Film better than the book

[Riotbeard]

I haven't seen the theatrical cuts since they were in the theaters. I forgot about the awful aragorn dies scene. I have seen the director's cuts way more than the others. It's probably one of those things were I will never be satisfied, haha. But I don't feel any of these problems for the Fellowship. For me, it's not so much what they cut but what they added and changed. I really thought they ruined Faramir and the whole osgiliath sequence was unnecessary.

I really enjoyed funny Gimli though, haha.

 

[Kieran]

Remind me, because it's years since I read the book, but in the book Faramir didn't bring frodo to Osgiliath, right? It would interesting to compile a list of sorry deviations from the book - and good deviations too. Aragorn's "death" was the most pointless one, far as I'm concerned. There was zero tension in that because it was obviously a cheap device aimed more at the sentimental than the sensible, and we all knew he'd be back in time for lunch.... :cover

 

[Riotbeard]

Remind me, because it's years since I read the book, but in the book Faramir didn't bring frodo to Osgiliath, right? It would interesting to compile a list of sorry deviations from the book - and good deviations too. Aragorn's "death" was the most pointless one, far as I'm concerned. There was zero tension in that because it was obviously a cheap device aimed more at the sentimental than the sensible, and we all knew he'd be back in time for lunch.... :cover

No, (it's some years for me too, but I remember being annoyed when the movie came out) Faramir let's frodo go after some questioning, and warns him about Golumn, etc... Faramir never seriously considers taking the ring back to Minas Tirith. He is never a particularly menacing character in the books, more pure of heart type. The narrative arc for Sam and Frodo is Shelob, and the third book I believe begins with Frodo captured. Like I said, it's been at least 5 or 6 years for me since I last read them, but I remember my annoyances, haha.

 

[Kieran]

I first read LOTR when I was 18, and read it maybe 7 or 8 times in the next ten years, but haven't read it since. That's about 20 years since I read it, though about 5 years ago we watched the box sets and I dug it out to read the appendices again.

I think Faramir is portrayed as being relatively pure in the film too, but they emphasised the daddy-complex stuff a lot in the film, and although it works well in the context of how Denethor is portrayed - and watching the third film yesterday, he's played as a leering old stage villain, but without any mention of the orthanc stone in his possession to explain why he's so gloomy and defeatist - it means they added in the part where Faramir takes Frodo captive. Still, those scenes at Osgiliath add to the film, even though they're not in the book.

The Shelob scenes are pure horror, aren't they?

 

[brokenshoelace]

What Kieran is trying to tell us is that he's old...

 

[Kirijax]

I first read LOTR when I was 18, and read it maybe 7 or 8 times in the next ten years, but haven't read it since. That's about 20 years since I read it, though about 5 years ago we watched the box sets and I dug it out to read the appendices again.

I think Faramir is portrayed as being relatively pure in the film too, but they emphasised the daddy-complex stuff a lot in the film, and although it works well in the context of how Denethor is portrayed - and watching the third film yesterday, he's played as a leering old stage villain, but without any mention of the orthanc stone in his possession to explain why he's so gloomy and defeatist - it means they added in the part where Faramir takes Frodo captive. Still, those scenes at Osgiliath add to the film, even though they're not in the book.

The Shelob scenes are pure horror, aren't they?

Having arachnophobia, I still cannot watch those scenes straight on. I heard Peter Jackson has the phobia too so I'm surprised he was able to do that.

 

[Kieran]

What Kieran is trying to tell us is that he's old...

I'm in the prime of life!

 

[brokenshoelace]

What Kieran is trying to tell us is that he's old...

I'm in the prime of life!

This reminds me of this scene:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RNrvtqTaE4

 

[Riotbeard]

I first read LOTR when I was 18, and read it maybe 7 or 8 times in the next ten years, but haven't read it since. That's about 20 years since I read it, though about 5 years ago we watched the box sets and I dug it out to read the appendices again.

