Re: Critics review 'Desolation of Smaug' | POSSIBLE SPOILERS

by Pettytyrant101 Fri Dec 13, 2013 3:40 pm

An Oscar is just a tool to judge how well (financially) a film grossed. - Azriel

Putting aside My Cousin Vinny, my final belief in any credibility the Oscars held died when PJ got a hatfull for the worst adapted screenplay ever committed to film (until he started on TH at least Evil or Very Mad

)

by Tinuviel Fri Dec 13, 2013 3:40 pm

Radaghast wrote:He's a slave to tradition, I guess

Or to MGM and the powers at be. I don't think he has a choice. He has to have his script and everything approved by his superiors. So that's why it has to be "cinematic." That doesn't excuse him from his other sins.

by Eldorion Fri Dec 13, 2013 3:41 pm

azriel wrote:I remember that scene, I remember the uplifting "we beat it" music, I remember Frodo with the "oh well,its gone,lets go home" attitude as he & Sam wait 5yrds away from noxious fumes & lava, reminiscing over old times.

:?:Frodo and Sam seemed very much resigned to death in the scene on Mount Doom. Frodo was almost welcoming of it, while Sam had a ton of regrets. The discussion about the Shire wasn't a "let's go home" moment, it was a "let's try to think happy thoughts in our last minutes on Earth" moment.

azriel wrote:An Oscar is just a tool to judge how well (financially) a film grossed.

The Oscars have plenty of issues, but they're not at all based on how much money a film grossed.

by Eldorion Fri Dec 13, 2013 3:44 pm

Tinuviel wrote:Or to MGM and the powers at be. I don't think he has a choice. He has to have his script and everything approved by his superiors. So that's why it has to be "cinematic." That doesn't excuse him from his other sins.

PJ has always had a ton of autonomy when making his Middle-earth movies. MGM wasn't involved with LOTR, but when Miramax tried to make him go down to one film, PJ upped and moved the entire project to New Line, who gave him a very loose leash.

by Bluebottle Fri Dec 13, 2013 3:44 pm

Pettytyrant101 wrote:An Oscar is just a tool to judge how well (financially) a film grossed. - Azriel

Putting aside My Cousin Vinny, my final belief in any credibility the Oscars held died when PJ got a hatfull for the worst adapted screenplay ever committed to film (until he started on TH at least )

Still they gave him none for AUJ, so they have some taste. slap laugh

by Eldorion Fri Dec 13, 2013 3:47 pm

I'm pretty sure that the "Best Adapted Screenplay" Oscar is not actually evaluating how well (faithfully) the script is adapted. It's just a category for screenplays that are not based on original story ideas. I used to bitch about this myself, but at this point I feel like it's a somewhat off-base complaint.

And again, I really wish I lived in your world where the majority of movies are so fantastic that LOTR looks like crap next to them. Rolling Eyes

by Bluebottle Fri Dec 13, 2013 3:52 pm

Yeah, I would still say that the quality of the screenwriting on the LotRs films is far from the sort of quality that should be honoured by prestigious awards though. Shrugging

My problem with the adaptation aspect is that the changes they make creates logical paradoxes and end up jarring with the story portrayed in the films. And that's because they don't take care of the inner logic in Tolkiens story.

by Eldorion Fri Dec 13, 2013 4:02 pm

Yeah, the inconsistencies have always bugged me. That's what you get for messing around with such a finely-tuned setting though. Plot holes don't bother me too much unless they're really glaring, though.

by Bluebottle Fri Dec 13, 2013 4:20 pm

Yeah, that's why I can nothing but shake my head at people on Torn calling the changes improvements.

I don't think Tolkien gets enough credit for his writing. And that's really one of the things that bug me about the entier movie debate. The quality of Tolkiens writing is often lost in the discussion.

by azriel Fri Dec 13, 2013 4:31 pm

My statement about Sam & Frodo letting go of The Ring was really how I interpreted that ending. I dont truly believe the ending was powerful enough, but, there's my argument about how 100 people can watch an accident & how everyone gives a different story, I felt it could have been stronger & you felt it was a great ending. Im not saying any ideas are the ones to be held, its just how it felt for me ? Wink

after all that pain & struggle, loss & fear, to get rid of this evil, & the ending on Mount Doom seemed a bit limp, in my feeling? Shrugging

I didnt mean to sound bolshi, Im sorry if I did ! Embarassed

by Pettytyrant101 Fri Dec 13, 2013 4:36 pm

I think Eldo is cranky- thats the word which describes Americans who are going to see DOS in a few hours and are trying to hide from themselves the horrible truth that they are crabbit about it.
Its unhealthy, I try to teach them, but do they listen?! Bloody well not, its enough to make a person crabbit and in need of a buckie. Evil or Very Mad

by Mrs Figg Fri Dec 13, 2013 4:55 pm

Pettytyrant101 wrote:The end result is the same, the book and the film just go about it in slightly different ways.- Mrs Figg

I dont see how the end result can be the same.

