Re: The Bigger, Badder, Even More Serious Thread

[Pettytyrant101]

{{ Things are rumbling on as the fall out from Moggs words continue, making it look very much like a Tory civil war is brewing. There are a lot of council elections coming up in a couple of months in Scotland and this is disastrous for the Tories.

'Boris Johnson is facing a brutal snub by not being invited to the Scottish Tory conference in March.
A source said it was “highly unlikely” the Prime Minister would be asked after Scots Tory leader Douglas Ross called for him to quit over party-gate.
It is the latest escalation of a civil war being waged between the Scottish and UK Conservatives.
Of the 31 Tory MSPs at Holyrood, 27 have come out publicly against Johnson after his appearance in the House of Commons yesterday.
Adam Tomkins MSP added there is now some “serious thinking” that needs to be done in Scotland about the links between the party on either side of the border.
Preserving the Union is the top priority for Scottish Conservative MSPs and the co-ordinated strike on Johnson shows they believe he is a recruiting sergeant for the SNP.
It was an action which, without resorting to exaggeration, was without precedent in the history of Scottish Tory politics.'- Daily Record

It has of course given so much ammo to the SNP to say things like this-

"The Scottish Tories are supposed to be the Praetorian guard of the precious Union and the leader of the House has just undermined them and thrown them under the proverbial bus. If this is how the government even treats the Scottish Tories, why should the Scottish people even entertain being any part of their useless Union?”

The question now is what happens next. Do the Tories try to paper over the cracks and hope voters forget about it, unlikely as the opposition party will be dining out on this for years to come. Or do the Scottish Tories separate themselves completely from Westminster Tories and create their own Scottish Tory party? But if they do that it rather makes a mockery of the Tories proper name - The Conservative and Unionist Party if they can't even unite among themselves. And would rather send the signal that Scotland is a separate independent country from England. It currently looks like a no win scenario of Moggs making. }}

[Mrs Figg]

This edifice of Tory/kipper shite is tumbling. This is what you get with the calibre of cretins like Rees-Morgue and Johnson at the helm. Just think, if they hadn't got the congenital flaws of arrogance the pair of them could have happily stayed in power for the foreseeable future, decades even. They were rock solid, 80 majority, but no, the arrogance and disdain for their fellow humans worsted them. It was stronger than them, like Trump's idiocy, it was stronger than him. The sociopathic personality flaws initially fooled the public, but they are narcissists with no depth or intelligence. Rees-Morgue sounds posh, ergo he must be clever, but he isn't, insulting Ross was stupid and spiteful, but then he is fundamentally a stupid and spiteful little weasel. As for Johnson, Long Was This Doom Foretold.

[halfwise]

Where exactly does "Long was this doom foretold" come from?  I tried looking it up, but scratch.

Closest I came is after Osgiliath is over run, an extra says "It's as the Lord Denethor predicted: long has he foreseen this doom."

[Pettytyrant101]

{{ Mogg shows his utter disdain for anything outside the south of England again, when pressed to name the current leader of Wales he couldn't even name them. Says it all. }}

[Mrs Figg]

Where exactly does "Long was this doom foretold" come from?  I tried looking it up, but scratch.

Closest I came is after Osgiliath is over run, an extra says "It's as the Lord Denethor predicted: long has he foreseen this doom."

yep I paraphrased that extra I love his dramatic two seconds of fame.

[halfwise]

Your paraphrase is better, though it doesn't fit into the action. It needs a weightier scene and should be spoken by a monolithic character like Elrond. I was looking for it because I swear I've read it before, though probably from you.

[Pettytyrant101]

{{ the response to that line from Gandalf in the film gets my blood boiling; 'foreseen and done nothing", you couldn't have a single line that more reflects how utterly different from the books the films are. }}

[halfwise]

Yep, there was no Denethor in the film. They painted up some pinata to look like him, but it wasn't him.

[Pettytyrant101]

{{ A quite literal pinanta as it only gets worse resulting in Gandalf of all people physically attacking the leader of Gondor and whacking him unconscious with a stick! }}

[Mrs Figg]

well I liked it.

talking of pinata, "Operation Save Big Dog"

[halfwise]

To me Denethor was perhaps the most interesting character in the books: incredibly noble and competent yet equally crusty because he sees it all being taking away, either by Sauron or by Gandalf trying to hide the fact that he's working to supplant him with Aragorn.  And yet he'll still work with Gandalf; he'll still put up a fight against Mordor even if he thinks it hopeless.  Even the loss of Boromir doesn't cripple him.  He's all twisted up yet too much in command of himself to let it affect his functioning. Among men there arguably wasn't a more capable leader in all middle earth (Aragorn was a leader of nothing of the same scale as yet).  It's only when he thinks he's lost Faramir that he finally crumbles. His end was a tragedy of Shakespearian scale.

