![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Had the guys over to watch Maryland dismantle UNC-Greensboro. Did some more thinking about the Peter Jackson films.
I've liked each of them. My estimation for the Two Towers went up with the Extended Edition, which helped me make some sense of Faramir's odd characterization.
By and large, I think Jackson did a good job with what I consider a very difficult story to translate to the big screen. There are really so many stories to tell, and not enough time to tell them in. In the book, many of those tales were relegated to the appendices and even more were left unfinished in the professor's notes.
More than anything else, I think Jackson excelled in capturing the flavor and feel of Tolkien's Middle Earth - from the arms and armor of the warriors, to the Ents, Orcs, and Nazgul - the stunning scenery and wonderful set design. And the realization of Shelob and Gollum as cgi-characters.
Comments, Critiques and Spoilers
As I'd mentioned above, some of my criticism lay not only with Jackson, but Tolkien as well. For example, in 1200 pages, Legolas and Gimli have almost zero characterization or character development. And that's what they are in the film: Token Elf, and his wacky Dwarven sidekick. Legolas has pretty shampoo commercial hair, and cool fighting moves. Gimli is short, gruff, and comic relief. And that's basically it. Not much Jackson could do with that.
But on other scores, Jackson does a fine job with the characterization of the hobbits, giving us enough to tell the difference between Merry and Pippin, and to show their own journeys. Sam is given his opportunity to shine, and he does. We have the big battles, the army of the dead, and the drama of the ring's journey. And the final scenes at the Havens and Sam's return that do close the story in lovely fashion.
Frodo and the Ring
The handling of Frodo, I thing is excellent as well. In the one sense, Frodo fails his biggest test, as he ultimately succumbs to the ring, when he brings it to the seat of it's very power - as Isildur once did an age ago.
And yet, Frodo does not actually fail in his quest. Sparing Gollum pays off. For this, we are shown the rewards and merits of Frodo's decision - both in his mercy and his pragmatism. We see how Sam could carry Frodo, but we do not forget that Sam would never have gotten them to the mountaintop had he set the policy - were Sam the ringbearer, he would have slain Gollum and never made it into Mordor.
Gollum's story is handled nicely as well. Jackson shows how Evil is not always monolithic. Both Sauron and Frodo spare Gollum, Sauron to extend his torments, and Frodo out of mercy. Additionally, each hope that Gollum will lead them to victory. And at the Ring's end, Good triumphs because Evil devours itself.
Also, I do enjoy how Jackson and Elijah Wood portray the four hobbits at the close of the story. How Pippin, Merry and Sam have each grown in their own ways - and how each will become leaders of their people. Though this is not shown as much of Merry and Pippen - largely because the scouring is cut. Frodo, on the other hand - presents a different figure of the soldier. There is limited joy in victory for him, few spoils of war. He does not return feeling a hero, forever remembers the weight he has carried and wounds that never healed. In war, even the best outcomes are often as bitter as they are sweet.
Rohan
One of my favorite aspects of the story has always been Rohan. Theoden and Eowyn, I thought were handled very well. The opportunities this battle presents for both of them - Theoden to redeem himself for his dotage, and Eowyn's chance to escape her cage, and to truly feel like one of her people. The chance to earn glory, from a warrior culture that emphasizes glory in battle because they are so hardened to war on the plains.
I do however wish the Houses of Healing were not cut. Tolkien shows the difference in Eowyn's love for Aragorn and her love for Faramir. It adds greatly to her story and shows Eowyn really growing up, and beyond the shallow attraction she has for Aragorn and what he represents. I also wish we'd gotten some more dialogue from Eomer. He's Eowyn's big brother. The king, and successor to Theoden. With his hulking frame and big manly beard. He's something of a leader himself. Sadly, too much story, too little time.
The White City
Minas Tirith looked and felt exactly as it should. A shining White City, yet also a trapped fortress clinging to the last hopes of life - much like her steward Denethor.
Denethor, painted her as a maddened old man, is something of a tragic figure though this story also is cut. Both by Tolkien himself, and even moreso by Jackson. Boiled down, he's really beauracracy run amok, so proud of his job (which he has executed fairly well) yet so trapped in his pride and bunker mentality, that he cannot perform to the spirit of his post.
The reasons for his disfavor of Faramir and his anitpathy toward Aragorn are not really shown, or told all that much by Tolkien, as each lies buried in the appendicies and backstory occuring some thirty plus years before the War of the Ring. Again, another story I wish were told, though I understand why not.
