Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FraserRonald" data-source="post: 541616" data-attributes="member: 7892">Before I begin my rant (and it’s a long one) let me warn everyone that there are lots of spoilers. Read this only after seeing the movie. Also, this is all just my opinion. While a fan of the novels, I haven’t read them in a bit. I’m not a purist. However, I couldn’t just turn off my critical faculties while watching the movie, and I don’t think I should have to.If you are still interested in reading my thoughts, read on.While I would absolutely recommend seeing the movies, and there are some really great moments, Peter Jackson has strayed quite far from the source materiel and, unlike “Fellowship of the Ring”, has done so without any apparent logical purpose.However, if you have never read the book, while there are problems with plot (extraneous elements that seem to serve no purpose and weak or stereotypical characterization are the two biggest cinematic problems having nothing to do with adaption) they are minor and should not impede your enjoyment. I would love this movie much more if I had never read the book. However, having read the book, and as this is an adaption, I cannot divorce it from its source material.There are many minor quibbles that can be ignored, such as the attack of the Warg-Riders in Rohan, Theoden actually being possessed by Saruman rather than just being a victim of poor counsel and ruinous neglect, and Smeagol ridding himself of Gollum until the betrayal by Frodo and capture by Faramir’s rangers. These are all examples of changes made that, in some cases, make for better cinema and action and in other cases are just easier for the viewing audience who haven’t read the book to understand.However, the massive changes made to some of the characters seem like missteps. Two glaring examples are Faramir and Theoden. Faramir, in the book, is an example that the men of Gondor are not all Boromir, thirsting for power, but rather some still have the blood of Numenor flowing their veins. Also, the genuine nobility of Faramir is what draws Eowyn to him, why they marry and flourish. Now, Mr. Jackson might be getting rid of that romance all together, which would be odd since he gives so much time to the romance of Aragorn and Arwen. However, who knows? The Faramir of the movie is simply Boromir 2 (He’s back, he’s not Sean Bean but he still wants the ring, it’s “Faramir: Boromir 2, the Revenge”!). And what, pray tell, moves him to change his mind? Is it that sappy, maudlin speech by Sam? (Someone mentioned to me that it proves Sean Astin is a great actor because that particular viewer didn’t have an overwhelming urge to throttle him after such rank cheerleading) I mean, the fact that the Nazgul want it should make him more adamant about not sending Frodo into Mordor rather than making him print up Frodo’s ticket. This Faramir only reinforces the fact that there’s a good reason Aragorn doesn’t want to be King of Gondor, ‘cause everyone in Gondor is such a bastard.And then there’s Theoden. In the book, once the clouds are lifted, once the work of Grima’s whisperings has been reversed by Gandalf (and not through exorcism, but we won’t go there), Theoden becomes a decisive, strong king, understanding the threat to Rohan and acting to counter it. In this movie he’s in denial, apparently still senile, and while physically strong, is not decisive until the very end, egged on by Aragorn.I think I see what Peter Jackson is doing. How many of you have not completely erased “Star Trek: Generations” from your mind? Remember the young captain of the new Enterprise, the guy played by Ferris Bueller’s buddy? How did such an indecisive idiot get to be captain of the flagship? The reason was so that Kirk could get to show how decisive and heroic he was. However, it is easy to be a hero among weaklings. Theoden is not allowed to be a powerful king and Faramir is not allowed to be noble so that Aragorn can stand all the higher. Heck, even Legolas (who was quite willing to chase down and possibly die in the attempt to wrestle Merry and Pippin away from countless Uruk-Hai) loses hope and worries about death. Only Aragorn stays strong. Problem is, how big of a hero are you if you are the only one who is heroic? Not much.I laughed at the portrayal of Gimili, and I don’t mind them turning him into comic relief because he’s still such a bad-a$$ with an axe, but I much prefer the serious and dour Gimili of the books, because when he is touched by joy and wonder (by Galadriel and in the Glittering Caves) the glimpse of his interior we see is more astounding due to its rarity. However, that’s a minor quibble at best.So, yes, a feast for the eyes. Helm’s Deep and Gollum are worth the price to see the movie. The battle scenes are great. The special effects are excellent. Definitely worth the price of admission. I’m very saddened, though, that Peter Jackson has lost what he had in “Fellowship of the Ring”, which was the sense to know what to change and what not to. I cannot find any compelling reason for the changes he made, other than arbitrariness.In any case, thanks for letting me vent. This is all definitely the beginnings of a review that will go up later at <a href="http://www.atfantasy.com" target="_blank">http://www.atfantasy.com</a> , though probably not until after Christmas.Take care all!</blockquote>

Verification