But what did we get in the film?  A conceited blithering idiot who refused to do anything except send an attack against Osgilioth.  Not a character you could care about in the least, and actually cheer when Gandalf knocks him out.

[Mrs Figg]

PJ made Denethor unsympathetic for a very good reason. It was to contrast with Theoden. They couldnt have two crusty but noble leaders of men.

[Pettytyrant101]

{{ He took one of the most interesting, nuanced and well written characters in the entire books and turned him into a pathetic pantomime villain to be booed and hissed at. Its an utter travesty of adaptation. Its cheap, crap, lazy writing. But it fits with their stupidly simplified views that everyone needs a character arc and journey to go on and everyone the good guys encounter needs to be an obstacle- see too the utter bastardisation of Faramir among others. }}

[halfwise]

That's the first defence of what they did to Denethor that I've seen Figgs - they never justified it because as far as I can see they didn't even realize they changed him. They explained the change in Faramir, they explained nearly every other change, but not that one. This was inexplicable to me until Gandalf's Beard popped up briefly and said that he thought film Denethor was identical to book Denethor. That's when I realized to my horror that perhaps the coven didn't even realize they had changed him!

But let's suppose you are right, they changed him to contrast with Theoden. After Gandalf cured him I didn't see Theoden as crusty at all, though they made him crusty in film because he was getting no help from Gondor. But even so the contrast should be clear: Denethor is FAR nobler than Theoden. It would have been an easy contrast if they had just stuck to the books. Book Theoden was an idealist who never backed down from a fight once he got his sword back; book Denethor was jaded with all that he knew of the world but holding up against it anyway despite almost certain defeat.

I didn't mind the more jaded version of Theoden they gave us, but I disagree he needed contrast with Denethor. Theoden was more one with the common men; Denethor held himself far above them.

[Mrs Figg]

In the films they gave far more weight to Denethor's love of Boromir over Faramir, and to emphasise this they made Denethor arrogant and unsympathetic. It made more sense dramatically to have this tension made explicit. I like film Denethors portrayal and kind of agree with Gandalfs Beard. The only bit I don't like is Gandalf giving him a thwack on his head.

[Pettytyrant101]

{{ I think you are thinking it through more than the coven did Figg. For me this one is simple, they ordered the films so badly and left so much to do in the final film, like include half of the last book in it, that there was no time left for anything but a crude child's drawing of Denethor. They never gave themselves the room or time to develop him beyond pathetic man and pathetic villain. Neither of which can be said of book version. They turned a heart breaking and sad fall of a mans mind through despair, grief and loss into a joke that needed whacked over the head in comic fashion to deal with, as thats what he had been reduced to in this script. Book and film versions are like night and day in comparison. }}

[Pettytyrant101]

[Lancebloke]

{{ I think you are thinking it through more than the coven did Figg. For me this one is simple, they ordered the films so badly and left so much to do in the final film, like include half of the last book in it, that there was no time left for anything but a crude child's drawing of Denethor. They never gave themselves the room or time to develop him beyond pathetic man and pathetic villain. Neither of which can be said of book version. They turned a heart breaking and sad fall of a mans mind through despair, grief and loss into a joke that needed whacked over the head in comic fashion to deal with, as thats what he had been reduced to in this script. Book and film versions are like night and day in comparison. }}

I always thought that was a conscious decision rather than lack of time. And I think that was to redeem Faramirs actions that they also invented.

[Pettytyrant101]

{{ Faramir isnt redeemed, in PJ's version Denethor is right about him, he let a witless halfling (and youd be hard pushed to find someone more witless than film Frodo the Incompetent) take the Ring into Mordor where, on the film evidence, Frodo is wanting to hand the Ring over to Sauron.
In the films Faramir is first a complete arsehole, lets his men beat the crap out of Smeagol, takes Frodo and Sam prisoner. By their own set up of how they treat the Ring Faramir, having decided not to let them go then going on a long march  to Osgiliath with them in close proximity of the Ring should have been more and more lured by it. But they just ignore that, all their own set up for an entire film worth of how the Ring works in the films just for this ludicrous nonsensical change. Then when they get to Osgiliath he decides to let Frodo go only after witnessing him trying to give the Ring directly to the Nazgul. What? Why would Faramir do that? Surely having decided to take Frodo prisoner seeing him try to give up the Ring to the Enemy would only reaffirm his view taking Frodo to Minas Tirith was the right choice? Especially as the Ring should be working on him by now given his flawed personality up to this point in the film.
Then for  everything after that they try to play him like the book version, but you cant after that as its two completely different personality types. Its a complete mess.
And in the commentary the reason for all this was they felt Faramir had to be an obstacle to Frodo and Sam and so Faramir could have an arc- again their obsession that every character has to be on a journey with obstacles to overcome. No they dont.}}

