|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
elentari3018
Rohan
Dec 21 2007, 8:08am
Post #1 of 27
(1666 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Philippa Boyens for screenplay writer
|
Can't Post
|
|
How awesome she was for LotR, i do not have to begin to say but we definitely need her back to helm the writing. I think she did wonderfully in LotR and therefore is REQUIRED to come back in any way shape, way or form...(well preferably as screenplay writer).
She knows her Tolkien. It's obvious.
Any news of her returning?
"By Elbereth and Luthien the fair, you shall have neither the Ring nor me!" ~Frodo
"And then Gandalf arose and bid all men rise, and they rose, and he said: 'Here is a last hail ere the feast endeth. Last but not least. For I name now those who shall not be forgotten and without whose valour nought else that was done would have availed; and I name before you all Frodo of the Shire and Samwise his servant. And the bards and the minstrels should give them new names: Bronwe athan Harthad and Harthad Uluithiad , Endurance beyond Hope and Hope Unquenchable.." ~Gandalf, The End of the Third Age , from The History of Middle Earth series
|
|
|
Windfola
The Shire
Dec 21 2007, 9:15am
Post #2 of 27
(1464 views)
Shortcut
|
she is not producing, so maybe ... ? 
|
|
|
Rabittooth
Bree
Dec 21 2007, 3:09pm
Post #3 of 27
(1447 views)
Shortcut
|
AND FRAN FOR DIRECTOR!!!!!!!!
-Rabittooth
www.rabittooth.com
|
|
|
tossingthedwarf
The Shire
Dec 21 2007, 7:32pm
Post #4 of 27
(1429 views)
Shortcut
|
you speak up a bit!
at last a film with dwarves
|
|
|
srethman
Registered User
Dec 21 2007, 8:33pm
Post #5 of 27
(1431 views)
Shortcut
|
For the Hobbit to be as well done as the Lord of the Rings movies, I think that the quality of the screenplay and the artistic vision are more important than who is directing. Since Peter Jackson is on-board at least the artistic vision can re-create a cohesive middle-earth. One major concern has always been the copyright issues of the artistic vision. The other is the screenplay. The direct qoutes from Tolkien's texts, even when said by a different character or in a different context were in a large part how the movie captured the spirit of the books. I don't trust anyone else but Jackson, Boyens and Walsh to write the screenplays for the two Hobbit films.
|
|
|
HUORN
The Shire
Dec 23 2007, 12:08am
Post #6 of 27
(1438 views)
Shortcut
|
Maybe but many came from the wrong character. LOTR was butchered my PJ and those other two writers. The commentary on FOTR DVD has the writers constantly going on about how they improved on Tolkien's work which is a sacrilege.
There is a reason the Tolkien Family jumped ship from those movies and PJ should not have been rewarded with the Hobbit. New Line is just cashing in.
I hope in my lifetime someone will redo these movies with the same love the Harry Potter movies have had.
(This post was edited by Altaira on Dec 23 2007, 4:55am)
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Dec 23 2007, 12:12am
Post #7 of 27
(1395 views)
Shortcut
|
that I've seen --the first and the fourth-- were not markedly better films than the LotR films (which I don't much care for). I can't speak to their quality as adaptations, not having read the books, but as films they were rather dull business.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Lord of the Rings in the Reading Room, Oct. 15, 2007 - Mar. 22, 2009!
Join us Dec. 17-23 for "At the Sign of the Prancing Pony".
|
|
|
entmaiden
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Dec 23 2007, 12:20am
Post #8 of 27
(1391 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The first and second movies of the series
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
are generally regarded as highly faithful adaptations, almost to the point of slavish adherence to the books. In movies three, four and five, the directors have taken some license, however they still have the primary elements of the books. Some of the dialogue is moved around the characters and bits are cut out (book five was over 700 pages and it was impossible to include everything in the movie).
The Harry Potter franchise is a good case for better adaptation, poorer critical praise. The series has been nominated for a couple technical awards, and I think has won a few MTV-type awards for the picture overall and the actors. However, no one has the expectation any longer that they will be taken seriously for any major awards. There was some hope for the first movie, but the success of FOTR far outstripped any expectations the Harry Potter movie might have had.
Each cloak was fastened about the neck with a brooch like a green leaf veined with silver.
`Are these magic cloaks?' asked Pippin, looking at them with wonder.
`I do not know what you mean by that,' answered the leader of the Elves.
NARF since 1974.
Balin Bows
|
|
|
Woodyend
Gondor
Dec 23 2007, 12:21am
Post #9 of 27
(1418 views)
Shortcut
|
|
"There is a reason the Tolkien Family jumped ship"
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Yes it is called M-O-N-E-Y! Tolkien thinking that no one would ever be able to bring LOTR to the big screen sold the rights to his work for something like $30,000. So yes they are bitter.
As far as the HP movies are concerned, I have been hoping in my lifetime that someone would make them with the respect and attention to detail as the LOTR movies where made.
Direct quotes? Maybe but many came from the wrong character. LOTR was butchered my PJ and those other two writers. The commentary on FOTR DVD has the writers constantly going on about how they improved on Tolkien's work which is a sacrilege.
There is a reason the Tolkien Family jumped ship from those movies and PJ should not have been rewarded with the Hobbit. New Line is just cashing in.
I hope in my lifetime someone will redo these movies with the same love the Harry Potter movies have had.
May your beer be laid under an enchantment of surpassing excellence for seven years!
~~~~~~~~Gandalf~~~~~~~
|
|
|
HUORN
The Shire
Dec 23 2007, 12:35am
Post #10 of 27
(1393 views)
Shortcut
|
Respect and attention to what exactly? Not Tolkien's words and characters.
