR and TTT, I read those books, but I haven't gotten around to ROTK yet. In general, I thought the movies were excellent, but the books a little dull at times.

Should I read it now or wait?

Sethan · « **Reply #25 on:** November 15, 2003, 04:13:41 pm »

Read it now. That way the peripheral events in the movie will make sense.

dangadget · « **Reply #26 on:** November 15, 2003, 04:15:32 pm »

personally, if you haven't read it yet, and found the original source material slow, then I wouldn't bother reading ROTK until after you've seen the film.

on the other hand, if you were like my sister, and loved the original works AFTER having seen the films, then go right ahead on

dangadget · « **Reply #28 on:** November 15, 2003, 08:12:21 pm »

i really don't understand all the fuss over Faramir....

when reading the books for the first time, lo these many ages ago

, I was immediately left with the impression that he was a goody two-shoes, non-interesting, almost deus ex machina character.

Walsh's/Boyen's/Jackson's Faramir has actual HUMAN qualities which I can relate to in a film far better than I would to Tolkien's literary Faramir.

i have read the arguments; that Faramir was resistant to the temptation of the Ring due to his goodness, etc, etc....

that may work in a book; but from a cinematic standpoint, all it serves to do is weaken the overall impact you've been trying to establish that the Ring is evil; it is powerful; it is corrupting, even to those whose intentions are good.

i think that the extended version of TTT(3 more days

) will give even more substance to Faramir's character, and i am looking forward to it.

Harlax · « **Reply #29 on:** November 16, 2003, 05:40:02 am »

Read again my friend. Faramir was tempted. He passed the test in the book, but did it in the secret hideout. Jackson feels the need to drag everybody back to Osgiliaith to accomplish this.

At the best this is a waste of time and appears to be an intentional thumbing of the nose at the storyline of the books.

At the worst...

Reread the Akalabeth section of the Silmarilian. Faramir is a descendent of the Numenorians. The greater part of whom where seduced to their doom by Sauron. Sauron deceived them into thinking they could challenge the Valar for the lordship of Arda. But there were those who resisted Sauron. The faithful. These escaped the wreckage of Numenor. Faramir's role in LOTR is much the same. He is able to resist. Just as Elendil and the faithful did in Numenor. - Poor Elendil, gets offed in the opening narration without any recognition. Just some dude with a sword we're going to need later. But then he doesn't "fit" Jackson's revised story line does he?

A goody two shoes cardboard character? Hardly. Faramir and Boromir encapsulate the entire history of men. Sometimes proud and arrogant, but also capable of greatness. In fact it's Jackson's Faramir who is the cardboard cutout. Nothing more than a Boromir clone.

dangadget · « **Reply #30 on:** November 16, 2003, 09:02:00 am »

with respect, I know all that, but consider what you are saying.

you are speaking as a purist and an informed reader of Tolkien's background material.

now think of the intended audience for the movies.

see the difference?

its all fine and dandy for _you_ to say that because _you_ know the backstory.(i learned it later too btw, but remember, i am referring to my first reading, back when I was still a kid with long hair

) but the average viewer will see only this guy who has every reason in the world to be tempted by the Ring and be hostile and suspicious of the hobbits acting like their boy scout troupe leader instead.

"headed to Mordor? sure, lemme help ya out there buddy!"

again, with respect, this is the kind of almost deliberate blindness that die-hard Tolkien purists seem to display when bashing the films.

i honestly don't get it, as nothing about the films takes anything away from the written works, so why not just take them both for what they are?

one as a literary masterpiece, and the other as a well done _adaptation_ , not literal _translation_of said masterpiece?

Harlax · « **Reply #31 on:** November 16, 2003, 09:44:05 am »

I've watched both films, bought both film, enjoyed both films.

Adaptation was necesary. And certain to produce gnashing of teeth among serious readers. As to casual viewers, well a cynic once said no one went broke underestimating the taste of the public. Movie viewers routinely enjoy movies with plot holes large enough for the host of the Rohirrim to charge through. Those kind of viewers would have swallowed a goody two shoes Faramir without even chewing.

Let me just leave it at this.

I simply disagree that the specific changes made to Faramir, the Ents and to a lesser extent, Rohan were necesary to adapt the story. Jackson chose to tell another story. Its still a pretty good story. It just didn't have to happen that way.

And it could have far worse. From the infamous Tolkein Sarcasm site...

http://flyingmoose.org/tolksarc/theories/pitch.htm

or

http://flyingmoose.org/tolksarc/theories/two_hour.htm

TO: Miramax Studios
FROM: Storyline Editor
RE: 'Lord of Rings' story

Ok, Jack -- I read this grossly oversized book, and I think we can handle it, but we have got to slim-n-trim this one big time to get it into our 2:07 frame. Luckily, 2/3 of this book is just dead weight. Proposed cuts:

Merry and Pippin, or at least one of them. Too easy to confuse. Too many Hobbits.
Sam. Sure, he's got the supporting role, but isn't Frodo's lone struggle against impossible odds twice as heroic without him?
Faramir. Wussy, non-heroic character - all he does is to get shot and lie around in agony. A waste of scenes. Better to keep Boromir alive, use him in later scenes.
Imrahil. Who cares?
Saruman. Needless duplication of a villain.
Kingdom of Rohan & its inhabitants. Needless duplication of a kingdom.
Ents. Talking trees? Makes me think of 'The Wizard of Oz'.
Nine Black Riders. Reduce to three.

IKV Nemesis D7L · « **Reply #36 on:** November 17, 2003, 07:51:50 pm »

Hstaphath_XC · « **Reply #37 on:** November 18, 2003, 09:28:40 am »

Have you guys seen this?

Corbomite · « **Reply #38 on:** November 18, 2003, 09:49:48 am »

Hstaphath!!!

News:

Topic: Has any one else herd chirs lee has been edited out (Read 28804 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

Harlax

Strafer

Demandred

dangadget

Commander Xizor

Sethan

dangadget

Harlax

dangadget

Harlax

dangadget

Harlax

Sethan

Corbomite

Barabbas

762

IKV Nemesis D7L

Hstaphath_XC

Corbomite

Fahrenheit

Topic: Has any one else herd chirs lee has been edited out (Read 28804 times)