So many thoughts. I like the Fellowship film the best, partly because I liked that volume the most (notice I didn't say Book *grin*). It has all the strengths of a well-done beginning. Introducing our main viewpoint characters, and slowly revealing the multiple layers of the story we're entering, and introducing the first bit of darkness and danger that shall only increase as we go along. I think Jackson was at his best here, because he restrained some of his more indulgent tendencies compared to the subsequent movies. I love his depiction of the Shire. Especially at my age now, thinking of where I'd like to live in Middle Earth, it's no longer Gondor, Lothlorien, or Rivendell. I want to live comfortably in the Shire, with a full larder and the view of well-tended fields.
One of my favorite character parts in the film was at the beginning of the quest, where Boromir is training the Hobbits in how to use their swords. It's a wonderful scene, ending with Boromir rolling on the ground with them, laughing. This is something we don't see in the book. There we just see him slowly being devoured by the desire of the Ring, albeit for the goal of saving his people. In the movie we finally get to see him acting as a proper leader. Teaching those under his care to protect themselves, and showing the charisma and sense of humor that make him a great leader. I like this Boromir far more than the book version.
As for changes, Jackson understands that you have to tell a story in a different way in a film compared to a book. It's what we told the producers of the Murderbot series when they mentioned some changes (and fortunately we were onboard for all of them. The scripts are great and watching filming was fantastic our day on set). We'd compare Fellowship to the first Harry Potter film, where that director felt he had to include everything mentioned in the book. With it's changes, Fellowship is still a far superior adaptation of a book compared to the first Potter film, which felt like they just went through a checklist of everything that had to include rather than creating a world and telling a story.
There are changes I can understand. Bombadill doesn't really add to the overall plot, and I can understand (but don't love) Aragorn's early reticence about pursuing the throne because they wanted to give his character more of a growth arc. The elves at Helm's Deep was a nice moment showing a renewal of an ancient partnership (and workable since they don't show Lothlorien having to fight forces from Dul Guldor). I'm just glad they dropped the idea of Arwen becoming a warrior queen and showing up there too. I wish the Scouring of the Shire was included, as it's an important storyline showing the growth and changes of the Hobbits, but can understand why structurally for a movie it didn't work.
The second volume, Two Towers, for me is the weakest of them, because it's the middle of the story. There's no beginning, and no conclusion. It's weak because it's not supposed to be a 2nd novel. If it were, it would have been written differently. Fantasies written as an intentional trilogy will have a different structure for the middle book. The movie, on the other hand, while still having to struggle with the same weaknesses we see in the published book, is able to have some standout sequences that strengthen it. The opening, showing Gandalf's fall at Khazad Dum, is incredible. The showpiece has to be Edoras and Meduseld. No adaptation of Beowulf has been able to equal what Jackson has done with Meduseld. Rohan was one of the best bit of world building the film series did.
Like most, I'll never accept the slander of Faramir with him threatening to take the Ring. I find his refusal of the Ring to be an important part of his character, and why he was more worthy than Denethor or Boromir.
Thank you for the excellent comment--you are right that there’s so much to think about!
Plus one for living in the Shire although in my more introverted moments, I think living in Tom Bombadil’s house would be fantastic. But there’s also post-war Ithilien; plus Elrond’s library is a real temptation (and Rivendell seems a bit comfier than what we see of Lothlórien in both texts). I’d have a hard time making up my mind.
YES! The characterization of Boromir throughout is so fantastic (including casting Sean Bean who, I gather, had up till then played mostly villains in Hollywood films, ditto). The training scene with Merry and Pippin is brilliant (he’s also carrying them on Caradhras ). So is the scene on the mountain (“so small a thing”) between him and the Ring, and between him and Aragorn, and he tries to laugh it off. The scene between him and Aragorn in Lothlórien is to die for. I *love* Film!Boromir so much that many of my fanfics are AU in which “Boromir must live” is one of the key premises (which doesn’t mean he's not tempted by the Ring!).
Re: Murderbot! I’ve been all over the place in my responses to the news about the Murderbot adaptation--because Murderbot’s voice, in letter/diary format, is so much of what I love about the series (especially the parentheticals! I adore the parentheticals). I’m glad to about the scripts and the filming. I’ll watch it, or at least start, no matter what, but this gives me hope!
I think everybody is happy that Arwen warrior queen was dropped (though I could also have done without the “she is dying because her life is linked to the Ring” element which seems so messed up). I loved her being reluctantly talked into leaving then returning because of the vision she had of their child (it’s one moment in the film that they convey the spiritual powers of at least some of the Elves).
