Re: Waiting for 'The Battle of the Five Armies' [2]

by Pettytyrant101 Sat Dec 06, 2014 12:33 am

{{{{{Just dont tell Figg I stole her 'special' eel!}}}}}

by Mrs Figg Sat Dec 06, 2014 12:43 am

Pettytyrant101 wrote:it was the effectiveness of the scene that is the important point. the scene in Dunharrow did a wonderful job- Mrs Figg

That is entirely subjective. I for one dont think it is a wonderful scene, i think its a scene robbed of all its meaning.

that is entirely subjective

But I was deliberately not discussing the subjective matter of if you liked it or not, I was discussing the non subjective matter of why there is nothing left for them to say to each other of significance- and the answer to that is because PJ used it all up already.

that is entirely subjective

And I think that is more than nitpicking.

For me the character of Eowyn is too proud to be blurting out her love for Aragorn at the point she does in PJ's.
When its down to the wire and he is about to walk right out her life and leave her stuck and hopeless, that makes sense, that its then that someone like her would go so far as to be so openly indiscreet about her feelings. Even to become emotional.

so why does she kneel before him and beg him not to go in the book, but not the film. you are arguing for the exact opposite of what happens.

I said before I thought moving some of the content of their final conversation earlier was good adaptation- but to move every last bit of it, especially that final crucial moment of her declaration does not seem like good adaptation to me as it leaves no content for the important moment of their parting, leaving it for me in comparison to the book completely emotionally flat.

you are tripping.

Its an important character moment for her and Aragrorn which I feel was horribly mishandled for the sake of putting a cheap dramatic emotional capstone on PJ's own deviation with Aragorn and the warg fight. He has used it in lesser circumstances not warranted within the personality of Eowyn.

seriously tripping

But that is my subjective opinion. But how Pj used the lines from that conversation is not subjective at all. Those are facts.

doesn't matter one jot. he did a great job

by Pettytyrant101 Sat Dec 06, 2014 12:50 am

You seem Figg to be in a state of some confusion over what is and is not subjective.

Your second pithy declaration of "that is entirely subjective" is utterly wrong as its not a subjective matter that Pj used up all the information from the book from that final conversation. That much is evident and provable.
There is nothing subjective about it at all.

'so why does she kneel before him and beg him not to go in the book'

For the reasons I gave, its down to the wire, this is the crunch moment for Eowyn, she sees Aragorn as her only hope of freeing herself from the life she is stuck in. And he is leaving, without her. Its desperation and pain drives her to it, which is why in the book its so painful to even behold.
Its also important she does reach that low point as it informs her decision to pretend to be a man and to ride to war in the hope of a glorious death.
I think the film version is weaker for not including it.

'seriously tripping'

So you don think their parting is a serious character moment for either of them? scratch

by Mrs Figg Sat Dec 06, 2014 1:02 am

T-ripping. you are the only person, like, on Earth, who doesn't like Eowyn and Aragorns relationship in the films. Everyone else, on Earth, can see its pretty clear whats happening, and thinks its an ok - to great adaptation. The only bit I have heard any beef about is the soup scene, which I agree is pants, but the rest of it is fab. Rolling Eyes

by azriel Sat Dec 06, 2014 1:07 am

Id still like to know what they gave poor old Viggo in that scene ? Did they prank him & give him witchetty grubs in cod liver oil & petrol ? Cos thats what it looked like !

by Pettytyrant101 Sat Dec 06, 2014 1:09 am

Being a lone voice does not automatically make me wrong however.

And had PJ done everything the same with the sole exception of keeping back her declaration of love for that final desperate parting I would have no issues at all with how it was handled.
My issue is with using up everything in that conversation before the story gets to it, leaving nothing of import or significance still to be said, and where Pj moved the declaration to in the story, which was too early and for reasons more concerned with his own invented Aragorn stuff than with Eowyn's character or development.

As usual if they had only had more trust in Tolkiens characters and his story telling they could have got this right.