I think Faramir is portrayed as being relatively pure in the film too, but they emphasised the daddy-complex stuff a lot in the film, and although it works well in the context of how Denethor is portrayed - and watching the third film yesterday, he's played as a leering old stage villain, but without any mention of the orthanc stone in his possession to explain why he's so gloomy and defeatist - it means they added in the part where Faramir takes Frodo captive. Still, those scenes at Osgiliath add to the film, even though they're not in the book.

The Shelob scenes are pure horror, aren't they?

Oh and the other things that annoy me about the movies is in every battle, that stakes are raised to a ridiculous level. In the movies, it's always 200 vs. 10,000 or something crazy, and in the books, it's a little more proportional, like 2k vs. 10k.

Also Denethor isn't as defeatist as in the movies. He does light the beacons. Everything is heightened and made over-dramatic in the movies, which makes the actual dramatic scenes less dramatic (IMO).

 

[Kieran]

I hope you didn't see The Hobbit films. They went to such ridiculous extremes to crank things up, but there was no tension at all because we knew the main characters would all live to be seen in the 2nd, and 3rd movies, and then LOTR. Talk about bloating. But in defence of the LOTR films, and their battle scenes, they're presented for a different medium, so to make them grander and explosive and more dramatic is film license, and okay as such. There were other liberties which I found more intrusive, but not these, because if you're going to make such a large-scale production of this magnificent tale, then you might as well throw everything at it.

It did become a little bit like Ancient Rome v The Monsters after a while, but this was the director's interpretation, and with so much source material, he had a tough ask to narrow it down. I found other things more irritating, such as the soft-focus dreary Galadriel, some of the backdrop scenes for Arwen (Liv Tyler), who also took Glorfindel's role in bringing the wounded Frodo to Elrond's gaff. In the books, this was one of the more vivid characters and scenes, but it was sacrificed in favour of the Aragorn love story.

How about the casting in this one? Gandalf and Gollum they got spot on, but I visualised Aragorn a little differently, maybe more a Russell Crowe type. Fella who played him was excellent, but not how I saw him...

 

[tented]

I visualised Aragorn a little differently, maybe more a Russell Crowe type. Fella who played him was excellent, but not how I saw him...

Do you mean Viggo Mortensen? He was a last minute replacement for Stuart Townsend. Jackson decided (correctly) on the fourth day of shooting Townsend was wrong for the role.

 

[Kieran]

I visualised Aragorn a little differently, maybe more a Russell Crowe type. Fella who played him was excellent, but not how I saw him...

Do you mean Viggo Mortensen? He was a last minute replacement for Stuart Townsend. Jackson decided (correctly) on the fourth day of shooting Townsend was wrong for the role.

Viggo! Thanks, I couldn't think of his name. I thought he was brilliant but I visualised Aragorn differently, more solid and rough. But Viggo, in fairness, captured the part very well. Maybe I just had Russell Crowe in my mind because he's played similar swashbuckling and strong character roles in other films.

I couldn't imagine Stuart Townsend being in that role at all!

 

[Kirijax]

I visualised Aragorn a little differently, maybe more a Russell Crowe type. Fella who played him was excellent, but not how I saw him...

Do you mean Viggo Mortensen? He was a last minute replacement for Stuart Townsend. Jackson decided (correctly) on the fourth day of shooting Townsend was wrong for the role.

Viggo! Thanks, I couldn't think of his name. I thought he was brilliant but I visualised Aragorn differently, more solid and rough. But Viggo, in fairness, captured the part very well. Maybe I just had Russell Crowe in my mind because he's played similar swashbuckling and strong character roles in other films.

I couldn't imagine Stuart Townsend being in that role at all!

I remember thinking when I saw Aragorn, "That guy has not washed his hair in like 3 years. Nasty. I wouldn't touch him with a ten-foot pole if I were Arwen." And then Legolas' hair was always so fresh and perfect. lol Actor wise he was ok.
Director Jackson had an almost impossible job in bringing that movie to film and he pulled of something of a miracle in my opinion. There had to be liberties taken to make it work. But his "Battle of the Pelennor Fields" is one of my favorite battles ever.