Tolkien didn’t spend much of his thought and energy on Arwen (and even less on Rosie!); the novel definitely slots them into the “afterthought” rule that the hero must have a happy ending, meaning, marriage. Although even Book!Arwen has her fans: one of my friends in LiveJournal fandom mounted a spirited defense of Arwen as a lot braver and more heroic than Éowyn on the grounds that Arwen gave up immortality and Valinor for Aragorn.
I’ve read some interesting comparisons about Lúthien and Arwen in regard to their powers and prominence in their tales (noting the diminishment of Arwen in contrast). And Lúthien and Beren is his founding myth about him and Edith, not Arwen and Aragorn). So I can understand why the filmmakers wanted to have Arwen doing something more.
I heard a great presentation at a recent virtual conference about the importance of weaving and other craft elements implied if not always narrated directly in Tolkien’s legendarium that included the flag Arwen made for Aragorn.
I remember Jackson talking about how TT sort of suffered from a middle-child syndrome in that he was working on final editing of its theatrical release while also working on the EE of Fellowship, and starting to work on Return. While I love all the extended editions, I think the EE of TT makes it much stronger than the theatrical release (as opposed to just putting in fun stuff for the book fans).
Along with the incredibleness of Gandalf’s fall, and Edoras and Meduseld, I’d add the sequence in the Dead Marshes including the change in Frodo and Sméagol/Gollum’s relationship (though the Black Gate bit with Sam falling and the Power of the Elven Cloak seemed a bit over the top to me).
The slander of Faramir: He did refuse the Ring in the end (and had to defend his choice to Denethor). He was tempted and tried to take it back to Minas Tirith (but didn’t attempt to take it from Frodo, as Boromir did, and realized later just what that would have done to Boromir, and presumably, to himself). He could easily have taken the Ring when they were captive.
So I don’t see the change as a slander because it fits into the established pattern of characters tempted by the Ring and then resisting the temptation (with some differences between each one as to how the temptation/refusal works).
Boromir, Gandalf, and Galadriel all make it clear (in book and film) that they are tempted to varying degrees (and twice in the case of Gandalf and Boromir) -- but all reject it. Frodo offers it directly to Gandalf and Galadriel, and at the Council of Elrond says that it really belongs to Aragorn (but doesn’t actually offer it), but by Ithilien he has both come more under the influence of the Ring and knows just how dangerous it would be to give it to anyone else and resists Faramir’s attempt.
We never see Denethor anywhere near the Ring, but I doubt anybody thinks he would have rejected it. I just realized, thinking about what you said, that the film doesn’t, as far as I recall, include Denethor’s use of the palantir, but I think that it’s fairly clear in the scenes where he sends Boromir out to bring the weapon of the Enemy back to Minas Tirith and later when makes his desire to have it in his vaults clear and attacks Faramir indicate he’s more than slightly already influenced by Sauron.
Jackson discusses the changes to Faramir's story they made in one of the extra features. They had to consider the part of the audience who knows nothing of the source text (adaptations are not, despite a certain amount of fan entitlement, created ONLY for the fans). All the earlier buildup in terms of time and effort to show the Ring as being powerfully tempting to everyone in Middle-earth just to show Faramir, a character only recently introduced, being able to easily resist that temptation would be a major flaw.
Faramir taking Frodo and Sam to Osgiliath, seeing and fighting the Orcs flooding into the ruined city, the arrival of the Nazgûl, and Frodo’s encounter with it leads to Faramir’s change of heart. The scene also gave Sam the chance to save Frodo (again! Cannot happen too often for some of us!) and to make that fantastic speech of why they need to keep going, and showed the audience just how overpowering the Orc forces were.
Faramir, like Boromir, resisted-- and while he didn’t die, as Boromir did, he might well have at his father’s command to attack Osgiliath which, as I note above, seems to be more about revenge on his surviving son than a well-thought out tactical decision! I’m sure Tolkien, as a survivor of the Somme, had some ideas about military commanders who never set foot on the battlefields but ordered their men forward no matter what the cost (Janet Brennan Croft deals with those issues of leadership in her monograph, now reissued in paperback YAY, War and the Works of Tolkien). .
What I consider the real slander of Faramir is the scene where he has ordered/allows his men to beat Gollum after they capture him instead of treating him humanely. That’s up there with the crummy “comic” scene about Éowyn being a lousy cook as far as I’m concerned.