Book Frodo- unable to act any further, watches the Ring go into the fire without any rejection of it and still desiring it but too overcome with pain and suffering to do anything about it.

Film Frodo. watches the Ring go into the fire without any rejection of it and still desiring it exactly like the book

Consequently he suffers from still desiring the Ring and a crushing sense of loss for it.
Arwen, to ease him when this pain is at its worse, gives him the jewel on the necklace to wear where the Ring once hung.
He never recovers however and finally he takes ship in the hope he can be healed.

Film Frodo, tells Sam he is going to the havens because the Shire is saved BUT NOT FOR HIM. because HE NEVER FULLY RECOVERS and finally takes to the ships

Film Frodo- is still capable of a vigorous physical confrontation with Gollum and is equal responsible for it going over the edge and into the fire.
He then hangs off the cliff whilst the Ring sits on top of the lava undestroyed.
Sam warns him not to let go and Frodo then chooses to take Sam's hand and only after he makes that choice do we see the Ring finally sink to be destroyed.
In the medium of film the link is quite clear, and Frodo's decision is met with the suitable triumphant music.
Film Frodo therefore not only takes part in the Ring going in, he also makes a choice to not follow it and to go on living.

of course he chooses to go on living, he does so in the book also.

That Frodo therefore has no reason to take the ship in the film, and the most he seems to suffer in the film is feeling that he cant fit back in again after all he has seen and the occasional twang in his shoulder.

wrong. he has every reason to take to the ships, he failed in his quest like book Frodo

That two versions are fundamentally different in every way. I dont see how the end result can be the same.

end result. exactly the same

by Radaghast Fri Dec 13, 2013 5:07 pm

Mrs Figg wrote:That Frodo therefore has no reason to take the ship in the film, and the most he seems to suffer in the film is feeling that he cant fit back in again after all he has seen and the occasional twang in his shoulder.

wrong. he has every reason to take to the ships, he failed in his quest like book Frodo

The way the movie depicts it, Gollum wouldn't have fallen without Frodo's interference.

by Mrs Figg Fri Dec 13, 2013 5:13 pm

I think really all this is just quibbling about minor alterations for the sake of it. The end result is the same, the message is the same, the story is the same, its just a few details were tweeked for the film.

by Elthir Fri Dec 13, 2013 5:14 pm

By the way, for those who have seen the second film...

... who is Elros in it? What does he do? Although I assume it's a minor part.

by Pettytyrant101 Fri Dec 13, 2013 5:16 pm

watches the Ring go into the fire without any rejection of it and still desiring it exactly like the book- Mrs Figg

At the moment when it goes in yes, not at the moment when he rejects it and makes the choice to reach for Sams hand.
And only then is the Ring destroyed. Up till then its just floating on the top waiting.

"because HE NEVER FULLY RECOVERS"

The film doesn't really show him suffering, there is no scene where Sam comes in to find him grievously ill and then realises the date, we never hear his lamentations and cries.
We get no real indication of how withdrawn he has become and how unimportant to his own people.

And most tellingly for me the only scene PJ can base on the book and have Arwen, a character he has invented scenes for just to get her in the films more, interact with Frodo he leaves out.
Why? Because it doesn't fit with what PJ just showed the audience. Frodo rejects the Ring and its destroyed, so is the reason for her to give the gift.

That and of course, having made that choice at the Cracks of Doom the only thing he really has to recover from is a sore shoulder he occasionally has to rub and some bad memories, and when it comes to those Sam seems to do fine.

"of course he chooses to go on living, he does so in the book also."

No he makes no choice at all in the final moments of the book, that's the whole point. He has endured to his last, there is nothing left to give, not physically, not mentally, not spiritually, he gave himself to the Ring and claimed it for his own and then lost it and now he is broken and unable to act further.
All is hopelessly lost Frodo has failed.
This is completely necessary for the ucatastrophe to occur, for it to seem like a hand of Providence has stepped in when all is lost to reward Frodo's self sacrifice and his pity of Gollum.
If Frodo is proactive the whole point is lost. If he makes a concious choice to reject the Ring and chooses to go on living it destroys the point.

