The Council of Elrond

[Sauron the White]

Part of making a serious film is to create moments of drama. Perhaps Jackson felt that the eventual declaration by Frodo to take the Ring was more dramatic if preceded by a moment of vigorous debate which degenerated into arguing. Frodo saying he will take the ring and reaction of Gandalf to those words puts an end to the loud bickering and puts a more dramatic feel of peace to the events.

[MatthewM]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

Part of making a serious film is to create moments of drama. Perhaps Jackson felt that the eventual declaration by Frodo to take the Ring was more dramatic if preceded by a moment of vigorous debate which degenerated into arguing. Frodo saying he will take the ring and reaction of Gandalf to those words puts an end to the loud bickering and puts a more dramatic feel of peace to the events.

Although I would have loved to see more included in The Council, I agree here. There is no denying that it is very dramatic when you hear Frodo yell "I will take it!" and you see Gandalf's face turn from anger to compassion.

[Finduilas]

Originally Posted by MatthewM

Although I would have loved to see more included in The Council, I agree here. There is no denying that it is very dramatic when you hear Frodo yell "I will take it!" and you see Gandalf's face turn from anger to compassion.

Dramatic, yes. Killing the Fellowship at the end would have been even more dramatic. It turns Boromir, Gimli, Legolas, and even Gandalf(and all those other people) into children who can't talk below a shout, and can't have a quiet debate! It was almost one of those "It's mine," "no, it's mine," arguements that I have had, and I am sure that I'm not the only Downer still able to remember the wonderful days of childhood, where logic isn't appreciated. Now I know it isn't nearly that bad, but it was childish, and I am glad that Aragorn and Elrond stayed seated and didn't join. It doesn't speak well for the order of the West.

*sigh* The things that movie makers do, and people justify it for the sake of "dramatics"! The whole Aragorn-Arwen thing is alot the same. All the falling off cliffs were for the same thing.

[Folwren]

Seems like they already had a dramatic setting for much the same thing - when Frodo was trying to give the ring to Gandalf in the beginning of the movie when he and Gandalf were rather loud just before his - "What must I do" line.

As for being dramatic in the Council...well, there is more than one way to make something dramatic. Tolkien's way of doing it was dramatic in almost the opposite way. Things were utterly quiet for some little while before Frodo spoke up in the book. I think they could have done it.

Having the council blow up into a shouting match between the elves and the dwarves and Gandalf and Boromir wasn't good.

I had no problem with the people being summoned, though. That was fairly reasonable. However, I wish they had shown people coming up with different options - like throwing it into the sea, or taking it across the Water, etc. *shrugs* I don't know, I think it's better than saying, "This thing is utterly evil, we have to walk into the middle of Mordor to destroy it and I invited you here so that I could shovel this duty on you, for one of you must do this."

Eh well. That's my opinion.

And, oh! Golly! Another insanely illogical and dumb thing that they did was put the Ring out in the middle of the whole circle! In the book Frodo was loath to show it, even for a moment. Would he have set it in the middle of so many strangers? I somehow think not. It was too easily set away from him.

-- Folwren

[Sauron the White]

Have you ever noticed how in actual real life things often regress pretty rapidly when you have opposing sides taking strong positions against each other? Notice how two smart people can be quickly overcome by road rage in a matter of seconds. There certainly was rational discussion in the Council of Elrond film sequence, but it regressed to what we saw. Again, I think it only served to underline the poignancy of Frodo's acceptance of the Ring.

In the end, only one thing matters when you are discussing a film. DID IT WORK?
And for me - and I would imagine millions of others who came back again and again - it did work. Mission accomplished.

[Folwren]

Originally Posted by Sauron the White

In the end, only one thing matters when you are discussing a film. DID IT WORK?
And for me - and I would imagine millions of others who came back again and again - it did work. Mission accomplished.

No...I don't think so... That is somehow wrong and slightly twisted. There are parts in that movie that didn't work, and yet people still came back. For instance, when Frodo stuck on the ring at Weathertop and you could see the Nazgul, who was impressed by the sniffing white guys looking down their noses at Frodo? No one...that certainly didn't work - and yet people came back.