The War of the Ring
The Battle of the Pelenno Fields was shot very well, though I was a bit less impressed with how Jackson set up the final battle before the Black gate. Missing, was the Parley before the gate, perhaps unecessary, but still a way to show insight into Sauron's largely absent characterization. (and the Dark Lord has characterization, though largely absent from this tale). Also missing, were Gandalf and Aragorn's explanation of why Sauron would send battle against them - namely the expectation that Aragorn had the halfling and the ring of power and intended to use it against him.
Sauron fails to anticipate that the Heir would have the ring destroyed - it is simply incomprehensible that anyone would refuse power when offered, and this is his downfall. In this Sauruman and Sauron reflect Power without Ethics or with Evil bent - both seek to change and shape the world, and are unable to resist the lure of any power that might enable them to do so, and resentful of any who might stand in their way. And both, having forgotten the initial purposes for which they originally sought to make change in the first place.
Here too, I mourn the excising of Saruman's end and the Scouring of the Shire. Again - too much story - too little time. Nevertheless, it adds far more to Tolkien's messages on war and social change. The Shire was once a peaceful oasis, and the Hobbits blissfully ignorant. The War ultimately reaches their doorsteps, and they are now, for good or for ill, a part of the world in ways they hadn't been before.
Also missing - the references to all the battles fought offstage - of Dwarves and men on the gates of Erebor to the north, and the sieges of Rivendell, Lothlorien, and the Mirkwood kingdoms. The Hammerstroke falls on Minas Tirith, but it is a big world and a big war. I'd have wished to seen more signs of that. Again - too much story - too little time.
Aragorn, Arwen, Elrond
This is the one part of the story, where I think Jackson really failed to create something meaningful or affecting.
From Tolkien's story, Arwen is nearly 3,000 years old. Aragorn, nearly ninety. He has been in love with her for seventy years, and she him for forty. The issues revolving around their courtship were hashed out in the past. By this point, both know exactly what their lives are about and are fairly resolved. They only await the conclusion. This, does not a drama make.
The drama truly centers around Elrond - who is not simply Arwen's father. In many ways, he is Aragorn's father as well, having fostered him in Rivendell from toddlerhood. As he had fostered so many of Isildur's line before. And Elladan and Elrohir, the sons of Elrond are foster brothers of Aragorn as well. Should Aragorn fail, Middle Earth is doomed. Should Aragorn succeed, then Elrond will depart the world, the age of men ascendent, and leave behind not only his beloved daughter, but also an Aragorn he is very fond of. Echoing the sense of loss Elrond must have felt over the past several thousands of years as he has watched his human kinsman depart from him. First, when his brother Elros chose a mortal life even as Elrond chose to be an Elf. And later, upon the succeeding generations of Elros' line (Elendil, Isildur and Aragorn among them) each bow to the fate of mortal man.
And Aragorn will lose his foster-father, see the desertion of his home and refuge, and the abandonement of Galadriel's Lothlorien, where he and Arwen first plighted troth.
Jackson's attempt to address anything with the Elrond/Arwen/Aragorn storyline are but poor shadows. Within Tolkien's direct text, he's not given much to work with, but Jackson still fails to pull on any themes. Why the elves are departing the world. And the lingering melancholy that Aragorn, Arwen, Elrond, and Galadriel must feel - this Brave New World victory brings them is not without it's cost. For each, there is an inevitable loss, even in victory.
Of course, I'm also a bit bummed that we don't see the sons of Elrond, or the company of Northern Rangers - Aragorn's own kin. Again - too much story - too little time.
Again. I very much enjoyed the film. Most of the flaws, I felt stemmed from what was already problematic with Tolkien's story. And the constraints of the medium. I can deal. Much of what I love about Tolkien, is not in the story itself, but in the world he creates. Always lurking beyond the trilogies is the weight of his history - the knowledge that there is far more story than Tolkien is able to tell.
And indeed, if one wishes there are appendicies to peruse, the Silmarillion, and all manner of letters and writing fragments Christopher Tolkien has produced. The wacky first drafts, in which Aragorn is a Hobbit named "Trotter". Tolkien's clever conceit that it is not his tale, but rather a slate of mythology that he discovered and was translating.
Jackson gives me that feel as well, and I'm happy with the films I saw. In my heart, they don't replace the books, but they do add to their legacy quite admirably. In the end, they do for me, what George Lucas wishes he could do with the "Star Wars" saga. And Shelob can eat Jar-Jar for lunch any day.
I've liked each of them. My estimation for the Two Towers went up with the Extended Edition, which helped me make some sense of Faramir's odd characterization.
