Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: The Iguana; HairOfTheDog; RikaStrom
I agree with most of what you say, and took such trouble to put so well, by the way. I guess I didn't make it clear I was mostly joking. I hope they don't make that song part of the movie, but IF they do: please, Gollum's song?? His tragedy was too deep for words, particularly the insipid ones sung here (I agree with you about the voice), the orchestral music was fine for what they're trying to achieve without the puerile singing! (You may want to see my response to Miss Rika above).

I too am a fussy purist, but I understand the constraints since they were making 3 movies and trying to make money, not trying to make a lengthy accurate version of Tolkien's opus. I realize the Arwen enhancement was to sell tickets, but I also thought it was conveniently kowtowing to the PC crowd. Some of the plain dialogue they wrote could have been replaced with Tolkien's words without buggering the movie-length considerations, but I'm quibbling here.

But my one serious complaint (not that you care, nor should you) was that, despite the obviously great effort (and Bravo! New Zealand, by the way!), they took the best pure story I ever read and made it mostly tedious. And people who take that as a personal insult (as is the wont around here with remarks not directed insultingly at anyone at Free Republic) need their heads examined.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

27 posted on 12/01/2002 9:56:57 AM PST by Argh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]


To: Argh; ecurbh
Hullo Argh! - This song has got you bugged still eh? Hmmm. The song has really grown on me... I things the words sound like his, methinks. I can't picture how it will be used in the movie yet, but I haven't seen the movie! - We shall see if it fits in the time and place it is used. (in 16 days 13 hours 18 min... ;~D)

I disagree with your "reason" they enhanced Arwen. I think to say it was simply to sell tickets or weakly to kowtow to the PC crowd is knee-jerk Free Republicskpeak. I don't think that is the reason. I just don't. No one went to see this film because Arwen was in it. No one. I think the reason was to highlight and bring out a love story that is nice and beautiful. Women did not go to see this film to see Arwen, but I have talked to men who enjoyed her quite a bit.

And, if you read it again, after the movie, Tolkien's words were in the story more than you might think. They may have been moved to a different place in the story, but upon reading it again after the film, I was surprised at how many times I recognized dialogue that was in the film.

On your serious complaint, I am not sure I even see it. How, in your opinion was the story made tedious?
29 posted on 12/01/2002 10:52:27 AM PST by HairOfTheDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

To: Argh
Not taking it as a personal insult, just bewilderment. Tedious, eh? You must have been watching a different movie from the rest of us.

I would not worry about this song being in the actual movie. That would be a mistake, and I don't think that will happen. Notice, during FOTR, the only lyrics are for choral pieces sung in languages we do not understand (ie, the dwarvish chorus in the Moria sequences). The songs with English lyrics were tacked on to the ending credits, not played during the movie. I suspect "Gollum's Song" will be similarly placed. Or at least, I hope so. It would be distracting, if placed in the movie.

31 posted on 12/01/2002 1:44:35 PM PST by Vast Buffalo Wing Conspiracy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

To: Argh
Hello Argh,

I actually hope that little of "Gollum's Song" makes it into the movie. At least the vocal part.

There is some hope for this eventuality given that much of the few vocalized songs on the FOTR soundtrack ended up being simply sampled. If they do the same with Gollum then I can live with that. To use any but a tithe of it would be laying sentiment on with a trowel.

For many years I was heartily opposed to the idea of a film adaptation of LOTR for the simple reason that I didn't think anyone could do it justice - or even begin to. Part of that was the sheer difficulty in getting much fo such a gargantuan work to the screen; part of it was the technology needed to convey so many supernatural elements; and part related to the likelihood of Hollywood's bowlderizing and crass commercialistic tendencies making a mush of things if the first two obstacles were surmounted.

Having said all that, I have to confess that while not perfect (in my eyes), Peter Jackson et al have probably done as a good a job in overcoming these obstacles to lens a film project reasonably faithful to the books as one could possibly hope for while retaining any hope of commercial success (or at least of recouping the massive costs). Far, far more than I ever hoped for. They have taken a great work of literature and made a great film out of it, which is a nearly impossible task and extremely rare achievement. The love of the work of so many involved int he project, from Jackson and Boyens and Walsh down to Howe and Lee to even actors like Christopher Lee (who reads it annually) is evident.

There are some missteps along the way (and I essentially agree with the ones you cite), but it seems niggardly of me to take especial notice of them in light of the un-hoped-for larger accomplishment.

Of course, it remains to be seen how TTT and ROTK fare.

33 posted on 12/01/2002 1:49:59 PM PST by The Iguana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson