Faramir and other changes

I don't think I'll be able to stay awake through it all - 21 hours (including intermissions) I'm thinking, I could watch the first two, then sleep during number 3, 4 and 5, and then wake up in time for 6 and 7 (haven't seen The Half Blood Prince in full yet, only a few scenes)

Yeah, the theatre in Houston is starting the movies at 4:30 AM the day before DH2 comes out and playing continuously right through the midnight showing of the final film. Skipping the middle films sounds like a good plan, though I would probably stick around for PoA and skip HBP if it were me. I'll have to settle for my families "marathon" of watching all seven films over a ~10 day period before July 15, though.

Never liked the Prisoner of Azkaban. Could be because I was too much of a purist back when I watched it, though. Maybe I should give it another go from a more liberal point of view As to the sixth film, I have heard both good and bad things about it, but I should at least watch it before I judge it

I disliked a number of parts about Prisoner of Azkaban (especially the freeze-frame ending), but I thought it was pretty entertaining despite the annoying differences. HBP I strongly disliked when I saw it because it focused so much on a Twilight-esque love triangle, but I re-watched part of it a few months ago and liked it more than I remembered. I'm looking forward to rewatching all of the films and seeing how my perceptions of them have changed since I haven't seen some of them in several years.

"I'm looking forward to rewatching all of the films and seeing how my perceptions of them have changed since I haven't seen some of them in several years."

I second that

Eldorion wrote:

Orwell wrote:Disney Club Penguin... Ahh.... I thought it was a "Penguin Books" forum, perhaps some sort of ultra-literary-highbrow-cynicalist book reading group, not just a safe place for children to play.

I thought the same thing, actually.

janesmith wrote:Petty, Arwen was not a "little" girl, was she? A mature woman is my best guess.

Arwen was still quite young; even by the time she married Aragorn she was not yet 20 yéni old (yén often translated 'year' really means 144 sun years).

Again, while Tolkien may not have thought of it, if the idea had occurred to him, it would not be outside the parameters of what he was capable of allowing his heroines to do. Indeed, I would strongly argue, it would be well within them, Petty. It was the sort of thing Luthien was guilty of, as you know, albeit probably without permission - at least at first.

I can agree that Arwen simply being female does not necessarily restrain her from doing a given heroic act, but there is more to consider here, I think.

I'm not convinced Elrond would have totally forbidden it anyway. It's certainly not "preposterous", no matter how one looks at it - unless, perhaps, one underestimates Tolkien's ideas about his heroines

Well, even if Arwen Halfelven is arguably lesser in potential 'power' than Luthien one could still argue she might try to find and help Aragorn in any event...

... but the particular circumstances surrounding these characters are different: after first meeting Arwen Aragorn ultimately said farewell to her and for nearly thirty years 'laboured in the cause' against Sauron, and after his betrothal to Arwen he 'went forth again to danger and to toil' and Arwen remained in Rivendell and 'watched over him in thought'. To my mind Arwen knew the danger for Aragorn, but accepted it, as well as her role in the hopeful outcome.

So this is the context; and yet suddenly Arwen is allowed, or sneaks out like Luthien, into peril? If not preposterous I would say it doesn't really fit. This isn't the tale of Beren and Luthien here, despite other connections that can be made.


But let's say Jackson decides he wants a different story, and wants Arwen to steal away from Rivendell and potentially put herself in danger to help. Let's even say Jackson decides that the context of Tolkien's tale (the circumstances noted) need not matter within the context of his film.

Even if he does, films still tell stories of course; and as far as I remember Arwen basically 'appears' alone in the woods. If we toss aside Arwen's story (Tolkien's story) to make Jackson's fit, where is the new story that at least attempts, even in brief, to explain her presence at this point? I couldn't accept that Jackson didn't have time to tell it because I can think of instances where he added material, or focused arguably longer than he needed to on fights and battles. I must admit it's been a long time since I've seen this scene, and maybe Arwen makes some brief reference regarding her presence in the woods?

But even if so, I don't recall anything I would call satisfactory story telling with respect to this point. If I remember correctly Jackson substituted Arwen because he wanted to simplify what he felt was too many introductions at this point, for a film. Granted, Glorfindel does not become part of the main storyline of course, and that's an arguable filmic concern, though a general concern as it stands -- meaning that that alone did not necessarily mean specifically Arwen 'needed' to be introduced here, nor in the way she was introduced here; which I already know you agree with.


In any case, Arwen simply being a female doesn't make the film scene preposterous or wholly impossible, no; but to my mind that's a fairly general argument or observation.

I'm not sure PJ's decision wasn't informed by the animated version in which Glorfindel is also substituted in order to introduce a main character earlier- in the animated it was Legolas.
I can see the thinking behind it-why bring in a character which will then just disappear- odd however when people read the book rather than be confused, puzzled or worried by this they tend to be intrigued by it and left wanting to find out more about him.
I see no reason why it would not be the same in film. Espeially if PJ had left the bit in where Frodo sees him as he is on the 'other side' as a shining figure- and given all it takes is one line of dialogue from Gandalf in the book to explain this (and the white horses and why the river rises at all) you'd think room could have been found by cutting out some troll fight or orc fight somewhere.

I have thought a bit about this 'problem' and although I can admit that 'too many introductions' at a given point is an arguable filmic concern, I too am not convinced that employing Glorfindel here would have been necessarily problematic.

Jackson also (again arguably) gave Haldir 'more to do' than the book, for instance, and he isn't a major character; but anyway, if no film director will risk Glorfindel, I actually think Legolas could work well enough (with a brief explanation), or at least work better than what we got with Arwen -- and Arwen could have been introduced even earlier in the film, in a flashback (Aragorn's) as the Company journeyed from Bree to Rivendell.

I think that's a good spot for a flashback actually, as it would take up 'real time' (for viewers) and return to Aragorn and Company in a different looking location -- which might help instill the sense of a longish journey at this point, yet still provide a change of scenery for the audience 'in between', so to speak.

It is all to do with believability, I think. Glorfindel in the book is obviously a powerful figure, but he has a relatively minor role in the events depicted in LotR. His presence hints of the "larger world" of Middle Earth, not just the limited world the audience experiences through the main characters. The technique worked perfectly in the books, why not in the films? For all that, I could have stomached Arwen taking Glorfindel's role; it's just she was handled badly in the first scenes with her - as simple as that. But I liked some of her scenes with Aragorn later on - the ones that conformed best to her story in the Appendix.

"I liked some of her scenes with Aragorn later on - the ones that conformed best to her story in the Appendix."

You should love those bits in the megaedit then! (hint, hint)

I'm getting to it, I'm getting to it! Actually, I've got today off. I'll have another go downloading it - got to walk the dog first, though... ((((Crabbit Scotshobbits! )))))

No wonder I'm crabbit Pure Publications have me working over time trying to organise the concert you are the star of!!!!! I've barely had time to keep up with sampling the buckie barrels as they arrive (well you wouldn't want me to serve any bad buckie- I really mean that, you do not want to drink a bad buckie)

So it comes to this, does it? Every hobbit (((((even his rustic Scotshobbiton relative)))) can unencrypt encryptions!!!! What's Forumshire coming to when you can't make heartfelt (secret) comments about them?

I've been promoted remember?- Admin privelages to mods (whiles he away) . Just as well he hasn't given such powers to say a drunken rambling scotshobbit who might perchance sell every secret going to the NotP in return for a steady supply of buckie. No, we can be grateful Admin hasn't done that.

Does this mean you can unencrypt ALL encryptions, Mr Tyrant? It is an awesome power to have, very corrupting I would have thought, and aren't you already corrupt enough?

Not sure yet. I found all sorts of stuff in the Tower of Lore when Baingil went out shopping for more shoes, not that um I was ever in there of course, and I certainly wasn't snooping for dirt to sell any newspapers, but if I had been I mean, I may have found some intresting powers lying about the place...

Personally, the less I know about "shoes" the better. The sexual connotations of such "leanings" is not to be contemplated - not by respectabillians at any rate. I must seek janesmith's advice. She has some expertise in spells --- which is not to suggest that she is a witch - or that all women are - I'm not suggesting that.

Pettytyrant101 wrote:Not sure yet. I found all sorts of stuff in the Tower of Lore when Baingil went out shopping for more shoes, not that um I was ever in there of course, and I certainly wasn't snooping for dirt to sell any newspapers, but if I had been I mean, I may have found some intresting powers lying about the place...

Of course, all those powers are the evaporating kind. I'm still home, you know. And watching. And I've still got all the really good powers locked up with me.

Oh, and the shoes are a plant. I thought I'd let the tabloids have their fun, too.

I was nowhere near the place, wherever the place is. Reports of me abusing any temporary powers of Admins in his absence are merely the spurrious warmongering of a bitter Banks.

I'm sure Eldo will find the reports amusing!

(((((Err... Petty... I think if One is to tell lies, One best rewrite or delete some of One's previous posts... )))))

Back to Arwen and Aragorn...

If Arwen had played "exactly" the same role as Glorfindel as far as going out to meet Aragorn, and the "love" element was kept (initially) out of it, focusing instead on the drama of Frodo's growing illness and the shadows closing in, then it would have worked nicely for me. The "pressing" need of the situation could have been foremost then - then, later in Rivendell, the romantic scenes between Arwen and Aragorn could still have occurred. Arwen could have been at the Council of Elrond, along with Gloin and Bilbo. What we learned in the book about what was happening at the Lonely Mountain was fascinating (giving as it does a real hint of the rising danger). And Bilbo offering to take the ring to Mount Doom was priceless - a funny and poignant moment for me, always!

Err... is this the Faramir thread? Where's Eldo when you need him?

I predict Baingil will make some witty comment about this post...

Yep, it's the Faramir thread! ...Or used to be.

... I'm a Seer!