Extended Edition of FotR!!

[IronParrot]

"and when he thought they changed something by making Frodo decide to take the Ring all the way to Mordor only at the Council of Elrond, even though that's how it is in the book."

Um, not exactly.

I think what Peter Jackson means there is that unlike the book, there is no mention in the film of the fact that the Ring must be destroyed in the Fire until the Council of Elrond. In the book, Gandalf talks about this before Frodo even leaves the Shire.

Regarding the various comments about Frodo's "strength" or "weakness" - I would say that even in the book, there is much evidence to suggest that Frodo's courage lies primarily in his self-sacrificial will to face responsibility, not in his physical ability.

[Cirdan]

The growth of his courage was not based on physical ability but on the willingness to act under the duress of fear. Certainly his years in the Shire in no way prepared him for the journey to Mordor. It was, in the book, the incremental leaps of confidence exampled in his bravery in the Barrows, on Weathertop, and at the Ford. In the film the side of him as baggage in still in but his moments of bravery are doused. No Barrow, he drops his sword without a swing on Weathertop, he does not make his strike for the Shire against the troll. Some very nice cringing though.

Even the smallest person can get up and at least try to defend himself.

[Khamûl]

Originally posted by Ms. Undomial
is there a two towers preview on the ex DVD? if so I can't find it. can someone please help me?

Check out this thread.

[Ms. Undomial]

Thank you so much!! I found it!!!

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Lief Erikson
That depends what you call weak, I think. In terms of moral strength, I think you're definitely wrong. He made the decision to go to Mordor alone, didn't he? That decision wasn't made in arrogance, it was made in self sacrifice and pure hobbit pluck and determination.

Physical strength you might have a point on, although that, to me, doesn't make any difference. He wasn't that physically strong in the books either.

I don't think too many things went unexplained, either. My Dad hadn't read the books before seeing the movie, and he didn't come away any questions as to what had been going on. I doubt that anyone could do a better movie of FoTR than Peter Jackson did.

I never said physical strength. Even his stand at the Ford was in no way physical. He mentally was able to withstand the Nazgul more than physically. Any one else would have crossed over the river or had put on the ring.

I've been watching the directors commentary. It's sort of strange how they don't even seem to know what was in the book, yet over and over Jackson was saying how close to the book he was staying. They also talked about how there were a lot of complaints about Arwen "calling" up the water. That was the least of my complaints with that scene.

Listening to Jackson describe the movie and what he felt was needed - makes me believe even more that he only set out to make an action movie. I agree that things had to be changed - but not a much as he changed them.

He goes on about how he hates magic in fantasy films and says that that is why Saruman and Gandalf don't have a "fireworks" battle at Isengard. No - instead he gives us break dancing Gandalf. He also makes Saruman cause the storm that forces the Fellowship to abandon the pass and go to Moria.

And Cirdan is right - Frodo needed some incremental moments to build up his strength for Mordor. Right now I need to argue with my friends, who haven't read the books, that Frodo is really stronger than he looks. They also claim that Boromir should have been given the ring. They feel that Boromir's idea of taking the Ring should have been tried and that a human would have been a better choice for going to Mordor. Why is this? Because Jackson didn't build of the characters of the Hobbits in the theatrical version. Instead he gave us action scene after action scene. Through out the dirtectors commentary he even says how everything "needed to be more intense". Well I don't think EVERYTHING had to be more intense.

[azalea]

I agree with that. I think it could have been done in a more understated way. A movie, even an adventure movie, doesn't have to have larger than life special effects to be good. Even so, there would have been plenty of opportunity to do the effects, have the battle scenes, etc. But I think you're right, he wanted it to be an action movie. I personally still really like it, but there are times when I see it that I wish this or that little thing had been done differently. I also thought it interesting in the appendices (that's what I'm in the process of watching now in the dvd) that Phillipa Boyens says that she likes to think of the things that were left out as things that just aren't mentioned. In other words, they DO see Tom B., but they just don't show it, and the same for other stuff that's left out.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by azalea
I also thought it interesting in the appendices (that's what I'm in the process of watching now in the dvd) that Phillipa Boyens says that she likes to think of the things that were left out as things that just aren't mentioned. In other words, they DO see Tom B., but they just don't show it, and the same for other stuff that's left out.

I haven't watched that yet. Is that how they explain the fact that they made Aragorn run from his destiny " Oh well secretly - he really desires being King and reclaiming Gondor - we just don't show it as much". "Oh - concerning the flight to the ford - well really Frodo was mentally resisting the Nazgul - we thought we brought that out - but we just did it a little more subtley than the way it is in the book."

