Sauron versus Aragorn

[denethorthefirst]

I absolutely hated the portrayal of denethor and gondor in general, it feels like a silly caricature without any depth whatsoever. Minas Tirith is just disappointing, where are the farmlands, the city and culture simply do not feel real and the disgusting interpretation of denethor is just the tip of the iceberg. And Gandalf knocks him out for comedic effect ...
Sadly out of all he movies only one (the fellowship) is any good, it has somewhat the right "tone", a sense of fairy-tale like wonder but it still feels real and believable ... the second and the third movie just do not "feel" right, they feel silly, like b-movie comic-book adaptions without depth.

But can we for a moment dwell on the depiction of Sauron as a giant eyeball ...
How ridiculous is that? What is that even supposed to be, when you think about it? His body? But Saruman said he can't take "physical form" ...
So it's supposed to be his spirit? ... In eye-form?
...
Nearly everyone who has read the Book must have understood that tolkiens usage of the "eye" is just a metaphor for the watchfulness and the inhuman, never sleeping power of Sauron. This "mistake" alone disqualifies Jackson in my opinion and I agree with the other posters that they probably just had no idea how to handle Sauron and so took the easy way out: "ah €?!&@ it, he's an eye". It was tolerable in the first movie because the camera didn't dwell on it and it was shot in a hazy way, so you could actually interpret it as a mental image ... In the second film there are several clear shots of this absurd monstrosity, but at least it's static ... But for whatever reason, in the third movie this thing starts moving like a lighthouse, like something out of a Saturday-morning cartoon and that just took me completely out of the movie and destroyed any supsension of disbelief that had survived until then. When I saw that for the first time I had to laugh out loud, it's just so unintentionally funny, ridiculous and absurd ...

A competent filmmaker would have captured the eery atmosphere of Barad-Dur and the inhuman horror of the inner court of sauron, whiteout necessarily showing sauron himself, and we would have a credible and believable villain.

But the eye is only the tip of the ice berg, removing that absurdity would not make the movies better and I could list dozens of other things that are just wrong in my opinion. I agree with the posters that said that the fact that the filmmakers even considered the Aragorn-Sauron duel, shows that they just didn't "get" Tolkien!

[Marwhini]

I had little idea that there were others who shared almost the same level of disdain for PJ's movies pretending to be the work of Tolkien as I have of them.

I often use the metaphor of a Catholic Mass and Communion.

Peter Jackson has dressed up four guys in black robes, handing out beer and pizza in an auditorium, an told us it is a Catholic Mass and Communion in a Medieval Gothic Cathedral.

Well... Pete... You have some of the elements that are similar.... You just missed out on the particulars, and most of all the Substance of a Catholic Mass and Communion.

His vision is beautiful and visually stunning. I will be happy to give him that much.

But he did not have a clue as to what he was leaping into when he made the movies.

And the sad fact is that Paramount, New Line, and Saul Zaentz (or his Estate) have now so sewn up the Rights to Tolkien's legacy that it will likely never be available again until it is in the Public Domain.

The proposed Fight between Aragorn and Sauron was just further evidence of how out of his depth he was.

MB

[Marwhini]

And let me hand it to the people who made the criticism of Jackson for their portrayal of Denethor (and his death), not to mention Gil-Gilad.

That run that Denethor made while on Fire really had me stunned when I saw the movie.

I was like "He ran roughly a mile while on Fire???!!!"

And Poor Elendil and Gil-Gilad have their epic fight with Sauron cut.

Applause to you guys for pointing these out.

And.... BTW.... There is no real reason why the movies could not have been done like the books. Only modest changes would need to have been made, with very minimal cutting.

MB