LotR1-FotR-Seq05

[Essex]

Originally Posted by Boromir88

I disagree. I don't think Jackson really heightens the power of the ring at all. We do get a several cases (in the movies when the ring's temptation is actually resisted).

Bilbo- giving it up at Bag End
Gandalf- "Don't tempt me Frodo!"
Boromir- On Caradhras= "Give the Ring to Frodo."
Galadriel- "I passed the test."
Faramir- Letting Frodo go. Though he does initially fall, I will argue at the proper time that he was more influenced by his Father than by the Ring.
Sam- Gives Frodo the Ring back in Cirith Ungol

Though I think it appears that Jackson shows the Ring affecting Frodo (and Boromir too) earlier than I found in the books, I think there are several cases that show the Ring can be resisted and isn't this all-powerful, corrupts everyone force.

Yes, and if you didn't have most of the above in the movie then you wouldn't have Lord of the Rings! What I mean is that as soon as Frodo puts the Ring on we have an all encompasing force 'seing' him 'I can see you' etc. The only time this is valid (and works well) is when Frodo sits on the seat of seeing, as in the book.

What I mean about it's strength is that as soon as the wearer puts it on (except for bilbo but there you go, it gives us an inconsistency) we have the eye of sauron on top of them. This means that NO WAY can Sam wear the Ring near Cirith Ungol (as Frodo says pretty much to him that they can't wear it anymore in hennuth anun) - so therefore, Sam wasn't a Ring Bearer and didn't follow Frodo in to the West (the Last 'movie' Boat had gone anyway!)

This is what I'm trying to get at, that movie wise the Ring and Sauron's connection to it is too strong, leading us to incosistencies and changes further down the line. And along with Tom, we see someone who doesn't even need to fight temptation - he just puts it on and isn;t effected by it! It also shows us there are simillar (or greater) forces on Middle-earth as well as Sauron, and this would have been great to see in the movie, whether it moved the story along or not.

PS It's funny how us posters with different views on the movies can use the 'move the story along' excuse for both our 'causes'.

[Mister Underhill]

I sympathize with your exasperation, Essex. In a perfect world, I'd definitely love to have the Old Forest, Bombadil, and the Downs up on their feet. Maybe the ideal format for Rings isn't feature movies or even a miniseries, but a full-blown hour drama television series that ran for two or three seasons. Then you could really dig into the story and cover everything.

I like all the reasons you cite for including Bombadil. As a practical matter, though, I can't see what else could go so easily while creating so few story problems. Maybe you have some ideas? How long do you imagine the sequence would have to be in order to do it justice? Do you think Jackson could have pulled off Bombadil? I ask these questions in sincere curiosity. I'd like to hear any ideas you have.

Originally Posted by Essex

What I mean about it's strength is that as soon as the wearer puts it on (except for bilbo but there you go, it gives us an inconsistency) we have the eye of sauron on top of them.

You only brush over the point, but I think it's a valid one -- with Jackson's compressed timeline and pumped up Ring power/Sauron connection, it sort of begs the question of why Bilbo doesn't suddenly have a giant peeper bearing down ("I see you!") when he wears the Ring. I also wonder if Bilbo sees the same scary, windy invisi-world that Frodo does. He seems awfully chipper when he takes the Ring off in Bag End. Maybe he's just become accustomed to how frightening it is through long experience over the years?

Originally Posted by Essex

I can't win with you guys. I try to find reasons for things happening in the film from the text, and it still gets brushed aside.

It's not about winning or losing -- we can have a talk about the movies without it being a contest. But on the point, if we take the movies as an adaptation on their own terms, there's no very good explanation for why the Black Rider would be so easily fooled. It weakens them, I think. It's like Gandalf yelling at Saruman, "Your shoe is untied!", then scampering out of Orthanc while the Many-Coloured one is distracted. I wonder, since Jackson went to the trouble of shooting the "Wood-Elves", why he didn't use that bit for its proper story purpose.

[Essex]

Originally Posted by Mister Underhill

But on the point, if we take the movies as an adaptation on their own terms, there's no very good explanation for why the Black Rider would be so easily fooled. It weakens them, I think.

Of course I want the movie as close to the film as possible, so having the wood elves frighten him off would be perfect. but we don't have this unffortunately.

but easily fooled? the black riders need a point of reference. they could tell the Ring was nearby (indeed in the book the first time we see the black rider he rides off without confronting them) but would not know exactly where it was. If they DID know he would have popped around the side of the tree and caught them. They just knew it was in the general area.

Now the SOUND of the bag/fruit crashing in the near didstance WAS A POINT OF REFERENCE for the nearly blind Nazgul - It rushed off in that direction, giving the hobbits time to escape (for now....)

Maybe the ideal format for Rings isn't feature movies or even a miniseries, but a full-blown hour drama television series that ran for two or three seasons. Then you could really dig into the story and cover everything.

The unabridged oral versions of the full LOTR take 54 hours. This fits in perfectly with a 3 seasons of 24 episodes each, which taking 15 minutes off for adverts equals 54 hours! perfect, - so I'm writing a screenplay as we speak!!!!!!!!


PS 'I can't win with you guys' - it's just an english saying - not really about winning or losing.

[Elladan and Elrohir]

I disagree that Bombadil is necessary to the story. I mean, yes, he shows that SOMEBODY is not affected by the Ring, but why is this important? As Boromir points out, we see people giving up or refusing the Ring numerous times throughout the films. Surely that would suffice. Plus, Bombadil is an extremely unusual exception to a wide-encompassing rule.

Now sure, I like old Tom Bom jolly Tom as much as the next guy, but he flat out does not belong in these films, beyond the small tribute he gets from Treebeard in the TTT EE. We've been over this tons of times, so I won't list the reasons here.

EDIT: I'm not trying to sound arrogant, and rereading my post, I think I did sound like that more than a bit. I apologize. Sometimes I go overboard when trying to make my point. Please ignore my tone and just focus on the argument. Sorry.

And yes, Frodo seeing the Eye while wearing the Ring at the Prancing Pony is a big change with potentially far-reaching implications. So, that begs the question: Does it accomplish its purpose in the movie? And while we're at it, what IS its purpose in the movie? I'll sit back and let you guys answer that before I jump in.

[Lathriel]

I like this sequence but the one thing that bothered me was the atmosphere of Bree. I had expected a cheerful setting but it turned out to be to menacing for me. I got used to it but I would have liked to see Bree friendly. Of course PJ wanted to prove the point that the Hobbits had now truly left their safe homeland but I don't really buy into that.
I liked the effects used when Frodo sensed the black rider, it certainly gave the feeling that the black rider was approaching quickly. I also didn't mind the whole shortcut to mushrooms since it gives us a bit of trivia about Hobbits and PJ actually managed to use a chapter title, "A Shortcut to Mushrooms"
The little part between Sam and Frodo about "Gandalf told me; Don't you loose him, Samwise Gamgee" works for me, it gets another line from the book into the movie. It shows that Gandalf already sees that Frodo will need help and that Sam is a good candidate for this job. (For lack of better words)
Of course I also really like the entrance of Strider, it makes him so mysterious.
The big eyeball and the "I see you" line might have been cheesy but it worked for me since these kind of things quickly creep me out.(This is a reason why I never watch horror movies)
I really like the shots of the Nazgul especially the one with the light that shines out from behind the tree branches. That shot gives it such a cold, evil and supernatural feel without resorting to some kind of showy magic.
I like it that they put in the midgewater sequence and part of Luthien's lament which Viggo composed.
I don't mind any of the comic scenes all that much although I did notice the iregularity with the apples but I don't see a point in making a big fuss about that.