The Beard of Théoden - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

Boromir88 · 09-04-2006, 05:52 PM

Well the actor that plays him Bernard Hill, would have been approaching 60, but he didn't even look 60 in the movies. They must have given Mr. Hill a wig, or just dyed his hair, because his hair (in real life) is grey. Which I think contributes to the rather young looking Theoden. Had I not known Theoden's age from the books, I would have guessed he was about 50.

mormegil · 09-04-2006, 11:18 PM

I think Brinniel alludes to the problem I see. I don't particularly like this scene but understand why it was done.

For the reading audience we have many pages, a chapter perhaps, to get an understanding of the true condition, you can be told the emotions of the character in the book but are not visually shown. That is the major problem in translating literature into cinema, there are certain emotions or thoughts that cannot be acted. This scene is a prime example of that point. There is no way for Bernanrd to 'act' possessed or poisoned as we learn in the book so to make up for it PJ must do some special effects to compensate.

While I'm not overly fond of this scene I think that all in all it was a required element and done well given the medium but generally it is this field of emotions that the cinema looses when translating from a book.

Essex · 09-05-2006, 05:16 AM

would everyone be happy if PJ had filmed the scene as it was in the book?

Gandalf speaks a few words in his ear, leads him outside in the Sun and that's it?

It would have been closer to the book I grant you, which is 99% of the time a good thing, but some things don't work on screen as they do in a book. It is a totally different medium

Morsul the Dark · 09-05-2006, 08:21 AM

I agree it wouldn't have worked it would(in my opinion) made theoden look gulllible and an idiot I mean this version(again on film) makes it look like theoden believes everything you tell him and was easily twisted as h was easily cured

The Mouth of Sauron · 09-06-2006, 04:33 PM

I thought Peter Jackson did a great job of the curing of Theoden .

It also must be said that PJ's entire transposition of a wonderful book in to a wonderful set of films was second to none .

mormegil · 09-06-2006, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Essex

would everyone be happy if PJ had filmed the scene as it was in the book?

Not at all. In fact I think PJ does a decent job I just don't like this scene in general. This, as I stated, is something where change was required to remain coherent. I have no proposed method of improving upon it but that doesn't change my general feeling that it was not a favorite aspect of mine...perhaps it was a bit over dramatic is all. However, if it wasn't done so I'm not sure the essence would have been captured.

Brinniel · 09-06-2006, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mormegil:
For the reading audience we have many pages, a chapter perhaps, to get an understanding of the true condition, you can be told the emotions of the character in the book but are not visually shown. That is the major problem in translating literature into cinema, there are certain emotions or thoughts that cannot be acted. This scene is a prime example of that point. There is no way for Bernanrd to 'act' possessed or poisoned as we learn in the book so to make up for it PJ must do some special effects to compensate.

Couldn't be better said.

For years now, I've read and understood others' complaints about changes in the movies, but as a future filmmaker myself, I can't help but view the situation from PJ and the writers' perspectives. In the process of adapting a novel to screen, there is almost always a reason why something has been changed, even as much as we hate it.

Rune Son of Bjarne · 09-07-2006, 06:36 AM

It is not that the scene ruins the movies for me in any way and I fully understand that you cannot be true to the book, but I still think it looks kind of ridcules when ever I watch that scene.

As I am not a film maker I do not know how to make it different, but is that not what characterize us critics. Never ever pressenting an alternative. . .

Essex · 09-07-2006, 09:22 AM

and that has been one of my main gripes over the last few years on this site

in my honest view you shouldn't criticise a particular movie scene against the book unless you have an alternative. just to say a scene is rubbish is not really much of a statement

to say WHY it was rubbish at least takes you part way to coming up with an alternative and I must concede that at least this is better than just saying 'it's useless'

I always find myself fighting the corner for the movie makers because of the constant bad press the movie gets from quite a few avid book readers. For me the films will never beat the books, but they are still 3 of the best movies ever made. The filmakers make bad decisions, but at least in some ocasions in the commentary they try to explain their reasoning behind the 'changes' - some I agree with some I do not, but I still try to see it from a movie maker's perspective.

this is the main thing I've learnt about movie adaptation over the past few years critiquing the movies on this site - its given me a broader view of what issues/problems movie makers have with adaptations.

09-04-2006, 05:52 PM	#1
Boromir88 Laconic Loreman Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: USA Posts: 7,521	Well the actor that plays him Bernard Hill, would have been approaching 60, but he didn't even look 60 in the movies. They must have given Mr. Hill a wig, or just dyed his hair, because his hair (in real life) is grey. Which I think contributes to the rather young looking Theoden. Had I not known Theoden's age from the books, I would have guessed he was about 50. __________________ Fenris Penguin

09-04-2006, 11:18 PM	#2
mormegil Maundering Mage Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Texas Posts: 4,651	I think Brinniel alludes to the problem I see. I don't particularly like this scene but understand why it was done. For the reading audience we have many pages, a chapter perhaps, to get an understanding of the true condition, you can be told the emotions of the character in the book but are not visually shown. That is the major problem in translating literature into cinema, there are certain emotions or thoughts that cannot be acted. This scene is a prime example of that point. There is no way for Bernanrd to 'act' possessed or poisoned as we learn in the book so to make up for it PJ must do some special effects to compensate. While I'm not overly fond of this scene I think that all in all it was a required element and done well given the medium but generally it is this field of emotions that the cinema looses when translating from a book. __________________ “I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo. "So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.”

09-05-2006, 08:21 AM	#4
Morsul the Dark Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 3,448	I agree it wouldn't have worked it would(in my opinion) made theoden look gulllible and an idiot I mean this version(again on film) makes it look like theoden believes everything you tell him and was easily twisted as h was easily cured __________________ Morsul the Resurrected

09-05-2006, 05:16 AM	#3
Essex Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Essex, England Posts: 886	would everyone be happy if PJ had filmed the scene as it was in the book? Gandalf speaks a few words in his ear, leads him outside in the Sun and that's it? It would have been closer to the book I grant you, which is 99% of the time a good thing, but some things don't work on screen as they do in a book. It is a totally different medium

09-06-2006, 04:33 PM	#5
The Mouth of Sauron Wight Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Barad-Dur Posts: 196	I thought Peter Jackson did a great job of the curing of Theoden . It also must be said that PJ's entire transposition of a wonderful book in to a wonderful set of films was second to none .

09-07-2006, 09:22 AM	#9
Essex Ghost Prince of Cardolan Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Essex, England Posts: 886	and that has been one of my main gripes over the last few years on this site in my honest view you shouldn't criticise a particular movie scene against the book unless you have an alternative. just to say a scene is rubbish is not really much of a statement to say WHY it was rubbish at least takes you part way to coming up with an alternative and I must concede that at least this is better than just saying 'it's useless' I always find myself fighting the corner for the movie makers because of the constant bad press the movie gets from quite a few avid book readers. For me the films will never beat the books, but they are still 3 of the best movies ever made. The filmakers make bad decisions, but at least in some ocasions in the commentary they try to explain their reasoning behind the 'changes' - some I agree with some I do not, but I still try to see it from a movie maker's perspective. this is the main thing I've learnt about movie adaptation over the past few years critiquing the movies on this site - its given me a broader view of what issues/problems movie makers have with adaptations.