Tolkien's Opinion - Page 3

Gwaimir Windgem · 12-21-2006, 08:52 PM

Imagining....

Yikes.

Seriously though, I remember one of his biggest beefs with Zimmerman was his tweeking of the characters; the plot was bad, but that was nothing next to the characters.

With that in mind, let us ponder Faramir, shall we...and then Aragorn...Arwen...

BB, I think you have it right.

captain carrot · 12-22-2006, 07:29 AM

well, there's a whole debate right there: which character would JRR have gone most nuts about ...and why? (in the film portrayals?)

(btw ...i'll reserve the right to change my mind on this ...)

but i think overall Gandalf would be, on balance, the main one that would have mild mannered jovial ol JRR frothing at the mouth and sharpening morgul knives this chiristmas!

Faramir of course stands out like BIg red X for the full be-slippered Oxford bezerker treatment - but for overall mangling, above and beyond the call of duty,for me, it has to be overall - Gandalf.

Gwaimir Windgem · 12-22-2006, 04:10 PM

Gandalf was certainly changed, but I don't think he was as bad as Aragorn or Arwen.

captain carrot · 12-22-2006, 04:22 PM

I always felt he was the closet to JRR's heart though ... and though i have no problem with Ian, he was slaughtered by both the screenplay, the direction and the editing.

a sum of smaller parts maybe than Aragorn or certainly Faramir ..but a larger sum in total, to my mind.

... and, i'd argue, to JRR's too. For, i feel, he'd be SO much more alive to every nuance and brushstoke ...

hectorberlioz · 01-17-2007, 05:11 PM

Oho! Here we are critisizing Gandalf behind my back, while I read your defense of him in the Hobbit forum....*ironic chuckle*

....

Well, He certainly qould go nuts over Denethor as well...that was pretty drastic stuff.

Gwaimir Windgem · 01-18-2007, 12:49 AM

BB: "The closet to JRR's heart?" Is this a Sir Ian joke?

Hey, Hector, I never said he was perfect, or great; I just said I'd rather have continuity. If this movie is supposed to be in some way connected with the LOTR movies, which it clearly is, then characters should, to the extent possible, look the same, and continuity should be largely preserved.

hectorberlioz · 01-18-2007, 12:44 PM

I would rather The Hobbit be different in feel from LotR.

sisterandcousinandaunt · 01-21-2007, 07:13 PM

Similar in nature (and not surprisingly) to issues in Biblical criticism.

If (to expand that analogy), you ask 'What is God's intent for His creation?', clearly it's important to establish "which" God you're discussing. He has an identity and POV in Leviticus that has almost nothing in common with the one we get in the Gospels.

Tolkien also varies somewhat, due to his life circumstances. It's clear his notions of the goblin/orc, for example, evolves between the Hobbit and other works. His take on the importance, or identity of the elven kind, also. Attempts of readers, scholars, or even Himself to explain these away have always rung false to me. He changed his mind. So what?

If we assume, therefore, that Tolkien was capable of changing his mind on the content of his characters (due apologies to that other 3 initial guy

) it's reasonable to assume that a large packet of money might have had charm. How much charm? Hard to say. I believe he'd have been less nitpicky even with earlier treatments, for example, if his salary and royalties didn't insulate him somewhat from vile commercial realities. He certainly was protective of his copyrights. Was that all about the Art? I put to this thread that many people who are concerned entirely with capital A Art can't even manage the compromises necessary to publication in the first place.

Very interesting thread, though.

Rána Eressëa · 01-28-2007, 05:05 PM

I think he probably would have enjoyed it due to the WORK put into it, but he probably would have shook his head strongly (like many of us do) at all of the changes, but I still think overall there would have been some kind of appreciation for it.

Though I'm sure he would have ripped on what was done to Faramir.

Gwaimir Windgem · 01-28-2007, 10:38 PM

I'm not too sure about the appreciation. He was a hell of a nitpicker and a perfectionist.

Rána Eressëa · 01-30-2007, 09:35 AM

True that. No argument there. Honestly, though, I can't see him hating it. I see him openly mocking it, but on the inside being at least impressed with the scale of work that went into it.

Compare the movies made of his books from those days to the ones made now. Big difference in the quality. I also believe Tolkien was a skeptic when it came to producing the movies with real people via live action.

Gwaimir Windgem · 01-30-2007, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rána Eressëa

Compare the movies made of his books from those days to the ones made now. Big difference in the quality. I also believe Tolkien was a skeptic when it came to producing the movies with real people via live action.