By and large, I think Jackson did a good job with what I consider a very difficult story to translate to the big screen. There are really so many stories to tell, and not enough time to tell them in. In the book, many of those tales were relegated to the appendices and even more were left unfinished in the professor's notes.
More than anything else, I think Jackson excelled in capturing the flavor and feel of Tolkien's Middle Earth - from the arms and armor of the warriors, to the Ents, Orcs, and Nazgul - the stunning scenery and wonderful set design. And the realization of Shelob and Gollum as cgi-characters.
Comments, Critiques and Spoilers
As I'd mentioned above, some of my criticism lay not only with Jackson, but Tolkien as well. For example, in 1200 pages, Legolas and Gimli have almost zero characterization or character development. And that's what they are in the film: Token Elf, and his wacky Dwarven sidekick. Legolas has pretty shampoo commercial hair, and cool fighting moves. Gimli is short, gruff, and comic relief. And that's basically it. Not much Jackson could do with that.
But on other scores, Jackson does a fine job with the characterization of the hobbits, giving us enough to tell the difference between Merry and Pippin, and to show their own journeys. Sam is given his opportunity to shine, and he does. We have the big battles, the army of the dead, and the drama of the ring's journey. And the final scenes at the Havens and Sam's return that do close the story in lovely fashion.
Frodo and the Ring
The handling of Frodo, I thing is excellent as well. In the one sense, Frodo fails his biggest test, as he ultimately succumbs to the ring, when he brings it to the seat of it's very power - as Isildur once did an age ago.
And yet, Frodo does not actually fail in his quest. Sparing Gollum pays off. For this, we are shown the rewards and merits of Frodo's decision - both in his mercy and his pragmatism. We see how Sam could carry Frodo, but we do not forget that Sam would never have gotten them to the mountaintop had he set the policy - were Sam the ringbearer, he would have slain Gollum and never made it into Mordor.
Gollum's story is handled nicely as well. Jackson shows how Evil is not always monolithic. Both Sauron and Frodo spare Gollum, Sauron to extend his torments, and Frodo out of mercy. Additionally, each hope that Gollum will lead them to victory. And at the Ring's end, Good triumphs because Evil devours itself.
Also, I do enjoy how Jackson and Elijah Wood portray the four hobbits at the close of the story. How Pippin, Merry and Sam have each grown in their own ways - and how each will become leaders of their people. Though this is not shown as much of Merry and Pippen - largely because the scouring is cut. Frodo, on the other hand - presents a different figure of the soldier. There is limited joy in victory for him, few spoils of war. He does not return feeling a hero, forever remembers the weight he has carried and wounds that never healed. In war, even the best outcomes are often as bitter as they are sweet.
Rohan
One of my favorite aspects of the story has always been Rohan. Theoden and Eowyn, I thought were handled very well. The opportunities this battle presents for both of them - Theoden to redeem himself for his dotage, and Eowyn's chance to escape her cage, and to truly feel like one of her people. The chance to earn glory, from a warrior culture that emphasizes glory in battle because they are so hardened to war on the plains.
I do however wish the Houses of Healing were not cut. Tolkien shows the difference in Eowyn's love for Aragorn and her love for Faramir. It adds greatly to her story and shows Eowyn really growing up, and beyond the shallow attraction she has for Aragorn and what he represents. I also wish we'd gotten some more dialogue from Eomer. He's Eowyn's big brother. The king, and successor to Theoden. With his hulking frame and big manly beard. He's something of a leader himself. Sadly, too much story, too little time.
The White City
Minas Tirith looked and felt exactly as it should. A shining White City, yet also a trapped fortress clinging to the last hopes of life - much like her steward Denethor.
Denethor, painted her as a maddened old man, is something of a tragic figure though this story also is cut. Both by Tolkien himself, and even moreso by Jackson. Boiled down, he's really beauracracy run amok, so proud of his job (which he has executed fairly well) yet so trapped in his pride and bunker mentality, that he cannot perform to the spirit of his post.
The reasons for his disfavor of Faramir and his anitpathy toward Aragorn are not really shown, or told all that much by Tolkien, as each lies buried in the appendicies and backstory occuring some thirty plus years before the War of the Ring. Again, another story I wish were told, though I understand why not.
The War of the Ring
The Battle of the Pelenno Fields was shot very well, though I was a bit less impressed with how Jackson set up the final battle before the Black gate. Missing, was the Parley before the gate, perhaps unecessary, but still a way to show insight into Sauron's largely absent characterization. (and the Dark Lord has characterization, though largely absent from this tale). Also missing, were Gandalf and Aragorn's explanation of why Sauron would send battle against them - namely the expectation that Aragorn had the halfling and the ring of power and intended to use it against him.
