Kudos to PJ for......

[Fimbrethil]

The setting.

Oh boy have I seen denouncements and anger over what PJ and Co have done to the story and the characters, but as for the setting, for recreating the world of Middle Earth?

Just WOW. Maybe things weren't quite as I imagined, but the sheer depth they go into

For example, Arwens sword. If you read the background, you also see that her father Elrond weilds the sword in the prologue. THEN you learn that the sword was made for the lady of gondolin. i.e. Idril. Its THAT kind of depth for back ground, for detail in the world which makes me almost ready to forgive PJ for his flaws in the script.

[markrob]

I agree, but with more than a handful of militant ultra purist around, you will be lambasted for a tribute to PJ. Good luck and welcome to FADship. :D

[Greymantle]

Bah. Token depth on a few minor points. It's an insulting mockery of the truly stunning depth to which the master himself brought his stories.

How can you say this depth forgives Mr. Jackson for his flaws? This sort of depth is a flaw (not being part of the real story) and an insult. Tolkien virtually dedicated his life to this great work, and for Mr. Jackson to try to demonstrate some similar kind of depth, while in truh his own work is, in comparison, entirely superficial, belittles Tolkien's magnificent effort. Jackson is putting himself on the same level as Tolkien.

Hey markrob. Remember me? The most bitter of the militant purists. I'm ba-ack! ;)

[Fimbrethil]

for detail in the world which makes me almost ready to forgive PJ for his flaws in the script.



I see no evidence of PJ tryinmg to put himself on the same level as tolkien. After all, there were 3 co-writers, some other bloke from weta worjshop is credited with overseeing the creation of the so-called bigatures.


Please give me an example of PJs 'token' depth?

He should be applauded for trying to recreate a world that many loved, but I never said that he should be put on a pedastel and equated with tolkien himself. He made a great film (which many purists admit), which held true to the spirit of the work, even if it had to be changed to work as a film.

[Thorin]

Aaah! markrob, Greymantle and I all in one thread together again! It almost brings a tear to my eye!

The utmost attention to detail that Jackson does is what is the most puzzling and damaging to the movie in my opinion. Why go through the painstaking effort to recreate the minutest detail of Tolkien's world (engraved elven runes, 250,000 links of chain mail, make-up) and then go and spoil that authenticity with cheesy dialogue and major character changes?


I can forgive PJ for the overly rushed scenes and the poor character development (to some extent on this part, if he had put less of his own fluff in, he might have had more time to develop these characters better. The EE helps in some ways). When you're dealing with the time constraints and pressure from NLC, it's understandable that the movie may falter in these areas, but for the above mentioned, there is no real excuse. He bolsters Tolkien so much in these details, but then he spoils it by doing the above said.

:confused:

[PRH]

PJ says in the commentary track -- right around the time they dock at Parth Galen I believe -- that he really wanted the audience to fully believe that they had been to Middle Earth. No matter what folks made of the changes and adaptations from the book, he didn't want anyone to feel at all ripped off about the vision of Middle Earth itself. I think it's fair to seperate the two out: 1)accuracy in production design and 2)accuracy in plot/character/dialog.

[Talimon]

I think it's fair to seperate the two out: 1)accuracy in production design and 2)accuracy in plot/character/dialog.

I agree completely. I think the former is more or less universally acclaimed.

[Greymantle]

What exactly do you mean by accuracy in production design?

[joxy]

Originally posted by Thorin
The utmost attention to detail that Jackson does is what is the most puzzling and damaging to the movie in my opinion. Why go through the painstaking effort....and then go and spoil that authenticity with cheesy dialogue and major character changes?
He bolsters Tolkien so much in these details, but then he spoils it by doing the above said.
This IS the crunch! He does so much that is good, then he blatantly and regularly goes wrong!
Is it incompetence, or insensitivity, or carelessness, or an outright intention to annoy?!

[PRH]

Originally posted by Greymantle
What exactly do you mean by accuracy in production design?
accuracy to the book insomuch as the production design.

[Ariana Undomiel]

All I can say is that 'PJ did a wonderful job on The Fellowship of the Ring! I know there were changes and I know that in comparison to all the stuff that is in the book, the movie is fairly shallow. However, it did fullfil my dream of seeing LOTR on the screen in a wonderful way and I get chills when I watch it. So thanks, PJ, for doing such a wonderful job!'

- Ariana