Welcome Guest 

Register

Forum Home » Movies Discussion » Discuss the Movies » Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
12
Author Topic:
Fattybolger
Council Member
Posts: 111
Send Message
Avatar
Post Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: June 24, 2005 08:20
Now that the dust has settled on the movies, including the EEs, it's time for us book fanatics to get organised. So which campaign do you think is most urgent?

[Edited on 24/6/2005 by Fattybolger]
Campaign to Restore the Hero Frodo
8% (5)
Campaign for a Slim Sam
2% (1)
Bring Back Tom Bombadil
5% (3)
Give Glorfindel his Horse Back
10% (6)
Campaign for the Real Faramir
18% (1)
Cut Arwen Down to Size
5% (3)
Scour the Shire
20% (1)
Amend Denethor's Table Manners
16% (1)
Ban Elves from Helm's Deep
7% (4)
Other
10% (6)
LinweSingollo
Movies & Casting Mod, Resident Hobbit & Frodo's Footstool
Posts: 3292
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: June 24, 2005 10:59
For me, it's a tie between Hero Frodo and Real Faramir.
"To the Hobbits. May they outlast the Sarumans and see spring again in the trees." J.R.R. Tolkien
BelleBayard
Prancing Pony Moderator & Elf Laundry Mistress
Posts: 3151
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: June 24, 2005 11:10
That's a tough one, but I think the Scouring of the Shire was very important to truly see how being in the Fellowship and all the hardships they went through truly changed Frodo, Sam, Merry, & Pippin.
newsgirl
Council Member
Posts: 1270
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: June 24, 2005 11:25
Prob. Bring Tom back. Almost everyone who read the books loved his charachter and wanted to see him in the films. I did. But the filmakers had a good reason not to put him in there so...
Kadaveri
Council Member
Posts: 18
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: June 24, 2005 11:57
I voted: 'Cut Arwen Down to Size'. Why? Because if you do that most of the other things in this list can be recified as well. Glorfindel would get his horse back for obvious reasons. We would be more likely to see the real Faramir as the would be no Arwen to make Aragorn say he doesn't want to be King and act wimpy to. Thus Faramir would not have to be shown as weak as he was, for he would not be a stronger character than Aragorn. Whereas if Aragorn's character in the movies is unchanged, the real Faramir would make him look totally unsuitable to be King. No Arwen gives us the real Aragorn and the real Faramir. With Arwen out (not including the few scenes in Rivendell and the one at the end of RotK, as those were necessary) there would be over an hour and a half's screen time saved. The Scouring of the Shire could easily be put in there somewhere. Denethor I believe was shown to be weaker to make Aragorn appear not so weak; which wouldn't have happened if Arwen was cut down. No Elves would have came to Helm's Deep if Peter Jackson didn't have the 'brilliant' idea of Arwen coming to Aragorn's rescue and start filming the thing.

The only real problems we have left are Frodo and Tom Bombadil. Frodo was annoying but I think the above is more important than just fixing him. I think it's better for Tom Bombadil to be cut out because he's just to darn strange for the movie. Considering nobody knows who or what he is, whether he's fat or thin, a Highlander, a hippie or a native American imagine the trouble the movie-makers would have portraying him. Best to leave him alone.
hobbitnamedeliza
Council Member
Posts: 148
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: June 24, 2005 04:50
Well, I love the books, that's for sure...but I also love the films. I totally understand the reason all these changes were made for the purposes of cinema, so I've had to vote, "OTHER."

Now, the OTHER I would choose concerns something I've never seen mentioned and yet concerns what I believe to be nothing less than the most important element of the books:

On Mount Doom, when Gollum attacks and Sam has him at his mercy. Sam has every reason to kill him, every desire to kill him, and every justification to kill him...yet, he does not. He honors Frodo's example of compassion, lets Gollum go, and, thus, through compassion, saves the world.

I think that was the scene I missed most. I guess I always thought it was obvious that that was the climatic point of the books...apparently not.

