GreyIstar -- I would agree that the Faramir decision is related to how they potray Aragorn.<P>What I would say is that they are both driven by some common fixations/obsessions/themes of these New Zealanders.<P>The main reason that the filmmakers can show Aragorn letting Frodo go at the end of Film-FoTR is 'cuz on Film he's on an anti-power trip, not wanting to be King and all.<P>Well, in the Book he knows what he wants, and yet it has hardly anything to do with his own glorification. This is either just too subtle or simply rejected by the Mr. Jackson.<P>Well, having of course set this thing up with Aragorn, while generally depicting all Men as power-hungry, weak and corrupt, they have, of course, boxed themselves in, and must show on a very visual basis some sort of hiccup in terms of Faramir and the Ring, especially as Faramir is part of the Gondor Establishment.<P>In the Books, Aragorn and Faramir are very similar, and there are also comparisons to Gandalf. But having decided that they need to more thoroughly heighten the transition of Aragorn's character, and yet show how exceptional he is compared to most Men, they are forced to make Faramir seem less perfect.<P>But I would argue to the Film-makers' credit that they are not lurching from one decision to another, but rather they are being internally coherent and consistent. In fact, for all we know decisions about how to potray Faramir influenced how the Aragorn role was written.<p>[ December 26, 2002: Message edited by: Man-of-the-Wold ]
__________________
The hoes unrecked in the fields were flung, __ and fallen ladders in the long grass lay __ of the lush orchards; every tree there turned __ its tangled head and eyed them secretly, __ and the ears listened of the nodding grasses; __ though noontide glowed on land and leaf, __ their limbs were chilled.
|