'Serenity'
A place to talk about movies--Old and new, good and bad, high art and high cheese. It's the place to place your kittens on the award winners, gossip about upcoming fims and discuss DVD releases and extras. Spoiler policy: White font all plot-related discussion until a movie's been in wide release two weeks, and keep the major HSQ in white font until two weeks after the video/DVD release.
Didn't they cast Uma as Arwen, but she had to back out due to pregnancy?
I don't know. But I'm glad if this was how it happened. I just pictured her with dark hair and I think Liv is vividly beautiful. Not that Uma is chopped liver, just not what I in mind for Arwen.
AAAARRRGH!!! No way. Just, ew.
I was kidding about the derrydols, but I think it would have been interesting (and truer to the book, which is always what I want with LotR) to have the barrow-wight sequence. I understand why they made some of their decisions, don't have to like or agree with them.
Even if you just threw him in a little. Plus, as they say in the behind-the-scenes stuff, once you've established the Ring as this irresistable force of evil that starts destroying anybody who puts it on, any character, even just one, who can put it on and laugh at it, or resist its effects in any way, destroys the icon of evil you've worked to build in your film, and renders Frodo's journey void. It's the same reasoning behind the much hated changes to Faramir, which I totally understood and agreed with.
Yeah, but I don't agree with the dumbing-down of the story just because it's a m00vEE. It is complex and not simple, and that's just too bad.
Not that I want to rattle a yardstick around inside that particular hornets' nest....
Whoops, too late. Just file me as Tolkien freak and purist and move on.
(I thought Faramir became more complex, not less)
(and truer to the book, which is always what I want with LotR) to have the barrow-wight sequence.
I did want the barrow wight sequence myself. I wasn't sure how to get them out of it without Tom, but I wanted to see that too.
Whoops, too late. Just file me as Tolkien freak and purist and move on.
Hey, me too. We just diagree on how acceptable particular changes were to each other. For instance, the way a lot of people felt about Faramir is how I felt about not using the exact dialog from the death of the Witch King. I thought the lines they wrote were flat and undramatic, and was quite disappointed to not hear Eowyn say "Begone foul dwimmerlaik, Lord of Carrion, leave the dead in peace."
(I thought Faramir became more complex, not less)
(me too)
Me three.
(I thought Faramir became more complex, not less)
Me too. And I like him better in the movie. Book!Faramir onscreen would have killed the momentum.
I thought Faramir became more complex, not less
I'm not sure I agree with that, but my statement was referring to Sean's statement about the Ring treatment vis-a-vis those who can resist it in the book (Eldest, who is immune, and Faramir, who resists).
Faramir does feel (to me) like a bigger character in a sense in the movie because his screen time feels bigger, but he has tons of backstory depth in the book and isn't mostly a daddyissues duty martyr, which diminished him, in spite of Denham's charismatic performance, in my experience.
But perhaps we should talk about this over in Stinky Hobbits if folks want to carry on?
But perhaps we should talk about this over in Stinky Hobbits if folks want to carry on?
Yes, please.
And whom should I talk to to get a Groundhog Day thread?
(kidding, not trying to be snotty)
(kidding, not trying to be snotty)
You're not fooling anyone!
resists temptation to post this multiple times