General Hobbit Movie Info (AVOID IF YOU DON'T WANT SPOILERS)

[Alatar]

You would not believe how many pages of vitriol there was over stuff that never even ended up on screen. Arwen at Helms Deep anyone?

And those scenes were shot! PJ cut them in great part due to the firestorm of Internet protests by those annoying Purists.

You honestly believe that? If PJ had felt it worked it would have been in the movie.

[solicitr]

You honestly believe that? If PJ had felt it worked it would have been in the movie.

Not necessarily. PJ was incredibly astute in building buzz by courting the fanbase via AICN and TORN and TORC, through both overt interviews and deniable leaks- and Wingnut monitored the LR-movie forums continually. While Purists bitched about a lot of things, none of it matched by an order of magnitude the outcry over "Xenarwen."

[sauronsfinger]

from Solicitr

And those scenes were shot! PJ cut them in great part due to the firestorm of Internet protests by those annoying Purists.

Since there are stills of Arwen at Helms Deep, some footage must have been shot - at least a few hours or a days worth. I think Alatar is correct..... if the idea had "worked" helping to make it a good film, it would have been kept. Obviously it did not work and was not in the film.

As to the idea that the opinion of fans played a "great part" in cutting such scenes, I truly doubt that any anger from Purists expressed on fansites nine years ago would have been the determining factor on that issue. A bit of humility is called for here. If the internet opinion of Purists was so darn important that it determined the content of the film, why did the Purist point of view fail to be honored on other issues as well?

In the end, Peter Jackson had one obligation and only one obligation and that was to make the best film he could for the studio employing him and footing the bill. When you look at the box office numbers, the number of industry awards, and the almost unanimous raves of professional film critics - he obviously came through with flying colors.

[vison]

He did, indeed.

But he coulda done better.

[axordil]

As I understand it, the main reason we lost Xenarwen was Liv Tyler not wanting/being able to do it.

eta: Glad I'm not the first to note it.

Re, vison's remark: I'm not sure PJ could have done better. He is what he is, cinematically speaking. On the other hand, I'm not sure how many other directors could have pulled off what he did, when he did. Producing nine+ hours of big-budget theatrical release in a seven year period would tax anyone. The 438 days of principal filming alone is astounding.

I rather suspect that while there might be other putative directors/screenwriters who might have gotten more "right," it would have been at the cost of new and different heinousness--or a collapse in mid-production and no films at all.

A hard-line purist might have preferred that, of course. But then, we wouldn't be having this conversation...

[solicitr]

BTW, PJ is now Sir Peter Jackson, KNZM (Knight Companion of the New Zealand Order of Merit).

[Voronwë the Faithful]

BTW, PJ is now Sir Peter Jackson, KNZM (Knight Companion of the New Zealand Order of Merit).

Um, did you not see that there were several posts about that it this very thread, just before you started talking about purists supposedly forcing the removal of Arwen from Helm'd Deep?

I thought one of the other reasons Arwen at Helms Deep was cut was because Liv wasn't gracefull enough to pull off Elf Princess during her fight scenes, i.e. she was too lanky and ill-coordinated to pull it off.

I've never heard it put quite like that. Certainly she was not very good at the fight scenes, and did not enjoy doing them. But not because she was not graceful enough. As I understand it, she herself lobbied to get away from the XenArwen meme, both because she did not think it was very good, and because she was so upset about the fairly vicious attacks that were being made against her by so-called 'fans'. To the extent that 'purists' complaints contributed to the dropping of Arwen at Helm's Deep I think it probably was more indirectly through influencing Liv to lobby against it than directly.

[vison]

ax, your points are good points. It isn't so much that I'm a "purist" but am rather . . . . don't know what to call myself. They were beautiful movies to look at. What still saddens me is not so much the changes - I had no issue with Arwen finding them in the wilderness, for instance. Or not much of an issue. But it has been mentioned many times that when the characters spoke Tolkien's they were always "right" and whe he "ad-libbed" it was jarring. I thought the movies dumbed down the tale - but that's another old dead horse.

He did a brilliant job, where the movies were brilliant. Probably better than anyone else could have done. I know very little about movie making so all the nuts and bolts mean little to me.

[yovargas]

I thought the movies dumbed down the tale

I love the movie but I doubt many fans will disagree with that point. Tolkien was a very thoughtful man.

[vison]

I thought the movies dumbed down the tale

I love the movie but I doubt many fans will disagree with that point. Tolkien was a very thoughtful man.

I don't think it was necessary, that's the thing.

[Padme]

BTW, PJ is now Sir Peter Jackson, KNZM (Knight Companion of the New Zealand Order of Merit).

Um, did you not see that there were several posts about that it this very thread, just before you started talking about purists supposedly forcing the removal of Arwen from Helm'd Deep?

I thought one of the other reasons Arwen at Helms Deep was cut was because Liv wasn't gracefull enough to pull off Elf Princess during her fight scenes, i.e. she was too lanky and ill-coordinated to pull it off.