[Edited on 25/6/2005 by hobbitnamedeliza]
LinweSingollo
Movies & Casting Mod, Resident Hobbit & Frodo's Footstool
Posts: 3292
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: June 24, 2005 06:44
to continue Kadaveri's plan to cut Arwen down to size...

Glorfindel has his horse back. Therefore, not needing to prove himself because he is not one of the very few women in the movie nor does he have a love interest to show off for, he lets Frodo ride on ahead and alone on his horse. Therefore, Frodo can prove he's not such a wimp after all when he must neccesarily defy the ringwraiths at the Ford of Bruinen.
Emboldened by this act, Frodo continues to show some backbone throughout the quest as he does in the book....
"To the Hobbits. May they outlast the Sarumans and see spring again in the trees." J.R.R. Tolkien
Lady_Goldberry
Council Member
Posts: 31
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: June 24, 2005 08:17
I thought those last three were good..but I already voted for "other." Elrond pretending he wasn't half-elf.
j_mercuryuk
Council Member
Posts: 662
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: June 24, 2005 10:37
I haven't voted yet because I'm trying to think of which one I would amend and wgich would work.
I'd say give Glorfindel back hi horse (partly 'cause he's my second favourite charater), but then people would (who haven't read the books) would try to remeber another character who to be honest is disposeable and plays a small part.
The same can be said about Tom Bomabil.
The scouring of the shire would just be ANTI-CLIMAXIC, that's why it was left out.
And I think having Arwen in is good to show whats Aragorn motibation and is is something which you either give alot of attetion to or none at all.


I think the most diaposable and unnessicary change is the evles at helms deep, they really didn't need to be there and could easyly have been missed out. Though I thought it was kinda a nice change.

[Edited on 25/6/2005 by j_mercuryuk]
Nenthule
Council Member
Posts: 284
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: June 25, 2005 02:10
It had to be "bring back Tom Bombadil" for me. I really looked forward to seeing him when I saw it the first time, and then when they got to Bree, I was like "what? where did Tom go?"!!
Morwinyoniel
Gallery Admin & Realm Head of Estë
Posts: 1637
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: June 25, 2005 07:26
I voted for "Amend Denethor's Table Manners", actually meaning "Make Denethor the Noble Lord of Gondor He Really Was". OK, in the medieval world, people ate with their fingers - but, one would be able to do so without messing himself. In general, his madness was taken over the top, and he was made a lot more negative character than he was in the book.

As "cool" as Glorfindel was in the book, he was, after all, a minor character with a very small part; therefore, I had no problem with Arwen taking his place at the Ford. All I would have left out of her part was the "I'm leaving - No, I'm not" uncertainty. Tom wouldn't have fit in the movie at all, and sorry to say but, book Faramir wouldn't have been believable in the films.

[Edited on 25/6/2005 by Morwinyoniel]
Fattybolger
Council Member
Posts: 111
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: June 28, 2005 08:04
I voted: 'Cut Arwen Down to Size'. Why? Because if you do that most of the other things in this list can be recified as well. Glorfindel would get his horse back for obvious reasons. We would be more likely to see the real Faramir as the would be no Arwen to make Aragorn say he doesn't want to be King and act wimpy to. Thus Faramir would not have to be shown as weak as he was, for he would not be a stronger character than Aragorn. Whereas if Aragorn's character in the movies is unchanged, the real Faramir would make him look totally unsuitable to be King. No Arwen gives us the real Aragorn and the real Faramir. With Arwen out (not including the few scenes in Rivendell and the one at the end of RotK, as those were necessary) there would be over an hour and a half's screen time saved. The Scouring of the Shire could easily be put in there somewhere. Denethor I believe was shown to be weaker to make Aragorn appear not so weak; which wouldn't have happened if Arwen was cut down. No Elves would have came to Helm's Deep if Peter Jackson didn't have the 'brilliant' idea of Arwen coming to Aragorn's rescue and start filming the thing.