As far as I know, there were no movies from "those days" of his book; Hobbit was 77, LOTR 78, RotK 80, respectively 4, 5, and 7 years after his death.

Tolkien didn't even like theatre; I can't imagine he would much care how impressive a cinematic production was.

hectorberlioz · 01-30-2007, 03:46 PM

He didn't like REGULAR theatre, but he liked Opera

Gwaimir Windgem · 01-30-2007, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

He didn't like REGULAR theatre, but he liked Opera

Citation, please, good sir!

carlrodd · 02-12-2007, 12:01 PM

i like to imagine that tolkien would have had the same major problem with the whole movie trilogy that i did(especially the last two). if you watch the special features, all these cast members and jackson can go on about was how 'human' of a story it was; how all the characters had these very understandable 'human' struggles.....so easy for the audience to relate. well, obviously, that was how PJ saw the story, but i disagree completely. tolkien's world is one filled with immortals and the long-lived. these creatures would certainly have had a much more lasting effect on the world in general than men did. and of course, the men who had a lasting effect were long-lived and had historically had close contact with elves and the great powers. i felt like so much of that was missing in the movies. PJ thought it was a human story, so he made it a human story. i was especially grieved by aragon's self-doubt....TOTALLY out of place, and all in an effort to make him seem more 'human'. he was directly descended from elros tar-minyatur. he had elven and maian blood in him. one of his forbearers was elu thingol who awoke at the waters of lake cuiviénen before the sun and moon. i think tolkien would have wanted a movie to understand this scope, and thoroughly represent it, and to show the characters as having a very complete understanding of this. PJ did not. his peripheral human stories grew tiresome, and were so overdone...especially with sam and frodo.

with that said, three wonderful scenes come to mind that i believe really captured that scope: the scene where arwen imagines becoming queen and outliving aragorn, while the beautiful background of gondorian architecture comes into it's fall and winter as the scene fast forwards is amazing. it really captures what i think tolkien tried to get across about the difference between the fate of men and elves. secondly, the narrated beginning of FOTR is simply extremely well done. lastly, for some reason, the scene in ROTK where smeagol takes the ring and begins to be transformed is brilliant. PJ really captures the feeling of the great scope of gollum's life, and how these personal histories were all intertwined the continuously unfolding music of ainur.

The Gaffer · 02-13-2007, 07:29 AM

I completely agree re: Aragorn. It might have worked if they had followed through with it, rather than making it a gratuitous and rather clumsy attempt at suspense. However, a far better strategy would have been to play up his patience, courage and boldness.

Legolas' line in ROTK, recounting the Paths of the Dead, and how the Army of the Dead were bound to his will, paints a very different picture of Aragorn: had he seized the Ring, how terrible a leader he would have become.

This makes a LOT more sense than the film character, just turning up and everyone is quite happy to hand over the crown to him.

Jon S. · 02-14-2007, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sisterandcousinandaunt

Similar in nature (and not surprisingly) to issues in Biblical criticism.

If (to expand that analogy), you ask 'What is God's intent for His creation?', clearly it's important to establish "which" God you're discussing. He has an identity and POV in Leviticus that has almost nothing in common with the one we get in the Gospels.

"Love your neighbor as yourself." Leviticus 19:18

smeagle · 02-20-2007, 06:42 PM

so would i what would he think??

12-21-2006, 08:52 PM	#41
Gwaimir Windgem Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA Posts: 10,820	Imagining.... Yikes. Seriously though, I remember one of his biggest beefs with Zimmerman was his tweeking of the characters; the plot was bad, but that was nothing next to the characters. With that in mind, let us ponder Faramir, shall we...and then Aragorn...Arwen... BB, I think you have it right. __________________ Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle

12-22-2006, 07:29 AM	#42
captain carrot Elven Warrior Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 138	well, there's a whole debate right there: which character would JRR have gone most nuts about ...and why? (in the film portrayals?) (btw ...i'll reserve the right to change my mind on this ...) but i think overall Gandalf would be, on balance, the main one that would have mild mannered jovial ol JRR frothing at the mouth and sharpening morgul knives this chiristmas! Faramir of course stands out like BIg red X for the full be-slippered Oxford bezerker treatment - but for overall mangling, above and beyond the call of duty,for me, it has to be overall - Gandalf. Last edited by captain carrot : 12-22-2006 at 09:42 AM.