So many thoughts. I like the Fellowship film the best, partly because I liked that volume the most (notice I didn't say Book *grin*). It has all the strengths of a well-done beginning. Introducing our main viewpoint characters, and slowly revealing the multiple layers of the story we're entering, and introducing the first bit of darkness and danger that shall only increase as we go along. I think Jackson was at his best here, because he restrained some of his more indulgent tendencies compared to the subsequent movies. I love his depiction of the Shire. Especially at my age now, thinking of where I'd like to live in Middle Earth, it's no longer Gondor, Lothlorien, or Rivendell. I want to live comfortably in the Shire, with a full larder and the view of well-tended fields.
One of my favorite character parts in the film was at the beginning of the quest, where Boromir is training the Hobbits in how to use their swords. It's a wonderful scene, ending with Boromir rolling on the ground with them, laughing. This is something we don't see in the book. There we just see him slowly being devoured by the desire of the Ring, albeit for the goal of saving his people. In the movie we finally get to see him acting as a proper leader. Teaching those under his care to protect themselves, and showing the charisma and sense of humor that make him a great leader. I like this Boromir far more than the book version.
As for changes, Jackson understands that you have to tell a story in a different way in a film compared to a book. It's what we told the producers of the Murderbot series when they mentioned some changes (and fortunately we were onboard for all of them. The scripts are great and watching filming was fantastic our day on set). We'd compare Fellowship to the first Harry Potter film, where that director felt he had to include everything mentioned in the book. With it's changes, Fellowship is still a far superior adaptation of a book compared to the first Potter film, which felt like they just went through a checklist of everything that had to include rather than creating a world and telling a story.
There are changes I can understand. Bombadill doesn't really add to the overall plot, and I can understand (but don't love) Aragorn's early reticence about pursuing the throne because they wanted to give his character more of a growth arc. The elves at Helm's Deep was a nice moment showing a renewal of an ancient partnership (and workable since they don't show Lothlorien having to fight forces from Dul Guldor). I'm just glad they dropped the idea of Arwen becoming a warrior queen and showing up there too. I wish the Scouring of the Shire was included, as it's an important storyline showing the growth and changes of the Hobbits, but can understand why structurally for a movie it didn't work.
The second volume, Two Towers, for me is the weakest of them, because it's the middle of the story. There's no beginning, and no conclusion. It's weak because it's not supposed to be a 2nd novel. If it were, it would have been written differently. Fantasies written as an intentional trilogy will have a different structure for the middle book. The movie, on the other hand, while still having to struggle with the same weaknesses we see in the published book, is able to have some standout sequences that strengthen it. The opening, showing Gandalf's fall at Khazad Dum, is incredible. The showpiece has to be Edoras and Meduseld. No adaptation of Beowulf has been able to equal what Jackson has done with Meduseld. Rohan was one of the best bit of world building the film series did.
Like most, I'll never accept the slander of Faramir with him threatening to take the Ring. I find his refusal of the Ring to be an important part of his character, and why he was more worthy than Denethor or Boromir.
Thank you for the excellent comment--you are right that there’s so much to think about!
Plus one for living in the Shire although in my more introverted moments, I think living in Tom Bombadil’s house would be fantastic. But there’s also post-war Ithilien; plus Elrond’s library is a real temptation (and Rivendell seems a bit comfier than what we see of Lothlórien in both texts). I’d have a hard time making up my mind.
YES! The characterization of Boromir throughout is so fantastic (including casting Sean Bean who, I gather, had up till then played mostly villains in Hollywood films, ditto). The training scene with Merry and Pippin is brilliant (he’s also carrying them on Caradhras ). So is the scene on the mountain (“so small a thing”) between him and the Ring, and between him and Aragorn, and he tries to laugh it off. The scene between him and Aragorn in Lothlórien is to die for. I *love* Film!Boromir so much that many of my fanfics are AU in which “Boromir must live” is one of the key premises (which doesn’t mean he's not tempted by the Ring!).
Re: Murderbot! I’ve been all over the place in my responses to the news about the Murderbot adaptation--because Murderbot’s voice, in letter/diary format, is so much of what I love about the series (especially the parentheticals! I adore the parentheticals). I’m glad to about the scripts and the filming. I’ll watch it, or at least start, no matter what, but this gives me hope!
I think everybody is happy that Arwen warrior queen was dropped (though I could also have done without the “she is dying because her life is linked to the Ring” element which seems so messed up). I loved her being reluctantly talked into leaving then returning because of the vision she had of their child (it’s one moment in the film that they convey the spiritual powers of at least some of the Elves).
