If Jackson made "The Silmarillion the Movie"

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
Since anything related to Peter Jackson -- even when it has nothing to do with the Lord of the Rings movies -- has been deemed okay to post in this forum, does this mean a Peter Jackson thread on King Kong would be okay to post here too? What about the cast? Can threads about their future film projects be included there too since this appears to have become the "anything movie-related goes here" forum?

Just wondering.

Actually, in case you haven't noticed, this is a board devoted to the works of JRR Tolkien.The Silmarillion is one of his works. I also know that there is an existing thread that discusses "King Kong" and there is a wager involved, so, what's your point?

[hawaiidevil]

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
Since anything related to Peter Jackson -- even when it has nothing to do with the Lord of the Rings movies -- has been deemed okay to post in this forum, does this mean a Peter Jackson thread on King Kong would be okay to post here too? What about the cast? Can threads about their future film projects be included there too since this appears to have become the "anything movie-related goes here" forum?

Just wondering.

I'm REALLY surprised you aren't a Smelly Orc. You have attitude

[Elf Girl]

Can you quit debating? The admins have spoken. If BB is ever an admin, he can question the other admins' decisions. As of now, he will have to be content with the board rules as they are.

[Cassius]

I can't see it being made into a movie, but I can see a Japanese style cartoon being made out of it. Yeah, probably a good one made by the same guy who did Cowboy Bebop or the Animatrix guys. They could probably do it some justice. Live action just isn't possible, no one would live long enough to finish it.

Oh and by the way, Peter Jackson has better casting skills than you do. I am quite sure you put Pamala Anderson on there for a reason.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Cassius
Oh and by the way, Peter Jackson has better casting skills than you do. I am quite sure you put Pamala Anderson on there for a reason.

I put it there as a way of making fun of jackson. I didn't say that I would cast her - I said he would. I still can not see how he made most of his casting decisions - such as Liv Tyler. The only reason I can think she got the part is because her father must have donated some money.

As for Pamela Anderson - I think it doesn't matter who he cast - the point I was making was that Jackson would some how use his overdone slow motion and turn the Luthien and Beren scene into a look-a-like of the intro to Bay Watch.

[Elvengirl]

Originally posted by jerseydevil

As for Pamela Anderson - I think it doesn't matter who he cast - the point I was making was that Jackson would some how use his overdone slow motion and turn the Luthien and Beren scene into a look-a-like of the intro to Bay Watch.

Oh, the horror I don't want to think about it.

[Elf Girl]

O dear. I don't think I'm going to picture that.

[Cassius]

I think that someone should come up with a cast,*coughjerseymancough* Then we all can criticize it.

[thranduil]

Originally posted by Cassius
I think that someone should come up with a cast,*coughjerseymancough* Then we all can criticize it.

Hey we all have one thing in common, we love lotr's, so lets just all respect each other. But if I saw a sil movie I would really like to see Liv Tyler in it, j/k It would really be good, if they did a closer to the book version this time.

[Elfhelm]

Originally posted by jerseydevil
I have friends whot WRITE screenplays.

I have friends who write, too. Doesn't make me an authority on anything. I repeat, I would like to see the PJ detractors prove that they are capable of writing a better script.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Elfhelm
I have friends who write, too. Doesn't make me an authority on anything. I repeat, I would like to see the PJ detractors prove that they are capable of writing a better script.

I don't have to prove to you - I know what i like and I know what movies are out there. I know that jackson didn't have to change the Flight to the Ford, I know that he didn't have to have the dwarf tossing jokes, I know that he didn't have to have merry farting after eating limbus, etc. As I said - I don't have to prove anything to you. I do NOT think the movies are well done - period. That is my opinion based on many films I have seen.

This is my DVD Collection. This is what makes me an authority on what I like and what can be done in movies. Some movies I like less than others though of course. Some I hardly ever watch. Some I can watch over and over and over again.