And I am not saying what they did does not work at all, I am saying it does not work anywhere near as well as it does in the original and their reasons for changing it are poor and down to yet another of their hasty last minute rewrites.

by Mrs Figg Sat Dec 06, 2014 1:21 am

she didn't need to tell him at the final parting, he knew already, he was just more prepared, it changed nothing, it alters nothing, the intensity is the same, you just don't like anything PJ does no matter how insignificant the change. The reasons PJ changed it, is why you don't like it, ie, Eowyn in Helms Deep, that's what you don't like, its the fact she is there at all, and that's why you cant see how effective it is, its because you are prejudiced from the get go. you were never going to like it. You cant get your head round Eowyn being in Helms Deep to begin with, let alone beginning her doomed relationship thing. I bet you anything that if that scene had been played out somewhere else you wouldn't even have noticed.

by Pettytyrant101 Sat Dec 06, 2014 1:30 am

Now you are just making wild assumptions about what I would or would not like based on nothing.

I can assure you I would have noticed no matter where it was moved to- the parting is one of my favourite scenes in the books.
My problem with the scene is with the final parting scene- I made no mention of it being a problem she is at Helms Deep- my problem there is with giving her early the declaration of love line in circumstances which are not warranted for her development, or her book character, and as an emotional capstone on PJ's invented Aragorn warg cliff debacle.

I think the parting scene is one of Tolkiens strongest character scenes in TT and one of the reasons people remember the whole Eowyn/Aragorn thing so fondly from the books is in no small part down to the strength of the writing in that scene and the power of it.
PJ wastes it on something trivial by comparison and thats my problem with it.

by Mrs Figg Sat Dec 06, 2014 1:40 am

but thats were you are wrong. its not trivial, its perfect. I prefer PJs version of their relationship, is just as real and poignant and it makes better sense, it flows better. There is absolutely no logical grounds for complaint. its your own personal take on things, based on dislike for Aragorns Warg encounter and her being there.

by Pettytyrant101 Sat Dec 06, 2014 1:48 am

More unfounded assumptions!

For the record I actually think having Eowyn and the folk there makes cinema sense- there are families in the caves in the book from the region round Helms Deep but it would take a bit of explaining, so easier to use the people the audience has already seen. Having Eowyn there to care for them in some way mirrors her book duty to take them to Dunharrow, and it also gives a 'known face' to the faceless folk- so no I dont have a problem with that element.

I dont like the Aragorn warg thing, its a shoehorned in last minute change to get Arwen in the story and Eowyns reaction doesn't ring true because like the scene itself it all feels contrived and without weight and is immediately forgotten about as there is a huge battle to fight which overshadows the importance of her words. Also coming immediately after the Awen scene robs it of some of its power.
The context is all wrong.

And in comparison to the book those are trivial reasons.
Her declaration coming at their parting seems much more natural, much more dramatic, leaves something of import still to be revealed and is highly effective in setting up her emotional state of mind just prior to her decision to ride to war and its not overshadowed by bigger more immediate threats.

by bungobaggins Sat Dec 06, 2014 2:19 am

Okay, maybe I'll eat my words on this someday, but re-watching that clip of Smaug and Bard, I thought to myself: I'm actually kind of glad that they took some time to get to know Bard in DOS, because there seems to be some weight to the scene, and we know who the hero is, and maybe even care about him a bit. Shrugging

by bungobaggins Sat Dec 06, 2014 3:36 am

I've listened to just over half of the BOFA soundtrack. Wow, this is some really uninspired music. It sounds like Shore really phoned most of it in. There are some nice moments, but overall it's very generic and straight leitmotif. Shore does vocal parts really well, and those moments do tend to stand out, and I'm hoping we'll actually get those moments in the movie. It will be interesting to see how much of the soundtrack actually ends up in the movie; I know with the last two there were great big chunks of music missing or replaced in the final film.

by Eldorion Sat Dec 06, 2014 3:42 am

bungobaggins wrote:Okay, maybe I'll eat my words on this someday, but re-watching that clip of Smaug and Bard, I thought to myself: I'm actually kind of glad that they took some time to get to know Bard in DOS, because there seems to be some weight to the scene, and we know who the hero is, and maybe even care about him a bit.