The only real problems we have left are Frodo and Tom Bombadil. Frodo was annoying but I think the above is more important than just fixing him. I think it's better for Tom Bombadil to be cut out because he's just to darn strange for the movie. Considering nobody knows who or what he is, whether he's fat or thin, a Highlander, a hippie or a native American imagine the trouble the movie-makers would have portraying him. Best to leave him alone.


I think you've hit the nail right on the head, Kadaveri. Take out Arwen and the rest will sort itself. Unfortunately (from the cinematic viewpoint) this would cut down the female interest to almost nothing, which is presumably why her little pointy ears keep popping up again & again. I for one wouldn't have missed them.

I love Tom Bombadil, and particularly Goldberry, in the book, but if one thing had to go, I think this was the one that did the least damage to the overall development. Pity to lose the creepy barrow-wight as well, though.

I'd forgotten the point about Sam's sparing Gollum on Mount Doom. This is indeed a climactic moment which could very easily have been included. Some critic noted that there are four occasions on which Gollum's life is spared, by Bilbo, Frodo, Faramir and Sam. Each of these acts of mercy is a contribution towards saving the world, and a reminder that it isn't just done by being big and strong and beating people up. A very Christian message, when you think of it, and one very rooted in Tolkien's world view.

And that terrific line in the book when Gollum talks about 'dying into the dust'... Ashes to ashes, dust to dust, indeed!

WIll conclude by saying that my second, though not really secondary, reason for starting this thread was to voice yet again my lament for the wise brave stern yet gentle heroic self-sacrificing handsome and utterly swoonable Boook Faramir, whom alas we shall never now see on screen. :banghead:

[Edited on 28/6/2005 by Fattybolger]
LotrLuva
Council Member
Posts: 164
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: June 28, 2005 01:22
Why isn't there an option for 'all of the above'? It's really hard for me to choose. I'll have to get back to you on this.
Lorna36
Council Member
Posts: 7
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: June 28, 2005 11:21
Great Topic!
This is very difficult. I went with the scouring in the end- it would have been a better end for Saruman and Grima too I think. I agree with everything Kadaveri said.
Here's my viewpoint on the options...
Campaign to Restore the Hero Frodo:
This wasn't a big gripe for me- it was overshadowed by worse things I think. The Ford scene annoys me though. I'm not a big Arwen fan
Campaign for a Slim Sam:
Errr...no that dosn't bother me. Again not really a great distortion compared to the other ones IMO. Infact I don't think it was 'wrong' anyway...
[/b]Bring Back Tom Bombadil [b]
I do like Tom really, but I can undertsand why he was left out. If they could pull it off, that would have been great. But somehow I can't see him working in the film.
[/b]Give Glorfindel his Horse Back[b]
Yes!! Give Glorf his horse! Again I can understand why they left him out-as he dosn't really appear again, and of course more Arwen. BUT I still think that scene (Ford) could have been loads better, even if they still left out Glorf. (Hero Frodo..etc) :banghead:
[/b]Campaign for the Real Faramir[b]
I undstand why people think Faramir wouldn't be believable. But it does bug me though, he isn't the book character
(who, however, is believable... hmmm:rolling: )
[/b]Cut Arwen Down to Size[b]
Yeah, I wouldn't mind. I still can't get over how much time she takes up in the second half of TTTEE. Its not that I don't like romance...but I just find it a bit pointless. She's going, now she's not...precious time is ticking :sleepy:
[/b]Scour the Shire[b]
I miss this badly- Tolkien said it was essential.

[/b]Amend Denethor's Table Manners[b]
Showing his corruption via Palantir would have been a good thing.:evil:
[/b]Ban Elves from Helm's Deep[b]
I wouldn't miss them I don't find this so bad-but having Haldir killed is really annoying, it just seems 'put in' just so there can be a death. :dizzy:
[/b]Other[b]
The grey company glows green- I don't think they look quite right. Alot of how the Dead Army worked was simplified from the book. If they had the time I would have liked to see more of it.