I guess by what you claim is said on the DVD - that according to Phillipa Boyens the movie matches the book exactly - it's just not on the screen. Makes me feel even more that they weren't as familiar with the books as they claim and just want the fans to accept it. They seem to be trying to cover their tracks and come up with lame reasons as to why the movies differ so much from the books - even if they do repeatedly claim they don't.

[azalea]

I got the feeling that Phillipa was a fan of the books; they mention a lot about how they were always trying to find ways to stay true, but still have a "marketable movie" I think it was probably frustrating for her to be faced constantly with having to alter things, but to be limited in that they had to answer to the powers that be. I think Jackson did have more of an action movie in mind, though. I don't think he was quite as married to the notion of staying true to the book. But I could just be reading a lot into it. Everyone seems to say over and over in the different parts of the EE and Appendices how they tried to stay as close as they could to the books, but it obviously wasn't someone's aim, as there are a lot of differences. It's too bad some really rich person who had no interest in the money-making aspect, but was aiming only for the true art of filmmaking, couldn't have done the films.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by azalea
I got the feeling that Phillipa was a fan of the books; they mention a lot about how they were always trying to find ways to stay true, but still have a "marketable movie" I think it was probably frustrating for her to be faced constantly with having to alter things, but to be limited in that they had to answer to the powers that be. I think Jackson did have more of an action movie in mind, though. I don't think he was quite as married to the notion of staying true to the book. But I could just be reading a lot into it. Everyone seems to say over and over in the different parts of the EE and Appendices how they tried to stay as close as they could to the books, but it obviously wasn't someone's aim, as there are a lot of differences. It's too bad some really rich person who had no interest in the money-making aspect, but was aiming only for the true art of filmmaking, couldn't have done the films.

I agree with that last part - although to get any studio to do the type of movie that needed to be done - it would have to make money. I think even without non-Tolkien fans going - enough LotR people would have gone to make it a success anyway. I basically hated the movie - yet I ended up seeing it 8 times.

The thing that gets me about them constantly saying - we tried staying true to the books - is that so much DIDN'T have to be changed. They had no reason to change Aragorn's character and I doubt the movie studio even had any input into his character or the clowns that they turned Merry and Pippin into. A lot was in their hands and THEY chose to change it. A lot was in Jackson's hands.

[olsonm]

Originally posted by IronParrot
Um, not exactly.

I think what Peter Jackson means there is that unlike the book, there is no mention in the film of the fact that the Ring must be destroyed in the Fire until the Council of Elrond. In the book, Gandalf talks about this before Frodo even leaves the Shire.

No, he said that in the book Frodo was always taking it to Mt. Doom, that that was the plan. While there was certainly more foreshadowing of this in the book, it wasn't the plan, and thererfore it wasn't a change.



JD - Whenever they talked about being true to the book they never meant in detail. They always couched it in terms of "spirit" and "essence". PJ says that early on they decided they couldn't stick very close in detail, but that as the project went on they found they couldn't stray very far from the general plot and characters. That's what they meant by staying "true" to the book. PJ even said that he wanted the scenary to be as close to the book as possible so the fans would at least feel that they had seen ME even though the story was changed.

[Rían]

I just listened to the director's commentary last night for the first CD. It was really interesting - I got a little more understanding of what works and what doesn't on a film. After all, they DO have to have it appeal to non-LoTR fans, too. It would have been nice if someone with lots of $$ forked up the cash to make a movie that was entirely true to the book, but I can't see how that would happen, so I'll just enjoy what we have, which is really quite good overall, IMHO.

It WAS pretty funny/ironic when they said something was in the book and it wasn't! There's some parts in the movie that really irk me, but overall, I'm very glad it was made - I just kind of ignore the parts that irritate me, and mentally "insert" the real parts. Visually, it was very well done - I really appreciate all of the detail that went into the weapons, etc., and the time they took to teach Legolas to really shoot a bow and arrow (I'm an archer, so I notice!) Notice how nicely he "anchors" at the corner of his mouth every time he shoots, and Aragorn anchors all over the place, because most of his time was spent learning how to use a sword! Anyway, I'm really curious how the Two Towers will come out - I hope it doesn't deviate even more.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by olsonm
JD - Whenever they talked about being true to the book they never meant in detail. They always couched it in terms of "spirit" and "essence". PJ says that early on they decided they couldn't stick very close in detail, but that as the project went on they found they couldn't stray very far from the general plot and characters. That's what they meant by staying "true" to the book. PJ even said that he wanted the scenary to be as close to the book as possible so the fans would at least feel that they had seen ME even though the story was changed.

Well I should hope that even Jackson would manage to produce a LotR movie that has a Ring - being carried by a Hobbit who destroys it in a volcano called Mt Doom. If that's all he meant by "staying true to the books" then I guess even an idiot could have succeeded in that goal.