12-22-2006, 04:10 PM	#43
Gwaimir Windgem Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA Posts: 10,820	Gandalf was certainly changed, but I don't think he was as bad as Aragorn or Arwen. __________________ Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle

01-17-2007, 05:11 PM	#45
hectorberlioz Master of Orchestration President Emeritus of Entmoot 2004-2008 Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Lost in the Opera House Posts: 9,328	Oho! Here we are critisizing Gandalf behind my back, while I read your defense of him in the Hobbit forum....ironic chuckle .... Well, He certainly qould go nuts over Denethor as well...that was pretty drastic stuff. __________________ ACALEWIA- President of Entmoot hectorberlioz- Vice President of Entmoot Acaly und Hektor fur Presidants fur EntMut fur life! Join the discussion at Entmoot Election 2010. "Stupidissimo!"~Toscanini The Da CINDY Code The Epic Poem Of The Balrog of Entmoot: Here ~NEW! ~ Thinking of summer vacation? AboutNewJersey.com - NJ Travel & Tourism Guide

01-18-2007, 12:49 AM	#46
Gwaimir Windgem Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA Posts: 10,820	BB: "The closet to JRR's heart?" Is this a Sir Ian joke? Hey, Hector, I never said he was perfect, or great; I just said I'd rather have continuity. If this movie is supposed to be in some way connected with the LOTR movies, which it clearly is, then characters should, to the extent possible, look the same, and continuity should be largely preserved. __________________ Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle

12-22-2006, 04:22 PM	#44
captain carrot Elven Warrior Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 138	I always felt he was the closet to JRR's heart though ... and though i have no problem with Ian, he was slaughtered by both the screenplay, the direction and the editing. a sum of smaller parts maybe than Aragorn or certainly Faramir ..but a larger sum in total, to my mind. ... and, i'd argue, to JRR's too. For, i feel, he'd be SO much more alive to every nuance and brushstoke ...

01-18-2007, 12:44 PM	#47
hectorberlioz Master of Orchestration President Emeritus of Entmoot 2004-2008 Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Lost in the Opera House Posts: 9,328	I would rather The Hobbit be different in feel from LotR. __________________ ACALEWIA- President of Entmoot hectorberlioz- Vice President of Entmoot Acaly und Hektor fur Presidants fur EntMut fur life! Join the discussion at Entmoot Election 2010. "Stupidissimo!"~Toscanini The Da CINDY Code The Epic Poem Of The Balrog of Entmoot: Here ~NEW! ~ Thinking of summer vacation? AboutNewJersey.com - NJ Travel & Tourism Guide

01-21-2007, 07:13 PM	#48
sisterandcousinandaunt Elf Lord Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 4,535	There's a problem in this historical dissection, though. Similar in nature (and not surprisingly) to issues in Biblical criticism. If (to expand that analogy), you ask 'What is God's intent for His creation?', clearly it's important to establish "which" God you're discussing. He has an identity and POV in Leviticus that has almost nothing in common with the one we get in the Gospels. Tolkien also varies somewhat, due to his life circumstances. It's clear his notions of the goblin/orc, for example, evolves between the Hobbit and other works. His take on the importance, or identity of the elven kind, also. Attempts of readers, scholars, or even Himself to explain these away have always rung false to me. He changed his mind. So what? If we assume, therefore, that Tolkien was capable of changing his mind on the content of his characters (due apologies to that other 3 initial guy ) it's reasonable to assume that a large packet of money might have had charm. How much charm? Hard to say. I believe he'd have been less nitpicky even with earlier treatments, for example, if his salary and royalties didn't insulate him somewhat from vile commercial realities. He certainly was protective of his copyrights. Was that all about the Art? I put to this thread that many people who are concerned entirely with capital A Art can't even manage the compromises necessary to publication in the first place. Very interesting thread, though.

01-28-2007, 05:05 PM	#49
Rána Eressëa The Rogue Elf Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 1,722	I think he probably would have enjoyed it due to the WORK put into it, but he probably would have shook his head strongly (like many of us do) at all of the changes, but I still think overall there would have been some kind of appreciation for it. Though I'm sure he would have ripped on what was done to Faramir.

