0
Usenet Posted 21 years ago
Screenwriting
LOTR: who doesn't like the writing?
Does anyone want to specifically criticize the writing for any of the LOTR movies? I ask not because I have any beefs, but because I've studied these movies to death. I figure, I'd like to be aware of what other people percieve as problems with the writing, whether I agree with them or not. I do note that 'Return Of The King' won an Oscar for 'Best Adapted Screenplay', so I'm also interested in how that squares with people's sensibilities.
-- Cheers, www.indiegamedesign.com Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA
"The pioneer is the one with the arrows in his back." - anonymous entrepreneur
-- Cheers, www.indiegamedesign.com Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA
"The pioneer is the one with the arrows in his back." - anonymous entrepreneur
Top answer
I didn't care for the way that Gimli the dwarf was used for rather crass comic relief at times, especially in the second film. And some of the more plot-based departures from the book struck me as a little odd, but then it would have been surprising if they hadn't: no two people react to a novel in exactly the same way, and any dramatisation is automatically an interpretation , despite the views of died-in-the-wool enthusiasts, who almost invariably believe that there's only one correct way to put a book on the screen. uk
- I didn't care for the way that Gimli the dwarf was used for rather crass comic relief at times, especially in the second film.
- And some of the more plot-based departures from the book struck me as a little odd, but then it would have been surprising if they hadn't: no two people react to a novel in exactly the same way, and any dramatisation is automatically an interpretation , despite the views of died-in-the-wool enthusiasts, who almost invariably believe that there's only one correct way to put a book on the screen.
- uk
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
22 Answers
0
I didn't care for the way that Gimli the dwarf was used for rather crass comic relief at times, especially in the second film. And some of the more plot-based departures from the book struck me as a little odd, but then it would have been surprising if they hadn't: no two people react to a novel in exactly the same way, and any dramatisation is automatically an interpretation, despite the
00
[nq:1]I didn't care for the way that Gimli the dwarf was used for rather crass comic relief at times, especially in the second film.[/nq]
I don't find anything structurally inappropriate about Gimli. You seem to be saying you don't like Gimli's character, or perhaps how John Rhys Davies played him. I don't recall Gimli being 'comic relief' in the books proper, but then, that's the nature of a
I don't find anything structurally inappropriate about Gimli. You seem to be saying you don't like Gimli's character, or perhaps how John Rhys Davies played him. I don't recall Gimli being 'comic relief' in the books proper, but then, that's the nature of a
00
[nq:1]I'm glad they had the sense to veer away from some of the worstchoices. If you watch "The Making Of..." ... some really bad ones. For instance, at onetime they considered having Aragorn battling Sauron in front of the gates ofMordor.[/nq]
More sensible and more pleasing, surely, would have been to use Saruman as "the mouth of Sauron". The way he just disappeared with a throwaway line (i
More sensible and more pleasing, surely, would have been to use Saruman as "the mouth of Sauron". The way he just disappeared with a throwaway line (i
00
[nq:2]I'm glad they had the sense to veer away from ... Aragorn battling Sauron in front of the gates of Mordor.[/nq]
[nq:1]More sensible and more pleasing, surely, would have been to use Saruman as "the mouth of Sauron".[/nq]
Well, that would have been a pretty big departure from Tolkien. I think it's better that "Mouth Of Sauron" was its own weird independent entity. Well, actually I do
[nq:1]More sensible and more pleasing, surely, would have been to use Saruman as "the mouth of Sauron".[/nq]
Well, that would have been a pretty big departure from Tolkien. I think it's better that "Mouth Of Sauron" was its own weird independent entity. Well, actually I do
00
[nq:1]Does anyone want to specifically criticize the writing for any of theLOTR movies? I ask not because I have any ... www.indiegamedesign.com Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA[/nq]
You might find this of interest then. A few years ago I got the chance to interview two of the writers - FRAN WELCH and PHILIPPA BOYEN on the pending theatre release of THE TWO TOWERS.
The editor of SCRE
You might find this of interest then. A few years ago I got the chance to interview two of the writers - FRAN WELCH and PHILIPPA BOYEN on the pending theatre release of THE TWO TOWERS.
The editor of SCRE
00
[nq:1]You might find this of interest then. A few years ago I got the chance to interview two of the writers - FRAN WELCH and PHILIPPA BOYEN on the pending theatre release of THE TWO TOWERS.[/nq]
Thanks for that!
-- Cheers, www.indiegamedesign.com Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA
When no one else sells courage, supply and demand take hold.
Thanks for that!
-- Cheers, www.indiegamedesign.com Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA
When no one else sells courage, supply and demand take hold.
00
[nq:2]More sensible and more pleasing, surely, would have been to use Saruman as "the mouth of Sauron".[/nq]
[nq:1]Well, that would have been a pretty big departure from Tolkien.[/nq]
Er... so what? A book is not a film, and what works well in the one might well be ruinous for the other (and vice versa). In the cinema, Saruman - who was hitherto so prominent and so important - just disapp
[nq:1]Well, that would have been a pretty big departure from Tolkien.[/nq]
Er... so what? A book is not a film, and what works well in the one might well be ruinous for the other (and vice versa). In the cinema, Saruman - who was hitherto so prominent and so important - just disapp
00
[nq:2]Well, that would have been a pretty big departure from Tolkien.[/nq]
[nq:1]Er... so what? A book is not a film,[/nq]
But, the LOTR writing team made a big effort to be faithful to 'the spirit' of Tolkien. While certainly many departures were made, none were so gross as putting Saruman in Mordor. They were more like details of causality. Typically, lines in the book are shifted from
[nq:1]Er... so what? A book is not a film,[/nq]
But, the LOTR writing team made a big effort to be faithful to 'the spirit' of Tolkien. While certainly many departures were made, none were so gross as putting Saruman in Mordor. They were more like details of causality. Typically, lines in the book are shifted from
00
[nq:1]But, the LOTR writing team made a big effort to be faithful to 'thespirit' of Tolkien.[/nq]
Absolutely: this is the first duty of any writer dramatising someone else's material. But I don't believe that my suggestions were anything other than faithful to the spirit of the book. Of course, just what constitutes faithfulness is a very personal thing.
[nq:1]While certainly many departu
Absolutely: this is the first duty of any writer dramatising someone else's material. But I don't believe that my suggestions were anything other than faithful to the spirit of the book. Of course, just what constitutes faithfulness is a very personal thing.
[nq:1]While certainly many departu
00
[nq:1]For instance, instead of the mountain of Caradaras being inherently evil, long before there was even a Sauron or a ... book. Why not Saruman from Isengard? It develops Saruman as an adversary, it moves his part of the story forward.[/nq]
Not to be too persnicketty, but while the book doesn't explicitly say that Saruman is responsible for the Fellowship's troubles on the mountain, it's l
Not to be too persnicketty, but while the book doesn't explicitly say that Saruman is responsible for the Fellowship's troubles on the mountain, it's l
0
Related Questions