School's out for the summer!

On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 19:42:28 -1000, "Anne Elizabeth Baldwin"
<anneb @ aloha . net> stomped through my brain with:

>> I think the original indication of Aragorn's age was in the
>> conversation between Strider and the Hobbits in Bree. Again, I'd
>> have to look it up. But since they kind of short-cutted the Bree
>> scenes, I'm not sure where they could have included that.
>
> I think you might be right, and that movie, I can't think of much to pull
>to squeeze it in. But I'd think they could have squeezed into some other
>part of TTT. That wasn't quite a crammed a film as the first one. {Smile}

TTT had it's own challenges. While it was not quite as crammed
with a single narrative line, there was the challenge of
integrating multiple narrative lines into a single over-all film.
We have Frodo and Sam, Merry and Pippin, The Three Hunters/Rohan
all going on at once. There was a lot of switching back and
forth from one point to the other and narrative flow needed to be
maintained as best as possible for the big screen. It's easier
to do these bouncing back and forth in a written novel because
you can seperate things in chapters. Film doesn't work quite as
well.

So, in the film, we have this extended portion where the people
of Rohan are in transit from Edoras to Helm's Deep. These travel
portions are great points for exposition because, "as they
walked, they talked" is kinda a narrative tool even in the
written word. So, we have in the first movie Gandalf's
exposition on fate moved from the table in Bag End to the Journey
in the Dark in Moria. In the second movie, some of the
exposition of who Aragorn is, his relationship to Arwen, and his
decision to actually persue his inheritance of the kingdom is put
into the journeys from one place to another.

Could there have been a better way to present it? Probably. But
we also needed to contrast Eowyn to Arwen. While I understand
the argument that Eowyn was a "princess" and used to court life,
she was also a "shield-maiden"... not your typical "let's sit in
the solar and embroider banners for our men" kinda gal. She
probably spent more time practicing with her sword than with her
needle or ladle.

I'm willing to give Jackson and Co. leeway in bringing such a
complex book as TTT to the screen. That was NOT an easy task,
blending the various threads of the narrative into a single
movie. To keep the film flowing, bowing to the nature of the
medium, certain changes and alterations needed to be made. The
overall perspective and theming of the storyline was well
preserved... not purely preserved which irks the purist Tolkien
fans, but preserved enough that the same story in the books is
presented in the films.

My opinion, obviously... YMMV

Tristaan

>
>> Tristaan
>
> Anne Elizabeth Baldwin
>

--
Beware Spam Trap!: "us" is an "ogre"
*******************************************************
Ogre-Monk, AIM TristaanOgre
"So good-bye for now and I'll see you again
Some way, some how
When it's my time to go to the other side
I'll hold you again and melt at your smile
Now I have all the ones that I am with
You taught me not to take for granted
The time that we have to show that we care
Speak into their lives and their hearts while they're here
And say I LOVE YOU!!"

~Disciple "Things Left Unsaid"

Theologian in training http://ballymennoniteblogger.blogspot.com/
*******************************************************

Tristaan wrote:

> Could there have been a better way to present it? Probably. But
> we also needed to contrast Eowyn to Arwen. While I understand
> the argument that Eowyn was a "princess" and used to court life,
> she was also a "shield-maiden"... not your typical "let's sit in
> the solar and embroider banners for our men" kinda gal. She
> probably spent more time practicing with her sword than with her
> needle or ladle.

I certainly do not disagree with bringing up the subject, nor bringing
up the subject at that point. And of course Jackson also had to be a bit
more explicit with the whole Eowyn-falls-for-Aragorn plotline that was
kind of glossed over by Tolkien until the point that he actually needed it.
The only thing I really object to is that he took what was, in the
context of the story and that particular movie, a poignant moment (Eowyn
opens up her heart to somebody for the first time in a long while, even
if the movie did and could not portray that quite as well as it was
described in the books; especially where Gandalf spells it out to Eomer
at the Houses of Healing), and turns it into poorly done slapstick.
It is just the one part of the story where the script writers really
dropped the ball in my opinion, both in setting the tone of the
narrative and in understanding the emotions of the scene.
The sequence where the people of Rohan flee for Helm's Deep did not need
Gimli first being portrayed as a clueless idiot (regardless if the
actual dialogue is witty), then Eowyn as an equally clueless and
historically inaccurate idiot (did she really not even taste the soup
she was cooking, and was there nobody in the entire camp who was
actually a professional cook (i.e. all the women there ...)) and then
continueing to making Gimli not only an idiot but a moron too (with the
falling off the horse and shouting 'that was deliberate').
A little less slapstick and a little more focus on the fears of the
people and the way that Eowyn shyly opens herself a little to Aragorn
would have made the entire sequence, and the movie, a lot stronger.

> I'm willing to give Jackson and Co. leeway in bringing such a
> complex book as TTT to the screen. That was NOT an easy task,
> blending the various threads of the narrative into a single
> movie. To keep the film flowing, bowing to the nature of the
> medium, certain changes and alterations needed to be made. The
> overall perspective and theming of the storyline was well
> preserved... not purely preserved which irks the purist Tolkien
> fans, but preserved enough that the same story in the books is
> presented in the films.

I agree. It was not the easiest book to turn into a movie, and he did
very well with it. The change to Faramir was startling at first, but
after a little explanation worked rather well in the movie.
The only other tiny little nitpicks I have with it is that apparently
Faramir had access to instant communication, seeing that he could tell
Frodo and Sam about what was going on in Rohan at the same time that it
was actually happening (I am presuming he did not have a time travel
device). And of course, the Ents not only be fairly clueless and
ignorant (about the whole not knowing about Saruman destroying their
forest, and the being tricked by Pippin), but also capable of
teleportation (they arrived seconds after Treebeard called out in anger
at seeing the devastation). Staying a bit closer to the way Tolkien
described it would not have weakened the story and would even have
tightened up the narrative, without having to need to sacrifice a
starring role for the hobbits. If I had been the writer I would have
made the ents agree to come see what was going on with Saruman after
Merry's moving speech at the Entmeet. Then seeing the devastated forest
they could have exploded into anger and action.


Eri
--
Yes - at last - You. I Choose you. Out of all the world,
out of all the seeking, I have found you, young sister of
my heart! You are mine and I am yours - and never again
will there be loneliness ...

Rolan Choosing Talia,
Arrows of the Queen, by Mercedes Lackey