Thematic Integrity in the Movies
KeskusteluCouncil of Elrond
Liity LibraryThingin jäseneksi, niin voit kirjoittaa viestin.
1guamo
I have to admit that I enjoyed Peter Jackson's films of Lord of the Rings. However, there were several points that I thought played against the thematic integrity of the books and that drew me out of the movie experience.
For me the key theme of the books is the idea of "the long defeat" as explained by Galadriel. The sense that no matter what happens, no matter how much is "won" something is inevitably lost on the road to the Fourth Age. The movies didn't capture this sense as much as I would have liked (although they did better than I could have expected). The one moment in the film trilogy that enveloped me in the same way as the books was Arwen's vision of Aragorn's death. The sense of victory wrapped in defeat, of the joy of Aragorn's full life contrasted with Arwen's choice and eventual death. That was a very poweful scene in the movies for me.
What do other people think? I'm sure there are other themes and I'm curious how people thought those themes were either developed or under-developed in the movies.
For me the key theme of the books is the idea of "the long defeat" as explained by Galadriel. The sense that no matter what happens, no matter how much is "won" something is inevitably lost on the road to the Fourth Age. The movies didn't capture this sense as much as I would have liked (although they did better than I could have expected). The one moment in the film trilogy that enveloped me in the same way as the books was Arwen's vision of Aragorn's death. The sense of victory wrapped in defeat, of the joy of Aragorn's full life contrasted with Arwen's choice and eventual death. That was a very poweful scene in the movies for me.
What do other people think? I'm sure there are other themes and I'm curious how people thought those themes were either developed or under-developed in the movies.
2Gwenhwyfach
When they threw Aragorn off the cliff in the second movie I nearly walked out. If they didn't have time to include a part of the book I understand, but when they make up parts that didn't happen and add nothing to the movie like Faramir taking Frodo on a detour to Osgiliath.
The exclusion of Fatty was another thing that while I could understand it I still wish he wasn't cut.
Those are just general pet peeves of mine and as a whole don't affect the storyline, however the last movie excluded the burning of the shire which I felt significant. To me the burning of the Shire showed the end of an age in a physical way. You saw the destrcution brought home to a small hamlet that was not directly involved in the war and it's effects that will ripple through the world. I think it is kind of what you were getting at where the age of man is starting and while it brings many changes those changes can't come without the loss of many things such as the elves leaving, the final sleep for many of the others such as the ents and the dissapation of magic.
Also the lack of development with Faramir and Eowyn. I thought they had an important romance as well. The realization Eowyn goes through as she longs to be queen to me mirrors the jealously of Boromir towards Aragorn. Eowyn was under the influence of wormtongue the same as her father but we don't get any feel of her struggle. Faramir was given a rather dark edit which bothered me a lot simply because he was a contrast to Boromir in the books which was lost in the movie.
The film to me focused so much on the battles that much of the characterization and driving motives were lost.
The exclusion of Fatty was another thing that while I could understand it I still wish he wasn't cut.
Those are just general pet peeves of mine and as a whole don't affect the storyline, however the last movie excluded the burning of the shire which I felt significant. To me the burning of the Shire showed the end of an age in a physical way. You saw the destrcution brought home to a small hamlet that was not directly involved in the war and it's effects that will ripple through the world. I think it is kind of what you were getting at where the age of man is starting and while it brings many changes those changes can't come without the loss of many things such as the elves leaving, the final sleep for many of the others such as the ents and the dissapation of magic.
Also the lack of development with Faramir and Eowyn. I thought they had an important romance as well. The realization Eowyn goes through as she longs to be queen to me mirrors the jealously of Boromir towards Aragorn. Eowyn was under the influence of wormtongue the same as her father but we don't get any feel of her struggle. Faramir was given a rather dark edit which bothered me a lot simply because he was a contrast to Boromir in the books which was lost in the movie.
The film to me focused so much on the battles that much of the characterization and driving motives were lost.
3manusbooks
The movies did focus a lot on the battles - aside from the fact that the whole arch is about a great battle, the reality is that movies were primarily about making money and had to appeal to the present audiences.
About changes to the story e.g. Faramir and others, I thought the commentaries on the extended DVD version did a great job of explaining their rationale(s).
One thing that I liked about the movies was how they conveyed a sense of a world that was MORE than it is now, in nature, statures, strength, struggles, intensity, integrity, everything was MORE - it links with guamo's comments on loss. with each passing there's a little bit LESS.
