Sinister71
Tol Eressea
Jun 11 2012, 1:10am
Views: 24297
|
I was just stating as screenwriter he obviously has a conflict of interest with keeping things the original way Tolkien wrote them... I wasn't bashing I know if I were a screenwriter I would have rather done an original story as apposed to having to use someone elses written story. But if I had to do someone elses story I would at least do it as closely as possible to the authors original context and meaning, not find the possible avenues to rewrite the story.
How can Bilbo be uncertain of the dwarfs fate, or question his choice when he can plainly see they are alright? Covering the actors lets the viewer wonder about the character, and have a vested emotion in their status, fear of the unknown thats part of emotion for a scene like this...it was the not knowing that makes it dramatic and tense
as far as saying "true to the book" or "needless changes" are we saying that that scene is needed to be changed? if it is, I would like to know (seriously) why it was needed to be changed and why does it fit the story better and not just give the actors face time on screen...
I'm being serious and not smart, when people respond all they ever seem to want to say is "thats the way the writers want it" or "PJ thinks its better" as apposed to giving a valid reason why its better to show the dwarfs. Like I said if done right the scene could be dramatic, action packed, dangerous, with the element of the unknown all while having dwarfs inside the barrels with lids on. I'm trying to figure out how its better to have what looks like an amusement park ride as apposed to something unknown and dangerous with the possibility of dwarfs drowning.
(This post was edited by sinister71 on Jun 11 2012, 1:19am)
|
