The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum - View Single Post - It's too Goody-Goody...they don't like Goody-Goody...but sometimes there has to be...

ReededGoat · 12-23-2002, 11:07 PM

What an excellently written and well-balanced commentary! I myself loved the film, but have much to say in criticism of it. One major point you touched upon I think is very apparent - these filmmakers aren't about subtlety. They use the sledgehammer of onscreen development at every opportunity. This is justified in many ways, since they have a complex plot and complex characters that need to be simplified for a cinematic presentation to an audience which mostly hasn't read JRRT's novel.<BR>I heard over at TORN that Phillipa B. said they felt that Faramir needed more of a progression in the film - that would be the justification for making him seem more strongheaded in sending Frodo to Denethor. This can also be applied as the reasoning for weakening so many of the characters from their book counterparts.<BR>This is definitely one opinion of how characters need to develop, but I think they take it too far. Theoden is really stand-offish about war, irrationally so in my opinion, so that when he finally rides out of the keep it will be really intense. Same with Faramir letting Frodo go, and Aragorn claiming the kingship and Frodo destroying the ring. In fact, it seems that the characters changed the least are the ones that don't need to rise to some specific intense act (the Ents in the film are an exception to this statement). PJ and Co. obviously feel that these drastic developments work better - that's, as I said, an opinion, but I disagree. Given PB's comment about Faramir, she seems to think that he is not as interesting the way he is portrayed in the book, or could not work on film. Now Faramir may work in and of himself in the film version, but that doesn't mean a character more like the book version couldn't hold and audiences interest and attention. Someone who could resist the power of the ring's temptation while everyone else can't wait to get at it would be intriguing in the film version - but that's just MY opinion, and therefore no more or less valid than that of the filmmakers.<BR>I think I will start a thread regarding this topic on the Ents, and how the desire for this onscreen intensity to manifest suddenly can cause other details to slip by the way side.<p>[ December 24, 2002: Message edited by: ReededGoat ]

12-23-2002, 11:07 PM	#3
ReededGoat Animated Skeleton Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 32	What an excellently written and well-balanced commentary! I myself loved the film, but have much to say in criticism of it. One major point you touched upon I think is very apparent - these filmmakers aren't about subtlety. They use the sledgehammer of onscreen development at every opportunity. This is justified in many ways, since they have a complex plot and complex characters that need to be simplified for a cinematic presentation to an audience which mostly hasn't read JRRT's novel.<BR>I heard over at TORN that Phillipa B. said they felt that Faramir needed more of a progression in the film - that would be the justification for making him seem more strongheaded in sending Frodo to Denethor. This can also be applied as the reasoning for weakening so many of the characters from their book counterparts.<BR>This is definitely one opinion of how characters need to develop, but I think they take it too far. Theoden is really stand-offish about war, irrationally so in my opinion, so that when he finally rides out of the keep it will be really intense. Same with Faramir letting Frodo go, and Aragorn claiming the kingship and Frodo destroying the ring. In fact, it seems that the characters changed the least are the ones that don't need to rise to some specific intense act (the Ents in the film are an exception to this statement). PJ and Co. obviously feel that these drastic developments work better - that's, as I said, an opinion, but I disagree. Given PB's comment about Faramir, she seems to think that he is not as interesting the way he is portrayed in the book, or could not work on film. Now Faramir may work in and of himself in the film version, but that doesn't mean a character more like the book version couldn't hold and audiences interest and attention. Someone who could resist the power of the ring's temptation while everyone else can't wait to get at it would be intriguing in the film version - but that's just MY opinion, and therefore no more or less valid than that of the filmmakers.<BR>I think I will start a thread regarding this topic on the Ents, and how the desire for this onscreen intensity to manifest suddenly can cause other details to slip by the way side.<p>[ December 24, 2002: Message edited by: ReededGoat ]