01-28-2007, 10:38 PM	#50
Gwaimir Windgem Dread Mothy Lord and Halfwitted Apprentice Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Thomas Aquinas College, Santa Paula, CA Posts: 10,820	I'm not too sure about the appreciation. He was a hell of a nitpicker and a perfectionist. __________________ Crux fidelis, inter omnes arbor una nobilis. Nulla talem silva profert, fronde, flore, germine. Dulce lignum, dulce clavo, dulce pondus sustinens. 'With a melon?' - Eric Idle

01-30-2007, 09:35 AM	#51
Rána Eressëa The Rogue Elf Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 1,722	True that. No argument there. Honestly, though, I can't see him hating it. I see him openly mocking it, but on the inside being at least impressed with the scale of work that went into it. Compare the movies made of his books from those days to the ones made now. Big difference in the quality. I also believe Tolkien was a skeptic when it came to producing the movies with real people via live action.

01-30-2007, 03:46 PM	#53
hectorberlioz Master of Orchestration President Emeritus of Entmoot 2004-2008 Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Lost in the Opera House Posts: 9,328	He didn't like REGULAR theatre, but he liked Opera __________________ ACALEWIA- President of Entmoot hectorberlioz- Vice President of Entmoot Acaly und Hektor fur Presidants fur EntMut fur life! Join the discussion at Entmoot Election 2010. "Stupidissimo!"~Toscanini The Da CINDY Code The Epic Poem Of The Balrog of Entmoot: Here ~NEW! ~ Thinking of summer vacation? AboutNewJersey.com - NJ Travel & Tourism Guide

02-12-2007, 12:01 PM	#55
carlrodd Sapling Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: delaware Posts: 14	i like to imagine that tolkien would have had the same major problem with the whole movie trilogy that i did(especially the last two). if you watch the special features, all these cast members and jackson can go on about was how 'human' of a story it was; how all the characters had these very understandable 'human' struggles.....so easy for the audience to relate. well, obviously, that was how PJ saw the story, but i disagree completely. tolkien's world is one filled with immortals and the long-lived. these creatures would certainly have had a much more lasting effect on the world in general than men did. and of course, the men who had a lasting effect were long-lived and had historically had close contact with elves and the great powers. i felt like so much of that was missing in the movies. PJ thought it was a human story, so he made it a human story. i was especially grieved by aragon's self-doubt....TOTALLY out of place, and all in an effort to make him seem more 'human'. he was directly descended from elros tar-minyatur. he had elven and maian blood in him. one of his forbearers was elu thingol who awoke at the waters of lake cuiviénen before the sun and moon. i think tolkien would have wanted a movie to understand this scope, and thoroughly represent it, and to show the characters as having a very complete understanding of this. PJ did not. his peripheral human stories grew tiresome, and were so overdone...especially with sam and frodo. with that said, three wonderful scenes come to mind that i believe really captured that scope: the scene where arwen imagines becoming queen and outliving aragorn, while the beautiful background of gondorian architecture comes into it's fall and winter as the scene fast forwards is amazing. it really captures what i think tolkien tried to get across about the difference between the fate of men and elves. secondly, the narrated beginning of FOTR is simply extremely well done. lastly, for some reason, the scene in ROTK where smeagol takes the ring and begins to be transformed is brilliant. PJ really captures the feeling of the great scope of gollum's life, and how these personal histories were all intertwined the continuously unfolding music of ainur. Last edited by carlrodd : 02-12-2007 at 12:39 PM.

02-13-2007, 07:29 AM	#56
The Gaffer Elf Lord Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: In me taters Posts: 3,288	I completely agree re: Aragorn. It might have worked if they had followed through with it, rather than making it a gratuitous and rather clumsy attempt at suspense. However, a far better strategy would have been to play up his patience, courage and boldness. Legolas' line in ROTK, recounting the Paths of the Dead, and how the Army of the Dead were bound to his will, paints a very different picture of Aragorn: had he seized the Ring, how terrible a leader he would have become. This makes a LOT more sense than the film character, just turning up and everyone is quite happy to hand over the crown to him.

02-20-2007, 06:42 PM	#58
smeagle Sapling Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 5	so would i what would he think??

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Tolkien's story of Middle-Earth is too much focused on LOTR...	Peter_20	Middle Earth	8	10-08-2007 12:33 AM
Tolkien's Languages	Forkbeard	Middle Earth	3	10-14-2004 01:08 PM
Capturing Tolkien's Vision vs. A Literal Interpretation	Black Breathalizer	Lord of the Rings Movies	924	11-03-2003 09:53 PM
Changing Tolkien's world by role playing	afro-elf	RPG Forum	12	04-04-2003 12:59 PM
Aragorn's Fall...any changes of opinion out there?	Black Breathalizer	Lord of the Rings Movies	186	02-05-2003 04:03 PM