About changes to the story e.g. Faramir and others, I thought the commentaries on the extended DVD version did a great job of explaining their rationale(s).
One thing that I liked about the movies was how they conveyed a sense of a world that was MORE than it is now, in nature, statures, strength, struggles, intensity, integrity, everything was MORE - it links with guamo's comments on loss. with each passing there's a little bit LESS.
4Calwise
#2 I liked the burning of the Shire in the book but I don't think in a movie it would've worked. While I enjoyed the Scouring of the Shire chapter and so on, I wouldn't have put it in the movie either for a few reasons.
A. The movie was already 3 hours long. The trilogy total was 9 hours long. The whole Scouring of the Shire thing would've taken way too long to resolve.
B. The entire quest was to destroy the Ring. In the book, this was accomplished halfway through. If in the movie the conflict was resolved 3 hours in and then there was this new conflict thrown in that, again, would take awhile to resolve, that wouldn't go over well. Half the book was just epilogueing. Enjoyable epilogueing, but epilogueing all the same.
A. The movie was already 3 hours long. The trilogy total was 9 hours long. The whole Scouring of the Shire thing would've taken way too long to resolve.
B. The entire quest was to destroy the Ring. In the book, this was accomplished halfway through. If in the movie the conflict was resolved 3 hours in and then there was this new conflict thrown in that, again, would take awhile to resolve, that wouldn't go over well. Half the book was just epilogueing. Enjoyable epilogueing, but epilogueing all the same.
5grabblemore
Viestin kirjoittaja on poistanut viestin.
6John5918
I've only just discovered this group, and have come to this particular topic five years after the last post, but I wonder if anyone is interested in extending the conversation on "Thematic Integrity in the Movies" to the more recent Hobbit films?
For me the thematic integrity of the Lord of the Rings films was not perfect and I concur with some of the comments above, but my issues with it pale into insignificance compared to the Hobbit trilogy.
For a start, it should never have been a trilogy. The Hobbit is a charming children's story which is also for adults, and of course is a forerunner of dark things to come, as Tolkien himself says, I think, in his introduction to LOTR. So while there is some logic in making it a bit darker and more serious than the original book, there is little justification (except profit) for making it into a three-episode marathon.
The battles in the Hobbit book take up very little space, whereas in the films they are the main event. This skews the whole story.
On the other hand, I quite enjoyed the introduction of familiar comic characters such as Stephen Fry, Billy Connolly and Sylvester McCoy, even if their roles were not very faithful to the original. Likewise scenes such as the dwarves' arrival at Bilbo's house and the subsequent tea party. These were at least a nod in the direction of the charming children's story rather than non-stop battle sequences.
For me the thematic integrity of the Lord of the Rings films was not perfect and I concur with some of the comments above, but my issues with it pale into insignificance compared to the Hobbit trilogy.
For a start, it should never have been a trilogy. The Hobbit is a charming children's story which is also for adults, and of course is a forerunner of dark things to come, as Tolkien himself says, I think, in his introduction to LOTR. So while there is some logic in making it a bit darker and more serious than the original book, there is little justification (except profit) for making it into a three-episode marathon.
The battles in the Hobbit book take up very little space, whereas in the films they are the main event. This skews the whole story.
On the other hand, I quite enjoyed the introduction of familiar comic characters such as Stephen Fry, Billy Connolly and Sylvester McCoy, even if their roles were not very faithful to the original. Likewise scenes such as the dwarves' arrival at Bilbo's house and the subsequent tea party. These were at least a nod in the direction of the charming children's story rather than non-stop battle sequences.
7AndreasJ
The combat scenes in the first Hobbit movie were extended to the point of boredom and beyond. One of the chief reasons I didn't bother watching the second two.
8John5918
Rereading Lord of the Rings again (on average I read it once a year) and it dawned on me this time how many small things have been skewed in my memory by the films to the extent that I had forgotten that they were not in the book. Can't remember them all, but the relationship between Sam and Frodo during their journey to and in Mordor after the parting of the Fellowship is one that springs to mind.
9Crypto-Willobie
The best Easter eggs in The Lord of the Rings movies are hidden in dialogue. Despite cutting scenes and characters, Jackson found ways of including Tolkien’s most arresting writing...
https://www.polygon.com/platform/amp/lord-of-the-rings/22263114/lotr-easter-eggs...
https://www.polygon.com/platform/amp/lord-of-the-rings/22263114/lotr-easter-eggs...
10anglemark
>9 Crypto-Willobie: Everything in the URL after the question mark is Facebook's tracking ID and is best deleted.
