Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [mythsoc] Jackson and the books

Expand Messages
  • David Bratman
    ... I am both convulsed with hilarity - at the idea of a cast and crew supposedly fairly familiar with the book needing to consult an on-set copy in order to
    Message 1 of 108 , Sep 5, 2007
      At 03:52 AM 9/4/2007 -0400, ChessQu654@... wrote:

      >>Are there any anecdotes to suggest that anybody actually consulted the book
      >>on the set?
      >Yes. Throughout the commentaries and appendices attached to the extended
      >version of the movies, many of the actors and production staff talk about
      >referring to the books. Sean Astin, Viggo Mortensen and Liv Tyler definitely
      >about reading the books and referring to them. Liv talks about the proposed
      >changes from the book that were abandoned, thankfully, that Arwen would be
      >present at Helm's Deep.

      I am both convulsed with hilarity - at the idea of a cast and crew
      supposedly fairly familiar with the book needing to consult an on-set copy
      in order to determine that Tolkien's Arwen was not at Helm's Deep - and
      saddened, because this treatment of Arwen is a perfect example of Jackson's
      cluelessness in dealing with his own script adaptation.

      For Arwen at Helm's Deep would not have been any more of a violation of
      Tolkien's story than what Jackson actually did - have Haldir show up at
      Helm's Deep instead - and it would have made more sense to have Arwen than
      Haldir in terms of Jackson's own story. Haldir is, in Jackson's story,
      only a walk-on character from the previous installment, so his sudden
      reapparance jars oddly; his presence violates plot logic (why an Elf from
      Lorien is at the head of warriors from Rivendell is never explained); and
      the Warrior Princess character arc that Jackson had been building for Arwen
      in the previous film (unfaithful to Tolkien though it was, it was also a
      consistent, coherent thread up to that point) is abruptly cut off,
      undercutting Arwen and leaving her far more of a helpless, pathetic female
      than she'd have been if he'd left her alone from the start.

      >The commentaries
      >frequently mention their desire to make it look like Middle Earth was a real
      >place, with real history. He tried to physically create a world and its
      >history for the screen, the way Tolkien did in the written work.

      This was a creditable impulse as far as it went, because Jackson was trying
      to avoid fuzzy fairylands, but he forgot Tolkien's wise comment in OFS that
      Faerie, while built on hard reality, is not enslaved to it, and Le Guin's
      reiteration that Elfland is not Poughkeepsie. Jackson's Elves are merely
      wickedly good warriors with pointed ears. You couldn't fairly say of their
      presence, as Bilbo does, that "it smells like elves."
    • aveeris523@aol.com
      ... appropriate. ************************************** Check out AOL s list of 2007 s hottest products.
      Message 108 of 108 , Dec 7, 2007
        In a message dated 12/7/07 9:41:39 AM, dbratman@... writes:

        > Very much the opposite opinion here. I don't recall anything harmful being
        > done to the text, but the image was definitely a problem. Tolkien says she was
        > "beautiful beyond enduring, terrible and worshipful." The only word in this
        > that Jackson seems to have followed was "terrible" - and he seems to be using
        > it in the sense of "scary and terrifying," rather than "eliciting awe" which
        > is what Tolkien presumably meant.
        > Good point David! Beautiful and Terrible like an angel would have been more

        Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.