Tolkien didn’t spend much of his thought and energy on Arwen (and even less on Rosie!); the novel definitely slots them into the “afterthought” rule that the hero must have a happy ending, meaning, marriage. Although even Book!Arwen has her fans: one of my friends in LiveJournal fandom mounted a spirited defense of Arwen as a lot braver and more heroic than Éowyn on the grounds that Arwen gave up immortality and Valinor for Aragorn.
I’ve read some interesting comparisons about Lúthien and Arwen in regard to their powers and prominence in their tales (noting the diminishment of Arwen in contrast). And Lúthien and Beren is his founding myth about him and Edith, not Arwen and Aragorn). So I can understand why the filmmakers wanted to have Arwen doing something more.
I heard a great presentation at a recent virtual conference about the importance of weaving and other craft elements implied if not always narrated directly in Tolkien’s legendarium that included the flag Arwen made for Aragorn.
I remember Jackson talking about how TT sort of suffered from a middle-child syndrome in that he was working on final editing of its theatrical release while also working on the EE of Fellowship, and starting to work on Return. While I love all the extended editions, I think the EE of TT makes it much stronger than the theatrical release (as opposed to just putting in fun stuff for the book fans).
Along with the incredibleness of Gandalf’s fall, and Edoras and Meduseld, I’d add the sequence in the Dead Marshes including the change in Frodo and Sméagol/Gollum’s relationship (though the Black Gate bit with Sam falling and the Power of the Elven Cloak seemed a bit over the top to me).
The slander of Faramir: He did refuse the Ring in the end (and had to defend his choice to Denethor). He was tempted and tried to take it back to Minas Tirith (but didn’t attempt to take it from Frodo, as Boromir did, and realized later just what that would have done to Boromir, and presumably, to himself). He could easily have taken the Ring when they were captive.
So I don’t see the change as a slander because it fits into the established pattern of characters tempted by the Ring and then resisting the temptation (with some differences between each one as to how the temptation/refusal works).
Boromir, Gandalf, and Galadriel all make it clear (in book and film) that they are tempted to varying degrees (and twice in the case of Gandalf and Boromir) -- but all reject it. Frodo offers it directly to Gandalf and Galadriel, and at the Council of Elrond says that it really belongs to Aragorn (but doesn’t actually offer it), but by Ithilien he has both come more under the influence of the Ring and knows just how dangerous it would be to give it to anyone else and resists Faramir’s attempt.
We never see Denethor anywhere near the Ring, but I doubt anybody thinks he would have rejected it. I just realized, thinking about what you said, that the film doesn’t, as far as I recall, include Denethor’s use of the palantir, but I think that it’s fairly clear in the scenes where he sends Boromir out to bring the weapon of the Enemy back to Minas Tirith and later when makes his desire to have it in his vaults clear and attacks Faramir indicate he’s more than slightly already influenced by Sauron.
Jackson discusses the changes to Faramir's story they made in one of the extra features. They had to consider the part of the audience who knows nothing of the source text (adaptations are not, despite a certain amount of fan entitlement, created ONLY for the fans). All the earlier buildup in terms of time and effort to show the Ring as being powerfully tempting to everyone in Middle-earth just to show Faramir, a character only recently introduced, being able to easily resist that temptation would be a major flaw.
Faramir taking Frodo and Sam to Osgiliath, seeing and fighting the Orcs flooding into the ruined city, the arrival of the Nazgûl, and Frodo’s encounter with it leads to Faramir’s change of heart. The scene also gave Sam the chance to save Frodo (again! Cannot happen too often for some of us!) and to make that fantastic speech of why they need to keep going, and showed the audience just how overpowering the Orc forces were.
Faramir, like Boromir, resisted-- and while he didn’t die, as Boromir did, he might well have at his father’s command to attack Osgiliath which, as I note above, seems to be more about revenge on his surviving son than a well-thought out tactical decision! I’m sure Tolkien, as a survivor of the Somme, had some ideas about military commanders who never set foot on the battlefields but ordered their men forward no matter what the cost (Janet Brennan Croft deals with those issues of leadership in her monograph, now reissued in paperback YAY, War and the Works of Tolkien). .
What I consider the real slander of Faramir is the scene where he has ordered/allows his men to beat Gollum after they capture him instead of treating him humanely. That’s up there with the crummy “comic” scene about Éowyn being a lousy cook as far as I’m concerned.