Book Clue for PJackson's Favor, or Still Maddening?

[Reyna Evergreen]

Vanimelda....<BR>Vanima means beautiful, so it must have something to do with Aragorn lorring over the Evenstar's beauty.<P>For the question on the film, athough here we all love J.R.R. Tolkien's incredible work and want the filmakers to stay completely true to them, we have to remember that this is a Hollywood production to an extent, and they need elements for it to sell.<P>The flashbacks between Arwen and Aragorn, for instance, are for the ever-present sex icons. Film-makers strongly believe you need induendo to make a movie successful, and sometimes they are right. Same for Arwen's general role in the movies. They put Liv Tyler in more ofter as Arwen than the books state because love and sex seems to sell.<P>There is also the issue that the books are very long with excessif dialogue, so the adapters and P.J. had to find ways to get the point across within certain time restrictions, which sometimes leads to changed words. But honestly, do we need them to follow everything to the line? I hate to break hearts, but that would be quite impossible.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>What seems gratuitous is the whole disappearance of Aragorn, and his self-rescue, which has no basis in the Books. It does serve, of course, to help the audience comprehend Eowyn's attraction for him and the approach of Saruman's forces.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>To that I agree, but have my own opinion. The battle was far-fetched and more or less another Hollywood-ism. Action sells probably as much as induendo does.<P>To finish, as much as everyone here would <I>love</I> for the films to be exactly to the word, in this real world that is unattainable, and to pay for this incredibly costly project they had to input elements that would sell.<P>[ February 09, 2003: Message edited by: Reyna Evergreen ]<p>[ February 09, 2003: Message edited by: Reyna Evergreen ]