Hmm...*ahem* I didn't intend to write so much! As a final note I kind of realise this makes me seem like I hate the films- I don't I love them, I really do!
yankeegirl
CoE Volunteer
Posts: 505
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: June 29, 2005 06:40
I'd say the kiss between Eowyn and Faramir in the House of Healing. I really wanted to see that. I hope the filmed it or something for us to see pics.

That and the cutting Arwen down to size.
Rulea
Council Member
Posts: 738
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: July 01, 2005 06:06
Denethor's table manners have to improve, someone send him to Manners School!
Image
Fattybolger
Council Member
Posts: 111
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: July 02, 2005 06:58
The manners are, of course, emblematic, though a stint at manners school certainly woudn't hurt movie D. It's the way they coarsened the whole character that bugs me. Actually, ITB Denethor is so austere that it's quite hard to imagine him eating at all. He seems to view even sleeping as slightly infra dig., sleeping in full armour etc. (which does come out in the EE of RoTK, but not to much effect). There isn't much in the movie that is actually vulgar, but their portrayal of Denethor is. No blame to John Noble - he could have made an excellent Denethor if they'd given him some decent material.
TezzlesOfIthilien
Council Member
Posts: 9
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: July 02, 2005 08:44
REAL FARAMIR!!!! come on people! do you really think making one of the greatest heroes of the book into a semi-villain is something to ignore?! sorry, i get a little over excited when it comes to these things. the faramir thing has always bugged me a lot, although scouring of the shire was a close second. (who cares if it would have made the film an hour longer? )
hobbitnamedeliza
Council Member
Posts: 148
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: July 02, 2005 07:53
I'm interested in the opinions about Denethor and his table manners...I have never had a problem with PJs Denethor. Denethor, in the book, has certainly become certifiably insane. Granted, this occurred because of his efforts to hold off Sauron's mind-vision while wrestling with the palantir; but by the time Gandalf and Pippin arrive in Minas Tirith, Denethor is quite beyond the reach of reason.

And poor Farmir! To be reviled by his father in such a vicious manner!

As I watch the scene in the movie where he eats as Faramir rides to his death, I always think of the stories of the Greek gods who devoured their children....what else, in his madness has he become? He has torn his son apart mentally and, now physically. By ignoring the consequences of his actons, he puts his guilt deep inside, out of sight, just as surely as he does that chicken he's ripping apart. Notice how the tearing of the joints and flesh align to illustrate the violence that will by perpetrated on Faramir and the soldiers in his command.
delf
Council Member
Posts: 6
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: July 04, 2005 12:10
ABSOLUTELY ALL OF THEM! AND ANY OTHER ONES ANYBODY COULD THINK OF!!
Fattybolger
Council Member
Posts: 111
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: July 04, 2005 04:59
REAL FARAMIR!!!! come on people! do you really think making one of the greatest heroes of the book into a semi-villain is something to ignore?! sorry, i get a little over excited when it comes to these things. the faramir thing has always bugged me a lot, although scouring of the shire was a close second. (who cares if it would have made the film an hour longer? )


Hear hear, Tezzle! We are with you all the way. One can NEVER get sufficiently excited (and irate) about the misrepresentation of that incomparable chevalier sans peur et sans reproche . Don't let 'em get away with it!

As for the scouring of the Shire, yes, we wants it, we wants it! It could certainly have gone into the EE, when you think of some of the downright daft things they put in that (like the drinking contest, for instance). And it would have given us more of the terrific acting in the parts of Saruman and Wormtongue. The latter in particular didin't get nearly as much screen time as he deserved.

I only had room to list ten distortions, but let a hundred come if you have them in mind!
Lorna36
Council Member
Posts: 7
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: July 04, 2005 05:09
I must add I totally agree with hobbitnamedeliza.