I totally get what you mean. Bard is largely an incidental character in the book and his slaying of Smaug does pretty much come out of nowhere. I don't think that's a flaw with the book, because the focus is kept so squarely on Bilbo and his perspective, and because the general tone is not one that is overly concerned with larger political and military matters. But it is kinda weird and I do know some people who were unhappy with the way it played out in the book (though I think that having Bilbo or the Dwarves kill the dragon would have undermined the whole book in a subtler way). Given the overall changes to tone and perspective in the films, it would be senseless not to have developed Bard more.

by Tinuviel Sat Dec 06, 2014 4:14 am

He's the only character I could see that being a proper justification. All the dwarves getting more character? NOPE. Not needed really. They're characterization in the books was enough for me. I never wanted to know more about any of them (except maybe Gloin, and Fili and Kili simply because they were royalty in a sense {something I feel like was casually mentioned in the book and kind of took me off guard. Also made me not care when they died. I was like "Why them?"]).

by Pettytyrant101 Sat Dec 06, 2014 6:42 am

I'd agree in an adaptation that Bard does need more set up than in the book. I don't think it needs to be overdone but it is probably essential.

Looking at the first two films and the detailed break down of what we know is in the third other choices seem bizarre however.
From a scriptwriting pov Beorn shouldn't be in these films. Even his cut down TE appearance is completely unnecessary to the story as they present it.
The give him whole scenes of exposition, setting up his past as the sole survivor of his people at the hands of Azog.
It has all the hallmarks of a later resolution. But we now know that in fact he has no resolution and only a brief appearence counted in seconds in the final film.
Really, given that, there is no reason for the stop at his house the story could have gone from the mountains straight to Mirkwood without losing a thing in the TE.

And its not the only example of these things being awkwardly or outright poorly done.
Given the Dol Guldur story line seems to be resolved in two short scenes spending the amount of time they did on setting it up, Radagast going to DOol Guldur fighting the Witchking, bringing the blade back, the entire WC, Beorn talking about the Necromancer, Gandalf finding the mark of the eye at Mirkwood and then going with Radagast to the Fells. Gandalf going to Dl Guldur, meeting Thrain, the whole fight there and the reveal of Sauron- its a large chunk of running time for very little pay off.

Then there is the set up of Dale and the Black Arrow launcher thing- it gets two flashback scenes entirely dedicated to it for no apparent reason as it doesn't even appear in the final film.

As far as the script goes, even taken aside from adaptation merits, its very poor and clumsy and is full of dead end writing that goes nowhere.

by azriel Sat Dec 06, 2014 1:13 pm

WC, meaning water closet, meaning toilet, which is where some parts of these films should go.

by Mrs Figg Sat Dec 06, 2014 2:59 pm

They lost my interest the moment they cast a young handsome actor. I find Luke Evans a bit Orlando Bloomesque, he is there to look good, be heroic blah blah blah. Bard wasn't a generic Hollywood hottie, he was probably middle aged, grim, stern of face, and a total loner, probably a bit more like an outcast Dunedain than anything else.
Dont like the cute family either.

by Pettytyrant101 Sat Dec 06, 2014 3:38 pm

Got to agree there Figg- film Bard is generic and as expected- Tolkien never did anything generic or expected because he was too disinterested in popular culture to know what was generic and expected.

by azriel Sat Dec 06, 2014 3:39 pm

I didnt like the cute family either, & a dwarf popping up thru the Karzee thru me off course Shocked

You just dont think of things like that, queueing up for the public loo, where would you hide it ?
Mirkwood..............muckwood
Erebor..................Arseissore
Laketown..............Leaktown

by Pettytyrant101 Sat Dec 06, 2014 3:40 pm

by feanor 1999 Sat Dec 06, 2014 4:13 pm

Ayup...

What absolute TOSH !

That video. PJ saying that Sauron Initiated the BO5A... Bollocks ! It was initiated by the wealth of Thror being won back by Bard via Thorin and co. Not because of the Dwarf/Goblin war. It was the sheer greed over the size of the Hoard that started it all, because it was thought that the dwarves had perished in the attempt and was lying about free-for all. Bollocks ! 'The first war of the Lord of the Rings' ? Bollocks ! Bollocks ! Bollocks !

The danger from Gandalfs POV was that the Quest would fail if the dwarves marched to Erebor all Bolshy and tried to assault Smaug by force. Thats why he needed Bilbo as a 'Burglar' to sneak in quietly using Thrains key, that he only got by chance. I dont know how he thought that the dwarves could kill Smaug, but it seems old Gandy was prepared to wing it and trust to luck that the dragon would be ousted and killed by the company somehow. His greatest worry though was for the mission to fail, and Sauron have a live dragon to use up North and Tie Galadriel and Elrond down whilst Sauron kicked Gondors Arse ! Its fookin' amazing the brass neck Boyens and PJ have ! I'm gobsmacked. Tie TH into the LOTR, fair enuff, but to suggest Sauron initiated the BO5A is outrageous ! Burn him ! LOL.

