"Gondor calls for aid!" (and other movie changes)

[Alatar]

So did I. So did most of us here.

I still think they got more right than they got wrong.

[Primula Baggins]

And some of what they got right was amazingly right, as has been pointed out in the thread on that topic.

[Siberian]

So did I. So did most of us here.

I still think they got more right than they got wrong.

See, I've mostly forgotten about the movies. But I've been rereading LOTR and made a mistake of watching the movies soon after. It all came back to me

FOTR is not perfect, but I still have a soft spot for it. The other two, I can't watch long without cringing.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

What I'm pissed at is the trio's glib remarks about how the professor is wrong and they know better. That's not what they said before the movies proved to be a hit. I know, I followed the preproduction and filming almost from the start.

Siberian, I believe that I read or saw every interview and commentary that PJ, FW and PB made, and I confidently say that they never said that Tolkien was "wrong" or that they knew better as to what he should have written in his books, or anything approaching that. What they did say was that they believe that certain things needed to be done differently in the context of the commercial cinematic adaptations that they were making. In some cases I agree with them about the need for changes, and in many others I vehemently disagree with them. But in all cases I acknowledge their right to make the films that they thought would be best.

I appreciate the fact that you have strong feelings and strong opinions about the films, but please try to avoid mischaracterizing the statements that were made by the filmmakers. Doing so does not promote productive discussion.

[Siberian]

What I'm pissed at is the trio's glib remarks about how the professor is wrong and they know better. That's not what they said before the movies proved to be a hit. I know, I followed the preproduction and filming almost from the start.

Siberian, I believe that I read or saw every interview and commentary that PJ, FW and PB made, and I confidently say that they never said that Tolkien was "wrong" or that they knew better as to what he should have written in his books, or anything approaching that.

No, that's not what I meant. It's more in relation to the changes. At times, there was something in their attitude that rubbed me the wrong way. I guess I'm too much of a purist

What they did say was that they believe that certain things needed to be done differently in the context of the commercial cinematic adaptations that they were making. In some cases I agree with them about the need for changes, and in many others I vehemently disagree with them. But in all cases I acknowledge their right to make the films that they thought would be best.

I do, too. I just didn't see enough respect for the story that was promised to me in their initial interviews.

[Smaug's voice]

*does CPR to revive the old thread*

I have never thought of this point and can see why it would appear morally conflicting. Though, I do not agree. As far as I recall Gandalf taking over Denethor is what happened in the books eventually, and much later.
Going by the scene from the movie, I personally find it morally appropriate to take charge and send for help, given the dire circumstances.
But, yovargas explained it much better earlier in this thread:

Hell, I wouldn't even call what Gandalf did "assuming power". It was more like trying to move a car out of the way of an incoming train. "But I didn't give you permission to move my car!" Really?? Um, too bad.

I am also, literally amazed by the people who complain about the illogicality of the location of the scene. Art and logic very frequently do not go hand-in-hand. Aesthetic pleasure ma have nothing to do with reason. Besides, one can always assume that there may be villages/towns on the slopes of those hills - which is not a really long stretch to imagine.
And there's quite a few illogicalities within the book itself.
My favorite being Samwise singing a jolly song about Oliphaunts in front of the Morannon! If I were to go by logic, that would be more ridiculous than alarm-signals set at the peaks of 12000 feet mountains.

But then, all of this may simply be my bias. I can defend RotK to the end of my days, as it was my key to Tolkien. I saw it first of all, not FotR or TTT. Which led me to the books. So I may be biased. (Though I can still debate about it critically if I desire )

[Passdagas the Brown]

There's some good stuff in LOTR. There's some amazing stuff in LOTR. And there are even a few sublime moments in LOTR that rival the best of cinema.

And then there's the other eight and a half hours...

[Smaug's voice]

And then there's the other eight and a half hours...

... which are beyond even sublime.

[Sunsilver]

Voronwë, the scene never bothered me that much, until I read your initial post in this thread. But of course, having them do it surreptitiously heightens the tension of the scene, makes it more dramatic, yadayada...

I do agree with you, though, that Denethor's character could have been more rounded, and we actually could have felt some sorrow when he met his end, if things had been done as you suggest.

Now, to fast-forward to Denethor's demise...

If I could change 60 second's worth of the movies, I would have Denethor dying as Tolkien has him die, on his son's funeral pyre. None of this jumping off the cliff business. That just ticked me of sooo much! There was NO reason for changing it, except PJ seems to have this fascination with people falling from great heights... (and usually surviving!) The Palantíri was the source of his madness: what better way than to emphasize that than to have him die with it in his hands?

And that brings me to the second scene I would love to see changed...Aragorn supposedly falling to his death in the battle with the orcs!

PJ seriously jumped the shark with that scene. Come on, PJ, you had to be aware that a very large percentage of the audience is going to be familiar with the book. Even those that haven't read it are likely aware who Aragorn is by now, AND know that there is a third film in the works called RETURN of the King!! Yet you're going to kill off that very same character? COME ON!!

[sigh] Okay, I fell better now. A bit. But the Hobbit shows P.J. has learned nothing about how ridiculous it looks when his characters and the objects around them so blatantly defy all natural laws of gravity and science...

I'm pretty good at suspending disbelief when watching films,* but P.J. manages to push my buttons every....single...time!!

*(Gollum falling into the lava at the end of ROTK, and not instantly bursting into flames bothered me hardly at all... )

[kzer_za]

Denethor has always been my biggest problem with the movies. He was such an interesting character in the book, and in the movie he's just a crazy guy. Just spending a minute or two on the palantír would have done a lot for him - and such a good visual with his burning hands on the orb; you'd think it would be right up PJ's alley with his horror sensibilities.

I think the most important qualities of Aragorn (beheading aside) and Faramir were basically preserved despite their changes, but Denethor is just so flattened out. Gandalf's "Denethor whack" in particular, on the other hand, has never really bothered me.

[Smaug's voice]

Denethor has always been my biggest problem with the movies.

Just this.
Other character-assassinations have their 'book' moments and some are even drastically re-instated to their book-counterparts. (for instance Filmamir turning to Faramir in the RotK EE).
But Denethor never, not even once, feels like the Lord we read about in the books.

But I would say, cinematically and out of context of an adaptation, he is a very effective presence and an interesting character.