Sauron fails to anticipate that the Heir would have the ring destroyed - it is simply incomprehensible that anyone would refuse power when offered, and this is his downfall. In this Sauruman and Sauron reflect Power without Ethics or with Evil bent - both seek to change and shape the world, and are unable to resist the lure of any power that might enable them to do so, and resentful of any who might stand in their way. And both, having forgotten the initial purposes for which they originally sought to make change in the first place.
Here too, I mourn the excising of Saruman's end and the Scouring of the Shire. Again - too much story - too little time. Nevertheless, it adds far more to Tolkien's messages on war and social change. The Shire was once a peaceful oasis, and the Hobbits blissfully ignorant. The War ultimately reaches their doorsteps, and they are now, for good or for ill, a part of the world in ways they hadn't been before.
Also missing - the references to all the battles fought offstage - of Dwarves and men on the gates of Erebor to the north, and the sieges of Rivendell, Lothlorien, and the Mirkwood kingdoms. The Hammerstroke falls on Minas Tirith, but it is a big world and a big war. I'd have wished to seen more signs of that. Again - too much story - too little time.
Aragorn, Arwen, Elrond
This is the one part of the story, where I think Jackson really failed to create something meaningful or affecting.
From Tolkien's story, Arwen is nearly 3,000 years old. Aragorn, nearly ninety. He has been in love with her for seventy years, and she him for forty. The issues revolving around their courtship were hashed out in the past. By this point, both know exactly what their lives are about and are fairly resolved. They only await the conclusion. This, does not a drama make.
The drama truly centers around Elrond - who is not simply Arwen's father. In many ways, he is Aragorn's father as well, having fostered him in Rivendell from toddlerhood. As he had fostered so many of Isildur's line before. And Elladan and Elrohir, the sons of Elrond are foster brothers of Aragorn as well. Should Aragorn fail, Middle Earth is doomed. Should Aragorn succeed, then Elrond will depart the world, the age of men ascendent, and leave behind not only his beloved daughter, but also an Aragorn he is very fond of. Echoing the sense of loss Elrond must have felt over the past several thousands of years as he has watched his human kinsman depart from him. First, when his brother Elros chose a mortal life even as Elrond chose to be an Elf. And later, upon the succeeding generations of Elros' line (Elendil, Isildur and Aragorn among them) each bow to the fate of mortal man.
And Aragorn will lose his foster-father, see the desertion of his home and refuge, and the abandonement of Galadriel's Lothlorien, where he and Arwen first plighted troth.
Jackson's attempt to address anything with the Elrond/Arwen/Aragorn storyline are but poor shadows. Within Tolkien's direct text, he's not given much to work with, but Jackson still fails to pull on any themes. Why the elves are departing the world. And the lingering melancholy that Aragorn, Arwen, Elrond, and Galadriel must feel - this Brave New World victory brings them is not without it's cost. For each, there is an inevitable loss, even in victory.
Of course, I'm also a bit bummed that we don't see the sons of Elrond, or the company of Northern Rangers - Aragorn's own kin. Again - too much story - too little time.
Again. I very much enjoyed the film. Most of the flaws, I felt stemmed from what was already problematic with Tolkien's story. And the constraints of the medium. I can deal. Much of what I love about Tolkien, is not in the story itself, but in the world he creates. Always lurking beyond the trilogies is the weight of his history - the knowledge that there is far more story than Tolkien is able to tell.
And indeed, if one wishes there are appendicies to peruse, the Silmarillion, and all manner of letters and writing fragments Christopher Tolkien has produced. The wacky first drafts, in which Aragorn is a Hobbit named "Trotter". Tolkien's clever conceit that it is not his tale, but rather a slate of mythology that he discovered and was translating.
Jackson gives me that feel as well, and I'm happy with the films I saw. In my heart, they don't replace the books, but they do add to their legacy quite admirably. In the end, they do for me, what George Lucas wishes he could do with the "Star Wars" saga. And Shelob can eat Jar-Jar for lunch any day.
There is one thing that has always squicked me about Sam in LOTR...
And that's the implication that Sam is one of the least affected by the Ring because he "knows his place".
Re: There is one thing that has always squicked me about Sam in LOTR...
I suppose, knowing one's place/role can be both a good thing, or a limiting thing depending upon circumstances. It's definitely a source of ambivalence in my reading of the story.