[Mrs Figg]

I know this is obvious but they needed more drama and stakes in the film as it was an adaptation and they made choices to make it more interesting for the audience. A lot of people hadn't read the books and didn't know about the subtleties. They had to introduce the characters arc in a more dynamic way and I fully understand the Faramir/Boromir/Denethor dynamic. The film makes it easier to understand. It might not show the more complex relationships of the book, but that's because it isn't a book, its a 3 our film. Things in a 3 hour film with so much material to cover in that limited time can never hope to compare with a book. Its unreasonable to expect the audience to warm to Faramir otherwise, he was a subtle guy and most of his motives were in his head and not obvious in the book. I get why they made him the 'outcast' son in comparison to Boromir, they chose to reveal Faramir's bravery in the charge. They chose to see Denethor crumbling with grief at the sight of him, I think it was jolly well done. As I said, the only thing that irked me was the thwacking on the head. That was a bit silly.

[halfwise]

I understand why they changed Faramir, it would have been damned hard to get him right. But their thing with letting Frodo go after he tried to give it to the Nazgul made less sense then Faramir resisting the lure of the ring. I have to agree with Petty that there was a bit of a muddled rush job. This may explain why they missed with Denethor, but the contrast is so large between book and film that I have feel it was deliberate: either they really thought that's what he was like (as GB did) or they thought that would be simpler as Figgs believes. Either way I'd say they done wrong.

[Mrs Figg]

Faramir was a difficult one. If they had been more true to the books he could have appeared like an Aragorn Lite. Therefore I think they consciously made him more ambiguous in the beginning to differentiate him from Aragorn

[Pettytyrant101]

but that's because it isn't a book, its a 3 our film. - Figg

{{ But thats a mess of their own making, by trying to cram half of book two into film 3 along with all of book 3 they screwed themselves over. Book 3 is the shortest of them all, you could tell it fairly accurately with nuance in three hours, let alone the extended editions 4. And its not like there is not enough nonsense that could be cut- did we need Aragorn falling off a cliff from a warg attack for some pretend drama? Did we really need to see a drinking contest between Legolas and Gimli? Did we need Legolas leaping about mumakil like a game character? I could go on and on with stuff thats a complete and utter waste of screen time.
For me the theatrical cuts say it all- they kept that nonsense in and cut out Sarumans end, just ignored a major character they had being building up for two films but kept a bunch of made up nonsense. That says it all really about their priorities. }}

[Lancebloke]

I dont think they would have needed to make him Aragorn Lite.

A Faramir character that does not crave power but will take charge if needed but with the strongest will to do what is right. Cross that with his love for his brother, which was recipricated versus the love for his father, which was not, I think could have shown that he would do what was right even in the face of those things.

And Denethor could have remained the strong, great leader that went toe to toe with something he could never have overcome (a demi-god) and was broken by it.

Where are Gondor's armies.... well, they are in the book and they aren't green.

[Mrs Figg]

but that's because it isn't a book, its a 3 our film. - Figg

{{ But thats a mess of their own making, by trying to cram half of book two into film 3 along with all of book 3 they screwed themselves over. Book 3 is the shortest of them all, you could tell it fairly accurately with nuance in three hours, let alone the extended editions 4. And its not like there is not enough nonsense that could be cut- did we need Aragorn falling off a cliff from a warg attack for some pretend drama? Did we really need to see a drinking contest between Legolas and Gimli? Did we need Legolas leaping about mumakil like a game character? I could go on and on with stuff thats a complete and utter waste of screen time.
For me the theatrical cuts say it all- they kept that nonsense in and cut out Sarumans end, just ignored a major character they had being building up for two films but kept a bunch of made up nonsense. That says it all really about their priorities. }}

Agreed about the added nonsense, and the added nonsense is always the worst part of the films. All the 'entertainment' slapstick stuff PJ likes is always the weakest part of the films, such as you said, the Warg scene, which just wastes time and doesn't feel right. Atmospherically it feels wrong and does zero for the story apart from Aragorn gets to snog Brego. Anyway, agreed about the obvious PJ moments, the impulse for slapstick is obviously stronger than him. But I do give him credit for the way he told a very complex story from different character pov. PJ's impulses for slapstick nonsense took him over in the Hobbit from the moment you find Bilbo and the Dwarves in Bagend its nonsense onwards, and its vulgarity goes full throttle. I give him credit for reining it in in the LoTR's films.