On Mount Doom, when Gollum attacks and Sam has him at his mercy. Sam has every reason to kill him, every desire to kill him, and every justification to kill him...yet, he does not. He honors Frodo's example of compassion, lets Gollum go, and, thus, through compassion, saves the world.

Even though it wasn't in the film ( and I think it should have been) I find it really annoying that they have Sam slash Gollum in the chest-they don't just miss it out, they do the opposite!
Morwinyoniel
Gallery Admin & Realm Head of Estë
Posts: 1637
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: July 04, 2005 08:09
I'm interested in the opinions about Denethor and his table manners...I have never had a problem with PJs Denethor. Denethor, in the book, has certainly become certifiably insane. Granted, this occurred because of his efforts to hold off Sauron's mind-vision while wrestling with the palantir; but by the time Gandalf and Pippin arrive in Minas Tirith, Denethor is quite beyond the reach of reason.

True; he had already gone insane by the time Gandalf and Pippin arrived at Minas Tirith in the book as well. But there, he was able to keep himself together somehow, until the last blow when Faramir was presumably mortally wounded, and he saw the black ships in the palantír (at least that's what I read between the lines). His madness wasn't as in-your-face and over-the-top as in the movie.

And poor Farmir! To be reviled by his father in such a vicious manner!

As I watch the scene in the movie where he eats as Faramir rides to his death, I always think of the stories of the Greek gods who devoured their children....what else, in his madness has he become? He has torn his son apart mentally and, now physically. By ignoring the consequences of his actons, he puts his guilt deep inside, out of sight, just as surely as he does that chicken he's ripping apart. Notice how the tearing of the joints and flesh align to illustrate the violence that will by perpetrated on Faramir and the soldiers in his command.

The juxtaposition is quite powerful, and certainly not wrong; and I'm sure that's exactly what the filmmakers were trying to point out. In my opinion, it's just too pointed out.

As I said above, for me, it's not just Denethor's messy table manners - it's that, the whole character was too exaggerated, too black-and-white, and his madness was taken over the top.
Nick_5
Council Member
Posts: 364
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: July 04, 2005 03:39
Scour the Shire

Great part in the book
hobbitnamedeliza
Council Member
Posts: 148
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: July 04, 2005 03:54
Lorna36, that's a very good point!
hobbitnamedeliza
Council Member
Posts: 148
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: July 05, 2005 06:29
Morwinyoniel, It's true the movie Denethor is not as subtle as the book Denethor...but that's true with many aspects of moving from print to film. "Subtle" can quickly equal "Boring" or a "Drag on the Action" on the screen where it is very interesting between the covers of a book.

I don't think the "Charge of Osgiliath" would have had the same brutal/poignant power if Denethor had been reading and signing petitions while Pippin sings that haunting song. As PJ and Fran explain in the EE commentary, he needed to be doing something just so commonplace that his coldness to his son and his madness is stark and frightening. Personally, I think it makes the scene that much better.
Morwinyoniel
Gallery Admin & Realm Head of Estë
Posts: 1637
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: July 06, 2005 10:47
It's true the movie Denethor is not as subtle as the book Denethor...but that's true with many aspects of moving from print to film. "Subtle" can quickly equal "Boring" or a "Drag on the Action" on the screen where it is very interesting between the covers of a book.

I totally agree about "subtle" getting all too easily "boring" in a movie, where one doesn't have the luxury of giving as much background to the characters as in a book, or putting things between the lines. For that reason, I don't have any problems with any of the changes to the other characters; however, in Denethor's case, I think the change went just a bit too far. There would have been a lot of room between "so subtle it gets boring" and "over the top".
Moonwalker
Council Member
Posts: 54
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: July 07, 2005 03:38
Real Faramir. I mean, geez, that guy in the Two Towers was NOT real Faramir.

Scriptwriters said that the movie would work better with the "evil" Faramir but I don't think so. I do understand the changes but did they really had to change him THAT much???