I've never heard it put quite like that. Certainly she was not very good at the fight scenes, and did not enjoy doing them. But not because she was not graceful enough. As I understand it, she herself lobbied to get away from the XenArwen meme, both because she did not think it was very good, and because she was so upset about the fairly vicious attacks that were being made against her by so-called 'fans'. To the extent that 'purists' complaints contributed to the dropping of Arwen at Helm's Deep I think it probably was more indirectly through influencing Liv to lobby against it than directly.

It was my understanding that she her self said she was too lanky and didn't have the grace to pull it off. That and she was upset by the fans being upset. I believe there is an interview somewhere of her saying she didn't like the scenes for a whole slew of reasons.

[eborr]

it's failry obvious if you look at some of the released film for TTT that a character had been digitally replaced, I am thinking of the scene where they charge out from the deep and there is a second fair-haired rider, and also anything with Haldir in.

Was Xenarwen a bad idea, probably, but certainly no worse than the trip to osgiliath, or Sam being sent away.

[solicitr]

but certainly no worse than the trip to osgiliath, or Sam being sent away.

However, to the best of my recollection we never knew those were coming and didn't have a chance to bitch about them.

--------

Vor: Vicious? There was certainly a lot of heat and strong language, but IIRC it wasn't directed at poor Liv (wasn't her fault) but at the grotesque misuse of the character Arwen, played by whomever.

[eborr]

I guess the point of interest is to understand what, if any, influence fandom had on the removal of Arwen from Helms Deep, or was it that it looked horrible.

Certainly it cannot have been an issue with the quality of any narrative or dialogue.

[sauronsfinger]

Art must be given enough latitude to experiment and make mistakes. The wonderful thing about film - unlike live TV or theater - is that the editing process comes in and those mistakes can be taken out if they hurt the film. The long history of film tells us that many directors filmed scenes that never made it to the screen. Directors often film the same scene different ways and using different approaches. They film different endings and try lots of different things along the way. I really could not care less if Jackson tried using Tyler at Helms Deep - only what is in the film.

Fandom had its limited uses to Jackson and the entire process in helping to create a buzz in certain quarters. I suspect that was rather limited and not a make it or break it factor regarding the success of the film. Unless some hard evidence is presented that a few internet message boards played the determining role in the Arwen decision, it is just a combination of wild speculation and not a tiny bit of misplaced pride.

Just asking: why would Peter Jackson or anyone else associated with making those films give more than a mild passing shrug at anything negative they read on an internet message board eight or nine years ago regarding their efforts? Sure, they liked the support and wanted a positive buzz around their efforts. In that regard they probably used the boards to their advantage. But why would they care enough to change the actual film just because some folks on a message board did not like rumors of what may or may not be in the film? Short of an all out fan rebellion against the films, I really think they would not care very much at all.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Vor: Vicious? There was certainly a lot of heat and strong language, but IIRC it wasn't directed at poor Liv (wasn't her fault) but at the grotesque misuse of the character Arwen, played by whomever.

Sadly, there was an element of it that was misdirected at Liz, and that was particularly mean-spirited. That's why I put "purists" in quotes because that element was not really motivated by purism, but rather by pure, unadulturated mean-spiritedness.

[vison]

Excellent points sf.

[Pearly Di]

Vor: Vicious? There was certainly a lot of heat and strong language, but IIRC it wasn't directed at poor Liv (wasn't her fault) but at the grotesque misuse of the character Arwen, played by whomever.

Sadly, there was an element of it that was misdirected at Liz, and that was particularly mean-spirited. That's why I put "purists" in quotes because that element was not really motivated by purism, but rather by pure, unadulturated mean-spiritedness.

I joined TORC in May 2000 and well remember some very spiteful and sexist remarks about Liv. These did come from a minority, I hasten to add -and certain of these individuals were eventually banned. Most posters unhappy about Film Arwen's role were mature enough not to blame the actress.

I always admired Liv for working hard on her Elvish.

I thought it was pretty common fandom knowledge that it was Liv's lack of dexterity with a bow and arrow that led to PJ's axeing Arwen from Helm's Deep - and thank goodness for that , thank you, dear Liv!

Fans, frankly, tend to imagine that they are more influential with the likes of film directors, producers and studios than they actually are ... IMO.

[Padme]

Vor: Vicious? There was certainly a lot of heat and strong language, but IIRC it wasn't directed at poor Liv (wasn't her fault) but at the grotesque misuse of the character Arwen, played by whomever.

Sadly, there was an element of it that was misdirected at Liz, and that was particularly mean-spirited. That's why I put "purists" in quotes because that element was not really motivated by purism, but rather by pure, unadulturated mean-spiritedness.

I also remember the horrid backlash against Liv, everything from her underbite to her weight as Arwen. I remember thinking these people are really mean. I also remember thinking, wow these people must not have a real life to spend this amount of time and energy on berating someone on the internet like they did.

[vison]

I wasn't particularly taken with Liv Tyler. I thought she was too young, too "modelly", too obviously American and essentially lifeless. But in retrospect, she was okay and managed to create a personality. BookArwen wasn't exactly a ball of fire, either.

I had never heard of her, of Elijah Wood, Viggo Morteson, or Sean Astin before I saw FOTR, so I had no prejudice for or agains any of them.