What Does Your Heart Tell You?

Wed May 10, 2006 4:01 pm

Much has been made of the inconsistent quality of the LOTR films, with stupid Dwarf tosssing jokes or bodily function jokes following on the heels of scenes of powerful emotion and grandeur. But I want to talk about another phenomenon -- scenes that are both good and bad at the same time.

A perfect example is the scene towards the beginning of ROTK when Gandalf and Aragorn are speaking about Frodo and Aragorn says to Gandalf "What does your heart tell you?" I often cite this scene as one that I dislike because it diminishes Gandalf so much. The uncertainty that the old wizard shows just doesn't jive with my view of Gandalf, no matter how much I extrapolate. Yet on the other hand, the scene is very successful at achieving exactly what it is intended to achieve: demonstrating how sensitive and (for lack of a better word) worthy Aragorn is. I really love the way Viggo delivers that line, and find that over time as the films become more a memory and less a constant companion (;)) those good qualities stick with me and the purist annoyance fades into the background. Indeed it is one of the parts of the films that has most assimilated itself into my psyche, so that I often find myself thinking or saying those words and finding great comfort in them.

Anyone else feel this dichotomy in this or any other scene in the films, in which they don't work at all on some level, and yet work very well on some other level?

Post by **Alatar** » Wed May 10, 2006 4:05 pm

Many. The whole Elves at Helms Deep has that effect on me. My puristy side rebels at the thought, but most of me goes "Kewl!!! Elves"

Post by **superwizard** » Wed May 10, 2006 4:16 pm

I like the speach when Elrond goes to visit Aragorn when he is with The Rohirrim next to The Paths of the Dead. Part of me likes it, but the other part is calculating how he knew where Aragorn was etc etc etc

Post by **Cerin** » Wed May 10, 2006 4:35 pm

These scenes continue to rankle just as much as ever, for me, if not moreso.

If I recall this scene correctly, what makes it utterly ridiculous at the outset is that it begins with Aragorn saying, 'No news from Frodo?' or something to that effect. Well for heaven's sake, they had better not have heard anything from Frodo, since no one is supposed to know where he is or what he is doing! How the heck are they supposed to have received word from him? Is he dropping them postcards along the way? Aaaaaaargh!

And then the fact that the dialogue is manufactured to portray Gandalf the White -- back from the dead and more powerful than ever in the previous film -- as this feeble, doubting being; which in turn is served up solely to bolster the manufactured Aragorn character arc. I think it demonstrates nothing but absurdity. It is a completely absurd moment in the context of the film and demonstrates bad, bad filmmaking/screenwriting.

"What does your heart tell you?"

That the screenwriters were full of beans (lovely people that they nonetheless undoubtedly are).

Post by **vison** » Wed May 10, 2006 4:58 pm

Ah, Cerin. If nowhere else we agree here.

The movies were full of it.

Full of it.

But they looked pretty.

Post by **superwizard** » Wed May 10, 2006 5:01 pm

Come on people PJ's LOTR wasn't really that bad. In fact I think he dd pretty darn ok. You cannot simply copy everything in a book exactly into a movie; it wouldn't work. IMHO PJ did a good job all things considered.
PS: That does not mean I agree with those who say the movies were nicer than the book. That suggestion makes me mad...

Post by **Alatar** » Wed May 10, 2006 5:06 pm

SW, I think you'll find there are many transcendentalists, purist and revisionists of all sorts on this board.

Personally I disagree with you. Some of the the changes for the movies were improvements on the book. Others weren't. It's not sacrosanct for Gods sake. Its not perfect. It can be improved. It's just a book at the end of the day with strengths and weaknesses.

Just like the film had strengths and weaknesses.

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Wed May 10, 2006 5:16 pm

superwizard, I love both, though I love the book more. When it comes to the films, I am one of those Transcendentalists Voronwë named a while back, on a different board. There are problems with the films that are quite clear to me, but somehow the entire package transcends those problems, and I can let myself treasure the films. The intermittent problems of taste, tone, etc., don't ruin the experience.

That doesn't mean I can't understand disliking the films, even hating them. I think it all comes down to what exactly we most value in the book, and whether the films conveyed that to us. (And whether Peter Jackson's directorial style grates on us or not.

)

Post by **vison** » Wed May 10, 2006 5:49 pm

Well, he basically ruined King Kong. Which, when you stop to think about it, is really weird.