I could have accept it if they only made Faramir a little more sceptical than in the book but ...grr...now he and his grew treated the hobbits and Gollum with violence and he was just too cold. I'm not angry that they made him look more weak than in the books but his personality was nothing like that. REAL Faramir is kind and gentle man who would never treat a defenceless beings like that.
This is a change which I'll never totally accept.
starlight_breeze
Council Member
Posts: 3
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: July 08, 2005 09:44
I would have to say Real Faramir.
I find kadaveri’s reasoning (completed by Linwe) very intelligent. Almost got me to vote for cut Arwen down to size, but panic that the changes would stop there. So I decided to follow my heart, and what I want the most is a portrayal of Faramir closer to
the wise brave stern yet gentle heroic self-sacrificing handsome and utterly swoonable Boook Faramir, whom alas we shall never now see on screen. :banghead:

I regretted the changes of TTT Faramir the most after seeing David Wenham:love: in RotK, I think he would have been a great Faramir all the way through. More sad than grim, more sure of himself, needing daddy’s approval and love but not risking his own convictions to get it, and above all not hitting Gollum! :angry: (Standing with his back to it, doesn’t change the fact that he allowed it and most probably ordered it, since he says: “That’s enough!”) I can see that the way it goes in the book, Faramir looking into Gollum’s eyes and making him tremble (“There are locked doors and closed windows in your mind, and dark rooms behind them.” Just love that sentence.) would probably be laughable on screen. But there has to be an alternative way. Menacing but not hitting! :nono:
I would dare to argue that this change would necessarily bring about a change in Aragorn. And probably in Denethor too if we are to understand why Faramir wants his approval.

Anyway restore the Hero Frodo and amend Denethor’s table manners come closely behind. By amending his table manners I understand restoring the poor guy’s dignity.
I agree to some extent that subtlety can equal boring in movies, some changes were necessary so that the rhythm of the narration wouldn’t fall, but we could have done with a little more subtlety at least as long as Denethor is concerned. I think that the oversimplified portrayal of Denethor is an underestimation of the audience. :rolleyes: Besides, the real good thing about subtlety is that every viewer can see what he is ready to see. Thus, a person who expects to enjoy the action-movie would only see that Denethor is a nasty guy who goes mad, whereas the rest of us would get a much more interesting character.

I’m not terribly upset by Arwen’s appearances (except the “I’m leaving/I’m staying part” and her appearance in the palantir scene. All this was just a forced intrusion.) Introducing Glorfindel so that he would bring a horse and then disappear really seems a waste of time, and since they needed the horse and Arwen was going to stick around anyway… I don’t think her presence has anything to do with the changes in Aragorn or Frodo. For some reason they just decided to bring down all the great people (Frodo, Aragorn, Théoden, Faramir, Denethor) to more normal standards. (Still working on the whys.) Though she is to blame for Elrond’s harsh behaviour towards Aragorn, and for the fact that the jealous dad needs to be convinced of reforging the sword of Elendil.
I loved the mental connection between Arwen and Aragorn in TTT since I found that to be pretty accurate (Even when Arwen is not mentioned a lot in LotR, there are hints that she is always present in Aragorn’s thoughts. Even if one doesn’t quite get it till the end.)

Tom Bombadil would have been an unnecessary and quite complicated detour, so it had to go. The Scouring of the Shire I regret to have missed but I don’t see how they could have included it without making the audience feel a new movie was starting. Nothing against Sam being fat, after all Gollum calls him fat hobbit all the time.