[Tuor of Gondolin]

Originally posted by Elfhelm
"I have friends who write, too. Doesn't make me an authority on anything. I repeat, I would like to see the PJ detractors prove that they are capable of writing a better script."
____________________________________________

While I understand your point, it seems a bit too strongly and generally worded. As it stands it bears a resemblance (I'm sure unintentional) to the standard professional athlete's response to criticism the gist of which frequently is:
"You never played the game, so you can't criticise what I do."

Surely it is possible to point out weaknesses of a movie, to suggest ways you think it could be improved, etc. without submitting a script. I don't believe Roger Ebert, for one, has ever written a script or directed a movie.

And bear in mind criticism can be both positive and negative. Therefore, to criticise PJ doesn't necessarily make you a detractor (although, granted, it could).

[Black Breathalizer]

Originally posted by Tuor of Gondolin
Surely it is possible to point out weaknesses of a movie, to suggest ways you think it could be improved, etc. without submitting a script. I don't believe Roger Ebert, for one, has ever written a script or directed a movie.

The real problem that I've witnessed here is that a Tolkien purists cry that Jackson should have done this or that as if he was totally insensitive to the books. The reality is that writing screenplays and editing films of this size and scope was a monumental task.

Tremendous thought was given to each and every scene (much more than any one of us have given here). The issues involved were never as black and white as "should we include this scene or not?" It was a giant jigsaw puzzle of conflicting interests in terms of plot, pacing, character development, and story. It's fine to criticize the films but most of PJ's critics here don't understand -- and don't want to understand -- filmmaking. Their view is that if it wasn't exactly like the books, it was wrong, period.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Their view is that if it wasn't exactly like the books, it was wrong, period.

Well, I have never shared that view. I happen to enjoy the movies, but I do think that there are scenes that deviated way to far from the books, and as I said before, I was somewhat disappointed at the omittion of what I thought was some important characters. Considering the complexity of the books, I don't think that a film could be produced to the exact specifications, but these films could have stayed a little truer to the story IMO. But, I would rather not see a film made of the Silmarillion by anyone.

[Black Breathalizer]

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
Well, I have never shared that view...but I do think that there are scenes that deviated way to far from the books.

I wasn't necessarily referring to your views in my comments above. But I do think your quote illustrates my point because there was a very important rationale behind each and every one of the scenes that deviated from book to film. You may disagree with his choices, but Peter Jackson's ability to bring Tolkien's story to life depending on putting together an elaborate jigsaw puzzle. Move one piece and many others were affected.

[Sister Golden Hair]

The problem many seem to have with that jigsaw puzzle is, how pretty the picture is once it is together.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
Tremendous thought was given to each and every scene (much more than any one of us have given here).

How do you know? Were you there in the editing room? Were you there when they were working on the screen play? :rollyeyes: Unless you were there with Jackson - you have no idea how much thought and care went into destroying Flight to the Ford and so forth.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
...there was a very important rationale behind each and every one of the scenes that deviated from book to film.

And again - you know this how?

[Cassius]

At least we can all agree that there was deviation. I for one wanted to see Glorfindel, since he is my favorite elf in the books. Not to mention the Glorfindel in the Silmarillion. I don't think that the ford scene was a good change, I think that it was a good scene. PJ mentioned something about having female characters playing a larger role because Women Activist groups got after him, IF I heard it correctly. That certainly doesn't totally justify the change, it just shows how the world we live in won't allow things to be exactly the same as it was first written. Some group or another will call you racist or sexist and sue.

[Sister Golden Hair]

Originally posted by Cassius
At least we can all agree that there was deviation. I for one wanted to see Glorfindel, since he is my favorite elf in the books. Not to mention the Glorfindel in the Silmarillion. I don't think that the ford scene was a good change, I think that it was a good scene. PJ mentioned something about having female characters playing a larger role because Women Activist groups got after him, IF I heard it correctly. That certainly doesn't totally justify the change, it just shows how the world we live in won't allow things to be exactly the same as it was first written. Some group or another will call you racist or sexist and sue.

How can PJ be held responsible for what Tolkien depicted?