Post by **superwizard** » Wed May 10, 2006 5:49 pm

I too am a fan of the movies. They were the reason after all I even started reading the lord of the rings.

Post by **Primula Baggins** » Wed May 10, 2006 6:01 pm

vison, I agree with you about King Kong. What was good about it—mostly Ann Darrow's time with Kong—was outweighed for me by mindless action scenes that went on too long or were entirely extraneous to the plot (or both: the dinosaur stampede).

I think PJ is talented (you may disagree with me there!

) but needs someone to say a firm "no" to some of his ideas. I don't know who that would be, though, as there were times on LotR when even Fran Walsh couldn't change his mind.

I'm glad that his next film is a "little" one.

Post by **Cerin** » Wed May 10, 2006 6:05 pm

superwizard, I actually am a fan of the movies, as phenomenon. I appreciate the way they brought Tolkien enthusiasts together, created good will worldwide, were such a labor of love for the multitude of persons involved in their making, and brought new people to the books.

It's just when confronting the specifics of the films that I run into trouble.

But it's worth every ounce of frustration, knowing that it brought you to the books and into our company.

Post by **Sassafras** » Wed May 10, 2006 6:09 pm

Well now, this is a rant dear to my heart.

I'll be back.

Post by **superwizard** » Wed May 10, 2006 6:59 pm

Cerin wrote:But it's worth every ounce of frustration, knowing that it brought you to the books and into our company.

That was really nice of you to say

. Especially because most of my friends discourage me from going on and on about LOTR they say there sick of hearing my endless discussions...

So that's why this forum means a lot to me; it's a place where people actually like the fact that I'm fascinated by the book.

Post by **Maria** » Wed May 10, 2006 7:24 pm

Alatar wrote:It's not sacrosanct for Gods sake. Its not perfect. It can be improved.

Wed May 10, 2006 7:29 pm

Cerin wrote:If I recall this scene correctly, what makes it utterly ridiculous at the outset is that it begins with Aragorn saying, 'No news from Frodo?' or something to that effect. Well for heaven's sake, they had better not have heard anything from Frodo, since no one is supposed to know where he is or what he is doing! How the heck are they supposed to have received word from him? Is he dropping them postcards along the way? Aaaaaaargh!

And then the fact that the dialogue is manufactured to portray Gandalf the White -- back from the dead and more powerful than ever in the previous film -- as this feeble, doubting being; which in turn is served up solely to bolster the manufactured Aragorn character arc.

Cerin, I agree with everything you say here 100%.

And yet, it moves me nonetheless, foolish transcendentalist that I am. I find that whenever I have a difficult decision to make I hear an echo in my head of Aragorn saying this line, with just the right amount of confidence that my "heart" will know the answer. And I often find that it does.

That can't be a bad thing, can it?

Post by **Cerin** » Thu May 11, 2006 2:07 am

Of course not, Voronwë.

Post by **axordil** » Thu May 11, 2006 2:15 am

Even Gandalf the White was, now and again, faced with uncertainty...witness his response to hearing Faramir tell him he had seen Frodo and Sam.

And to turn that uncertainty into a probing of Aragorn, well, that's ok by me.

Post by **Old_Tom_Bombadil** » Thu May 11, 2006 2:19 am

Primula_Baggins wrote:superwizard, I love both, though I love the book more. When it comes to the films, I am one of those Transcendentalists Voronwë named a while back, on a different board. There are problems with the films that are quite clear to me, but somehow the entire package transcends those problems, and I can let myself treasure the films. The intermittent problems of taste, tone, etc., don't ruin the experience.

Very well put, Prim. That's precisely how I feel.

Primula_Baggins wrote:I think PJ is talented (you may disagree with me there! ) but needs someone to say a firm "no" to some of his ideas. I don't know who that would be, though, as there were times on LotR when even Fran Walsh couldn't change his mind.

Nor could Philippa Boyens. On the ROTK extended versions there are a couple of places in the commentary where Philippa gives Peter a bad time: (1) the scene where Denethor runs off the end of the 7th level while aflame, and (2) the highly extraneous super-cameo scene featuring Aragorn, Legolas, and Gimli's encounter with the Pirates. Philippa was in hysterics over the ridiculousness of those scenes. It's a shame that Philippa didn't have some sort of veto power in the editing room.