Tolkien points out that after the Coronation Frodo begins to to be troubled, which is when Arwen first notices it and Tolkien goes onto say that Frodo had expected to die, but had not and had gone on living and still regretting the loss of the Ring.
He did not make any choices at Mt Doom at the end, let alone a choice of hope.

"he failed in his quest like book Frodo"

No he didn't, he successfully, all be it accidentally, put Gollum over the edge with the Ring. In PJ's version had Frodo not assaulted Gollum the Ring would not have been destroyed at all. No Providence. Thus destroying Tolkiens entire purpose in one fell swoop.

"end result. exactly the same"

I still beg to differ.

by Radaghast Fri Dec 13, 2013 5:17 pm

Mrs Figg wrote:I think really all this is just quibbling about minor alterations for the sake of it. The end result is the same, the message is the same, the story is the same, its just a few details were tweeked for the film.

I guess I'm ambivalent about this part (though I still think this scene is nigh unwatchable), but considering everything else PJ got wrong about Frodo, I'm not inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. He has forsaken story points in favor of cinematic purposes before. A lot.

by Pettytyrant101 Fri Dec 13, 2013 5:37 pm

For me its the crux of the book and should be the crux of the film.

What Tolkien gives us an implied religious revelation, that the actions of the players leading to this moment dictates the results according to a greater plan.

What PJ gives us is entirely secular. Two people get into a heated tussle and fall off the edge.

For me its the worst single sin the scripts commit in all three films because its so important.

by Tinuviel Fri Dec 13, 2013 5:43 pm

Elthir wrote:By the way, for those who have seen the second film...

... who is Elros in it? What does he do? Although I assume it's a minor part.

He's the guard with the keys. He gets drunk. That's pretty much it.

by Carcharoth Fri Dec 13, 2013 5:46 pm

Pettytyrant101 wrote:For me its the crux of the book and should be the crux of the film.

What Tolkien gives us an implied religious revelation, that the actions of the players leading to this moment dictates the results according to a greater plan.

What PJ gives us is entirely secular. Two people get into a heated tussle and fall off the edge.

For me its the worst single sin the scripts commit in all three films because its so important.

It has no doubt been said before, but Frodo keeping Gollum alive when it made more sense to kill him is what makes Frodo heroic in both book and film, is it not? So the actions of Frodo do still dictate the end result.

I was never fully satisfied by Gollum just falling off the edge if I'm honest. Both endings are seemingly decided more by luck than judgement.

by Radaghast Fri Dec 13, 2013 5:47 pm

Gollum jumped around in joy and lost his balance. Weirder things have happened.

by Pettytyrant101 Fri Dec 13, 2013 5:49 pm

The book version implies intervention of a divine nature, a final moving of all the pieces.

According to Tolkien in Letters one of the things driving Frodos lamentations was the idea he had been used by the powers of Good and now he had done his job he was just left to suffer, and this bred an element of resentment in him at the times when he felt his loss of the Ring strongest.

by Radaghast Fri Dec 13, 2013 5:53 pm

Yeah, I agree with the "divine providence angle" as well. Gandalf himself is "heaven-sent"* and it's he who impressed upon Frodo the quality of mercy.

*Though, so too is Saruman, but I guess you can consider him a fallen angel.

by Mrs Figg Fri Dec 13, 2013 6:20 pm

Pettytyrant101 wrote:For me its the crux of the book and should be the crux of the film.

What Tolkien gives us an implied religious revelation, that the actions of the players leading to this moment dictates the results according to a greater plan.

What PJ gives us is entirely secular. Two people get into a heated tussle and fall off the edge.

For me its the worst single sin the scripts commit in all three films because its so important.

sorry didnt read above post. Had to deflea my pussy.

by Radaghast Fri Dec 13, 2013 6:25 pm

Not a fan of this review, even though it's a negative one:

http://www.irishtimes.com/culture/film/film-review-the-hobbit-the-desolation-of-smaug-1.1625647

Bravely ploughing his way through The Silmarillion (not a task you would wish on your worst enemy), Jackson and his writers have located some adventure involving yet more journeying and yet more meetings with sombre eminences.