Scenes we could have been spared of, giving their minutes to more important stuff:
- Elves at Helm’s Deep: There’s not one of them left in the end, they just arrived to give us a very emotional moment and then get killed. (What bothers me most about this scene is that I actually liked it, inaccurate and all.) Proposal: let’s put in a little more Éomer and a little else “worried about their own borders” Elves.
- RotK prologue: it was good to become acquainted with Gollum’s story but it did not quite fitted there. I would have started directly with Saruman. That way it would have stayed in the theatrical where it was needed.
- Drinking contest: funny but unnecessary. And it got into the EE!!! :angry: Propose to exchange it for Aragorn healing Faramir.
- Legolas bringing down the Oliphaunt: it wouldn’t bother me if it didn’t take so much time off important stuff. Propose to exchange it for Théoden being found on the battlefield and being transported in honour to Minas Tirith. Someone could also recognised Éomer as the new King and I think we still have some seconds left.
- Gollum splitting Frodo and Sam: the whole point of this seems to have been to create more tension. Why not including Sam and Frodo being overrun by Orcs from the beginning instead of inventing conflicts? :twitch:
- I had not thought about Sam sparing Gollum at Mount Doom. :blush: I supposed I got used to him ill-treating the treacherous creature, both verbally and physically, since they first met.(Not at all like Sam. Or to Tolkien beliefs.) :nono:

By the way, I love the movies. I wouldn’t spend so much time analyzing them if I didn’t. But I also love the books and I find some details hard to let go.

Sorry I rambled on for so long.


Dolwen
Store Admin & Head Weaver of Vairë
Posts: 15050
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: July 08, 2005 01:33
I picked the real Faramir. That is the one thing that annoyed me the most.
MerryandPip
Council Member
Posts: 717
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: July 10, 2005 09:18
I agree! Bring back the real Faramir! He sucked in TTT!!!!
Fattybolger
Council Member
Posts: 111
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: July 11, 2005 06:44
Let's keep hearing it for the Real Faramir, folks - you really comfort me. Have filled several reservoirs with the bitter tears I have shed for the peerless hero of the book.

Oh, about Sam: its only in the movie that Gollum keeps on calling him fat. Gollum and Sam can't stand each other in the book of course, but Golum's words are cross, rude, not nice .. never fat. How could anyone be fat after walking 1600 miles (that's my estimate of the distance from Hobbiton to Mount Doom, using the maps) on mostly very scanty rations? How could he be fat at the end, even if he was at the beginning (which in the book he wasn't)?
orthanc5
CoE Volunteer
Posts: 120
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: July 11, 2005 07:19
Definitely fix Denethor's table manners. It's fine when PJ changes the plot, but I hate when he tweaks with the characters. He totally ruined Denethor's reputation, even how some bookies percieve him. Changing Denethor irked me more than any other character, because he was one of the most interesting characters from the books.
MerryandPip
Council Member
Posts: 717
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: July 12, 2005 02:20


Oh, about Sam: its only in the movie that Gollum keeps on calling him fat. Gollum and Sam can't stand each other in the book of course, but Golum's words are cross, rude, not nice .. never fat. How could anyone be fat after walking 1600 miles (that's my estimate of the distance from Hobbiton to Mount Doom, using the maps) on mostly very scanty rations? How could he be fat at the end, even if he was at the beginning (which in the book he wasn't)?


Yeah, I don't see how you could be fat after eating only a little bit of lembas each day.
Alie
Council Member
Posts: 7
Send Message
Avatar
Post RE: Which movie distortion/omission would you most like to correct?
on: July 12, 2005 10:59
tell me if I am crazy, but I picked "other" because the thing that bothered me the most in all the movies was the part in TTT where the hobbits are in Osgilliath and a Ring Wraith sees him with the Ring.
Why? because the entire mission was depending on secrecy, and that sauron was confused as to where the hobbit with the Ring was. If a ring wraith had Frodo with the Ring he woulf have either killed Frodo adn taken the Ring or taken both! And even in the (in my oppinion) impossible chance that this happened and the Wraith was scared away, he would have gone right back to Mordor and the whole army and Sauron would know where the ring was, adn Frodo would be captured anywy by patrols that would be put out or something!!!!! :twitch:
It may be a minor scene, and added just for suspence with no harm intended, if this had indeed happened the whole quest would have failed.
THAT^^^ is what annoyed me most :banghead:
(That and the whole Faramir thing, what is with the attitude change? Tho' in ROTK he was fine)
12
Members Online
Print Friendly, PDF & Email