Also - I never disagreed that Jackson's Middle Earth sets look great. The problem that I have with the movie is the fact that he doesn't really go any deeper than action and scenary. he could have stayed closer to the books than he did - he acts as if fans should be happy and pleased with his movie. Well I'm one of those LotR fans that doesn't buy his propaganda. The movie could have been SO MUCH more than it was, stayed closer to the books and still have been a success. If he had more charactersation and stuck closer to the books - chances are it could have won best picture. As it was - I don't think it should have even have been nominated. And I'm not talking about a regurgitation of the book either - I'm just saying STAY CLOSER to it (likehe constantly said in interviews).

[olsonm]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
Also - I never disagreed that Jackson's Middle Earth sets look great.

Nor did I or anyone else say you did. That was hardly the point of that quote. That quote was to show that PJ DID agknowledge that the story was different.

he acts as if fans should be happy and pleased with his movie. Well I'm one of those LotR fans that doesn't buy his propaganda. [/B]

No, he doesn't. He hopes fans will be happy and pleased with his movie, he simply doesn't feel beholden to their opinions. And accusing everyone who likes the movie of being a sycophant of PJ's is a bit sad. Not to mention thinking PJ has ''propaganda." If people think the movie is exactly like the books then that's their problem, not PJ's. There are more than enough quotes by those involved with the film detailing their willingness to change things.

I never said that you had to like the movie despite the changes. I was always well aware of the changes (some of which were radical) but I still enjoyed the movie. You either like it or you don't.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by olsonm
Nor did I or anyone else say you did. That was hardly the point of that quote. That quote was to show that PJ DID agknowledge that the story was different.


No, he doesn't. He hopes fans will be happy and pleased with his movie, he simply doesn't feel beholden to their opinions. And accusing everyone who likes the movie of being a sycophant of PJ's is a bit sad. Not to mention thinking PJ has ''propaganda." If people think the movie is exactly like the books then that's their problem, not PJ's. There are more than enough quotes by those involved with the film detailing their willingness to change things.

I never said that you had to like the movie despite the changes. I was always well aware of the changes (some of which were radical) but I still enjoyed the movie. You either like it or you don't.

Before anyone got to see the movie - he used to go on in interviews about how he couldn't change this or that because "the fans" would have his head. He now slowly throws in things about deviating from the book and people forget the things he used to say before FotR came out.

He did do a propaganda campaign on the movie. I was reading everything about LotR before the movie came out and listening to his interviews. Now I have a different attitude toward the movie and what Jackson says. What he says now - is different than what he was saying while he was making it.

Oh well - hopefully at some point someone will actually make a movie that does the books and Tolkien justice. As far as I'm concerned, Jackson's movie doesn't come close to capturing the magic of The Lord of the Rings.

[olsonm]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
Before anyone got to see the movie - he used to go on in interviews about how he couldn't change this or that because "the fans" would have his head. He now slowly throws in things about deviating from the book and people forget the things he used to say before FotR came out.

He did do a propaganda campaign on the movie. I was reading everything about LotR before the movie came out and listening to his interviews. Now I have a different attitude toward the movie and what Jackson says. What he says now - is different than what he was saying while he was making it.

I also read all the interveiws and I still don't see what he changed that he promised he wouldn't.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by olsonm
I also read all the interveiws and I still don't see what he changed that he promised he wouldn't.

Well going by Jackson's interviews would you have expected him to have the whole Flight to the Ford scene hacked and that lame line - "If you want him, come and claim him" put in? Would you have expected Aragorn to be running from his heritage (which is completely contrary to the book)?

I expected Arwen and Aragorn to possibly talk more, her to take Glorfindel's place - but not to practically single handedly save Frodo from the ringwraiths.

[olsonm]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
I expected Arwen and Aragorn to possibly talk more, her to take Glorfindel's place - but not to practically single handedly save Frodo from the ringwraiths.

And there you have it, it wasn't what JD expected. To be quite frank, I expected more changes than what they did. I can understand that you would have liked to know before hand about these things, but I don't see them as contradicting what PJ said earlier.


Here's an early interview by PJ.

http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=2728

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by olsonm
And there you have it, it wasn't what JD expected. To be quite frank, I expected more changes than what they did. I can understand that you would have liked to know before hand about these things, but I don't see them as contradicting what PJ said earlier.

No - actually the reason I don't like the movie - is because he turned it into an action film in addition to him having NEEDLESS changes and lack of character development.

[olsonm]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
No - actually the reason I don't like the movie - is because he turned it into an action film in addition to him having NEEDLESS changes and lack of character development.

And when did I say you didn't like it because it wasn't what you expected? I already knew why you didn't like it.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by olsonm
And when did I say you didn't like it because it wasn't what you expected? I already knew why you didn't like it.

Wel you sort of implied that it was because it wasn't what expected when you said this...

And there you have it, it wasn't what JD expected.