Re: Sorry if I don't make sense; bit tired. arkan2January 12 2013, 22:00:20 UTC
I forgot in my first comment to include this pair of videos of the Spoony One and his brother talking about the movie; most of the former's comments aligned more-or-less with my feelings about it.
I just saw a video of cast interviews, where Christopher Lee was explaining that at this point in the chronology, Saruman is basically decent and upstanding if a bit stuffy and irritable, but there's little hint that he's going to turn one day. Which is funny, because to me, in the theater, he came across as one short step away from twirling his moustache. If I'm the only one seeing it, though, then maybe that's something to do with me, not the film. Odd.
I think it was mostly there if only to create tension and show just how bleak everything was.
I get that, but I think playing it this way was a little bit lazy on Jackson's part, and that depicting the events more or less as Tolkien set them up (but did not depict himself) would have been at least as interesting and exciting, and perhaps more so. Big missed opportunity, to my mind.
I like Frodo just fine in the original films, so no argument from this quarter.
I think you're right about giving Thorin a Captain Ahab vibe, but I don't think that's really enough to explain the scene. I know I said that about Thorin being a dick, but actually, I can't even look at it as a character flaw of his - to me, it comes across more than anything as sloppy storytelling. It's like Jackson and company were trying to tell two stories with the dwarfs in that scene: one of Thorin going off to face Azog, and the other of the rest of the company (Gandalf included) stuck in a tree about to fall into a gorge, and the two stories are badly mashed together in a way which creates weird incongruities. The scene (or this part of it, specifically) doesn't make any sense to me on a narrative level, and the only way it makes sense on a meta-level is if I chalk it up to a technical failure.
Re: Sorry if I don't make sense; bit tired. ladyhadhafangJanuary 12 2013, 22:38:28 UTC
*Makes a note to watch that video*
Nah, I say that come to think of it, you're right. I mean, I will admit there are times when Saruman's evil became a little obvious (not to the extent of mustache twirling, but mostly to the extent of "Did we mention he's a bit suspicious?" His casual ridiculing of Radagast didn't help -- although the mentioning of mushrooms was a pretty amusing nod to the original films). And yeah, you're right. I mean, I guess the White Council was like, "Oh dear Valar, not this shit again", but outright ignoring evidence? *Headdesk*
And that's good to know. :) *Sighs* I guess I've just been feeling alone at times regarding Frodo in the original films, so that's definitely reassuring. :)
Yeah, that is true. I think chalking it up to a technical failure would be pretty good. I guess it just flew over my head a bit when I was watching, really.
I just saw a video of cast interviews, where Christopher Lee was explaining that at this point in the chronology, Saruman is basically decent and upstanding if a bit stuffy and irritable, but there's little hint that he's going to turn one day. Which is funny, because to me, in the theater, he came across as one short step away from twirling his moustache. If I'm the only one seeing it, though, then maybe that's something to do with me, not the film. Odd.
I think it was mostly there if only to create tension and show just how bleak everything was.
I get that, but I think playing it this way was a little bit lazy on Jackson's part, and that depicting the events more or less as Tolkien set them up (but did not depict himself) would have been at least as interesting and exciting, and perhaps more so. Big missed opportunity, to my mind.
I like Frodo just fine in the original films, so no argument from this quarter.
I think you're right about giving Thorin a Captain Ahab vibe, but I don't think that's really enough to explain the scene. I know I said that about Thorin being a dick, but actually, I can't even look at it as a character flaw of his - to me, it comes across more than anything as sloppy storytelling. It's like Jackson and company were trying to tell two stories with the dwarfs in that scene: one of Thorin going off to face Azog, and the other of the rest of the company (Gandalf included) stuck in a tree about to fall into a gorge, and the two stories are badly mashed together in a way which creates weird incongruities. The scene (or this part of it, specifically) doesn't make any sense to me on a narrative level, and the only way it makes sense on a meta-level is if I chalk it up to a technical failure.
Reply
Nah, I say that come to think of it, you're right. I mean, I will admit there are times when Saruman's evil became a little obvious (not to the extent of mustache twirling, but mostly to the extent of "Did we mention he's a bit suspicious?" His casual ridiculing of Radagast didn't help -- although the mentioning of mushrooms was a pretty amusing nod to the original films). And yeah, you're right. I mean, I guess the White Council was like, "Oh dear Valar, not this shit again", but outright ignoring evidence? *Headdesk*
And that's good to know. :) *Sighs* I guess I've just been feeling alone at times regarding Frodo in the original films, so that's definitely reassuring. :)
Yeah, that is true. I think chalking it up to a technical failure would be pretty good. I guess it just flew over my head a bit when I was watching, really.
Reply
Leave a comment