There's a difference between making something that will hold together for a little while and making something that will last for a lifetime. The LotR movies were great for the first few viewings. All of us were stunned and amazed by the movies when we saw them in theaters. We went two or three or more times to see them while they were there. Then we bought them when they came out and we have watched them many times since. But! After learning them by heart and finally waking up from the dream that the beautiful scenery and intense drama that the movies cast on us, we realize, hey...these movies have holes...why? The books don't...

The difference between us and the millions that you mention is that they don't study the work like we do. I doubt they watch them as much we do.

Do you know why they were such big hits? Because it was the Lord of the Rings and the Lord of the Rings has amazing depth in characters, plot, history, and different scenery. And why does it have those things? Because Tolkien put them there. Jackson used a fair amount of Tolkien's work, but not as much as he could have. Do you know what would have happened if Jackson had used more of Tolkien's original work? I am convinced that the movies would have been a great deal more loved, by Tolkien fans and people who didn't know Tolkein both.

The Council of Elrond (as well as many other places in the movie) could have easily been done differently and could still have impressed the people who didn't know Tolkien's work just as much, and could have made LotR fans happy.

-- Folwren

[Sauron the White]

After learning them by heart and finally waking up from the dream that the beautiful scenery and intense drama that the movies cast on us, we realize, hey...these movies have holes...why? The books don't...

Of course the movies have holes. Nothing is perfect. I cringe every time I see the scrubbing bubbles of the Army of the Dead render the complete battle before the gates of Minas Tirith meaningless. Of course there are holes. What film does not?

The other day I was watching WEDDING CRASHERS on cable. Pretty successful film with a very simple plot. But a hole big enough to drive the proverbial truck through. The preppie bad guy calls his buddies to get the real lowdown on the two crashers - but does not give his contact on the other end of the phone any real info about them which could lead to discovering their actual identities. Everything he tells them is meaningless crap. But a half hour later, he gets a call and finds out all the truth. There is no way the guy on the other end could have found out this stuff even if he was Sherlock Holmes. This is typical and every film has something like this. And books do also.

And as for the book LOTR not having any holes. I give you two words - the first one is Tom and the second one starts with the letter B.

No holes? Explain this to me then. Sauron needs the ring so he can dominate and control all of Middle-earth. Well, he had it once and it sure did not do him any good then did it? The forces of the Last Alliance of Elves and Men defeated Sauron and his armies even though Sauron had the ring firmly in his possession.

And for years now I have yet to hear a reasonable explaination as to why the forces of good could not have laid siege to the Black Gates to distract Sauron and his forces while at the same time Frodo swept in on an eagle, escorted by an army of other eagles, and dumped it right into Mount Doom.

No holes in the book? Really? And that is just off the top of my head.

[MatthewM]

Originally Posted by Finduilas

*sigh* The things that movie makers do, and people justify it for the sake of "dramatics"!

I am not justifying it, I don't think that anything PJ did opposite to the books is "justified". I'm just saying that I liked Wood's delivering of "I will take it!" and the look of Gandalf afterwards. That's all.

Originally Posted by Finduilas

The whole Aragorn-Arwen thing is alot the same. All the falling off cliffs were for the same thing.

Although there are constant complaints about the Aragorn and Arwen plot change, I do not mind it much. The falling off the cliff is another story.

[MatthewM]

Originally Posted by Finduilas

It turns Boromir, Gimli, Legolas, and even Gandalf(and all those other people) into children who can't talk below a shout, and can't have a quiet debate!

And you're right (I've made my stance clear on the "childish" qualities PJ's Boromir holds, as you know)- but this thread isn't about character portrayal - it's about The Council scene itself, correct?

[TheGreatElvenWarrior]

Well the characters have a lot to do with the council scene, since they are kinda the thing that keeps it going... are they not? And yes Boromir was quite childish, not just in the council scene but also when he picks up the hilt of Narsil and then drops it, and in other parts of the films as well, and i was also Boromir who started the fight. Was it not?