Dumbing it down

[Lalwendë]

About Faramir (again... )

Originally Posted by SpM

But it’s not something that is going to cause confusion with audiences. They just get a different perspective

The changed character does cause confusion, as in his new role, Faramir is not entirely a 'good' person, and when the question is raised as to why he does not defy his cruel father, then this becomes justified. A man with such a personality might be expected to be more naturally suspicious and questioning and therefore more likely to defy a father who asks him to give up his own life. New Faramir would not have the sense of duty to the notion of a once noble father.

Originally Posted by SpM

The problem lies with the fact that, the Nazgul having seen the Ring, Osgiliath should have been swarming with them within minutes.

With the Fell Beast in Osgiliath seeing the Ring, not only ought Osgiliath to have been swarming with Nazgul in minutes, but in addition the whole of Ithilien, and I would not give odds on the chances of Frodo getting away at all, let alone getting into Mordor through a poorly guarded approach.

Originally Posted by SpM

Of course she was surprised. She wasn’t expecting it. If she had been, it would have made her look weaker. They are on the threshold of Rivendell. It doesn’t take much wit to work out (with a little patience) that the flood was invoked by either Elrond or Gandalf, who we subsequently learn is there, or both (as in the book). I can’t recall, but it may even have been explained in the following scene with Gandalf and Frodo. (Lalwendë, in the book it was Elrond and Gandalf that created the flood, not Frodo.)

I actually thought that the look of surprise on Arwen's face was more due to Liv Tyler's 'acting' . But she does look as though she is 'invoking' something, so it's obvious where this confusion comes into play. there is little suggestion there that it is anyone other than she who has 'invoked' the flood. And yes, it is not Frodo who literally invokes the flood in the book, but it is his presence of mind which calls upon his guardians to help him; he does not sit there defenceless, he musters his own mental strength for a last fight.

The criticisms I have heard are from many non-readers, most of whom are fairly sharp-eyed and -eared, and well accustomed to following the 'logic' inherent in the sci-fi and fantasy genre, whether in films, books or on TV. These are the kind of people who Jackson was without a doubt trying to attract to his films, and unfortunately, the kind of people who are highly likely to spot illogical plot moves.

EDIT to pick up on something Fordim says:

Now, surely if Jackson was trying to leave elements of the film 'open to interpretation' then he was not making them more accessible? To leave plot areas open to interpretation would make the film more difficult to understand, and this would surely repel the 'popular audience'? I think where he leaves things 'open to interpretation' it is more likely he couldn't see a way to tie up the loose ends. I think that the explanation that they wanted to show some more of Gondor before RotK came out would possibly cut some ice in terms of an explanation, but it isn't the spin that Jackson put on it. After all, if you are a film director who has just spent hundreds of millions on making a film and then there is a plot hole it has to defended in some way. And whether they wanted to make the most of the 'cool' special effects or simply to show some of Gondor in advance of RotK we will never know as Jackson puts other reasons forward which don't wash.