Jason, I've always seem Eowyn as a tragic figure, and not a schoolie either. I think it was because there was no-one to 'Love' her, or for her to Love romantically in Edoras. She turned the anger and yearning and lost Hope she felt into sword-craft and being a shield-Maiden and was thinking of getting herself killed in battle at the earliest opportunity, because that lack of Love hurt her so deeply. she felt that she was unable to love and to be loved, so in the end she only saw herself being able to function as a soldier. But then of course, Aragorn turned up. A Rock Star. Dunedain. Charismatic, and she tried to attach herself, (or imprint herself as is the modern term) onto him. Aragorn tries to cool her down, but she cant (or wont) do it, and when she finds about Arwen and Aragorns Legacy, she gives up totally and resolves to fall in Battle ASAP. Luckily for all concerrned apart from the Witchking, she wins through, even after the loss of Theoden. And so it seems that she gets her reward, being able to hook up with another semi-tragic figure, (but for different reasons) Faramir, and so they were able to heal each other through their private anguishes, and find Love. Hooray !

by feanor 1999 Sat Dec 06, 2014 4:32 pm

Eldorion wrote:
bungobaggins wrote:Okay, maybe I'll eat my words on this someday, but re-watching that clip of Smaug and Bard, I thought to myself: I'm actually kind of glad that they took some time to get to know Bard in DOS, because there seems to be some weight to the scene, and we know who the hero is, and maybe even care about him a bit.

I totally get what you mean. Bard is largely an incidental character in the book and his slaying of Smaug does pretty much come out of nowhere. I don't think that's a flaw with the book, because the focus is kept so squarely on Bilbo and his perspective, and because the general tone is not one that is overly concerned with larger political and military matters. But it is kinda weird and I do know some people who were unhappy with the way it played out in the book (though I think that having Bilbo or the Dwarves kill the dragon would have undermined the whole book in a subtler way). Given the overall changes to tone and perspective in the films, it would be senseless not to have developed Bard more.

Ayup Eldo...

Shirley Bard IS important because he was the Heir of Girion. I always got the feeling that after the loss of Dale, Girions bloodline was sidelined by people LIKE the Master, who bled Esgaroths profit from trade with the elves (amongst others), but there was nothing Bard or his heirs could have done about it. The people knew, but the master and his ilk were too powerful and had the trade, and thus the peoples livings by the balls, so they depended on his (the masters) patronage as it were, and were prepared to put up with it. But Bard came through, and after Smaugs death, the river did indeed run with gold, and the prophesy was fulfilled.

by Mrs Figg Sat Dec 06, 2014 5:04 pm

feanor 1999 wrote:Ayup...
Jason, I've always seem Eowyn as a tragic figure, and not a schoolie either. I think it was because there was no-one to 'Love' her, or for her to Love romantically in Edoras. She turned the anger and yearning and lost Hope she felt into sword-craft and being a shield-Maiden and was thinking of getting herself killed in battle at the earliest opportunity, because that lack of Love hurt her so deeply. she felt that she was unable to love and to be loved, so in the end she only saw herself being able to function as a soldier. But then of course, Aragorn turned up. A Rock Star. Dunedain. Charismatic, and she tried to attach herself, (or imprint herself as is the modern term) onto him. Aragorn tries to cool her down, but she cant (or wont) do it, and when she finds about Arwen and Aragorns Legacy, she gives up totally and resolves to fall in Battle ASAP. Luckily for all concerrned apart from the Witchking, she wins through, even after the loss of Theoden. And so it seems that she gets her reward, being able to hook up with another semi-tragic figure, (but for different reasons) Faramir, and so they were able to heal each other through their private anguishes, and find Love. Hooray !

Agreed, at least Peejers got that story right. Wink

by Pettytyrant101 Sat Dec 06, 2014 5:10 pm

If only

by Mrs Figg Sat Dec 06, 2014 5:45 pm

he did. with knobs on. Nod