Respect and attention to New Zealand? That's about all I can think of.
The Harry Potter movies may not have gotten the approval of critics who don't read books but they are good and can be watched over and over a gain. The LOTR movies will not stand the test of time.
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Dec 23 2007, 12:52am
Post #11 of 27
(1396 views)
Shortcut
|
The LOTR movies will not stand the test of time. A few prominent critics in the late 1950s predicted that interest in The Lord of the Rings had run its course. I dislike the films, but would not dare guess as to their longevity.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Lord of the Rings in the Reading Room, Oct. 15, 2007 - Mar. 22, 2009!
Join us Dec. 17-23 for "At the Sign of the Prancing Pony".
|
|
|
Woodyend
Gondor
Dec 23 2007, 1:34am
Post #12 of 27
(1387 views)
Shortcut
|
|
For your information I have read all the HP books more than twenty times each.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I have two hardback copies of all the books. One from the US and the other from Amazon UK. And yes in places they are different. I celebrate every movie and book with a party of like minded friends, just like I did with the LOTR movies. Don’t make assumptions on people you only know from a few post you have read on a message board.
In the HP movies words that were said by one character where given to another also, especially Ron’s. It is the nature of the beast (books to movies) that this happens. In a movie you have to keep the story flowing, are it drags to a standstill.
Respect and attention to what exactly? Not Tolkien's words and characters.
Respect and attention to New Zealand? That's about all I can think of.
The Harry Potter movies may not have gotten the approval of critics who don't read books but they are good and can be watched over and over a gain. The LOTR movies will not stand the test of time.
May your beer be laid under an enchantment of surpassing excellence for seven years!
~~~~~~~~Gandalf~~~~~~~
|
|
|
HUORN
The Shire
Dec 23 2007, 1:51am
Post #13 of 27
(1406 views)
Shortcut
|
The Harry Potter Movies are very true to the characters in the books. Changes have been made but the spirit of the books is intact so far. The author has obviously had a large say in what goes on in the movies. And while I love the Potter books Rowling is not the wordsmith Tolkien was. Tolkien labored to get every word just right. There should not have been a phrase uttered by any character that was not a word for word quote out of the books. I'll forgive the Shire scenes but not "Red skies...blood has been spilled". ugh. the contents of my stomach were spilled.
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Dec 23 2007, 2:04am
Post #14 of 27
(1387 views)
Shortcut
|
|
"In the movies you have to keep the story flowing.."
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
"...or it drags to a standstill."
Could you elaborate on that comment? What is an example of a film in which the story drags to a standstill?
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Lord of the Rings in the Reading Room, Oct. 15, 2007 - Mar. 22, 2009!
Join us Dec. 17-23 for "At the Sign of the Prancing Pony".
|
|
|
HUORN
The Shire
Dec 23 2007, 2:16am
Post #15 of 27
(1372 views)
Shortcut
|
Lord of the rings became big at the time but didn't make the impact Star Wars original trilogy made and it should have had a better script have been made. Go to toys R us and see what toys you find more of, star wars or LOTR. No comparison. The movies were good, I guess. I was there at opening for all three and bought the DVDs when the extended editions came but they are simply not movies that I care to watch more than a couple times. The look and casting are great but the script and soundtrack blows. The movies are not quotable, and given they are based on Tolkien, rather sad. The movies do not live up to the level of "classic" like the books do. Special effects and big budgets cannot overcome a bad script, and bad storytelling. Watching the DVDs with commentaries left me thinking the only person familiar with the book (not simply reading) was Christopher Lee and he could barely get a word in between the mindless chatter from the rest of the cast. I'd love to have a one on one with him on his opinions on the movies.
|
|
|
N.E. Brigand
Half-elven
Dec 23 2007, 2:19am
Post #16 of 27
(1385 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Where are the Citizen Kane toys? //
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Lord of the Rings in the Reading Room, Oct. 15, 2007 - Mar. 22, 2009!
Join us Dec. 17-23 for "At the Sign of the Prancing Pony".
|
|
|
Woodyend
Gondor
Dec 23 2007, 2:28am
Post #17 of 27
(1382 views)
Shortcut
|
|
You know the last time I looked.......
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Peter, Fran and Philippa had won a Academy Award for best adapted screenplay and Steve Kloves had won none. Special effects and big budgets cannot overcome a bad script, and bad storytelling. Watching the DVDs with commentaries left me thinking the only person familiar with the book (not simply reading) was Christopher Lee and he could barely get a word in between the mindless chatter from the rest of the cast. I'd love to have a one on one with him on his opinions on the movies.
May your beer be laid under an enchantment of surpassing excellence for seven years!
~~~~~~~~Gandalf~~~~~~~
|
|
|
HUORN
The Shire
Dec 23 2007, 2:37am
Post #18 of 27
(1361 views)
Shortcut
|
Jethro Tull beat Metallica for a heavy metal Grammy. Your point?
Peter, Fran and Philippa had won a Academy Award for best adapted screenplay and Steve Kloves had won none. Special effects and big budgets cannot overcome a bad script, and bad storytelling. Watching the DVDs with commentaries left me thinking the only person familiar with the book (not simply reading) was Christopher Lee and he could barely get a word in between the mindless chatter from the rest of the cast. I'd love to have a one on one with him on his opinions on the movies.
|
|
|
Woodyend
Gondor
Dec 23 2007, 2:48am
Post #19 of 27
(1397 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I thought that movies like.......
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Lemony Snicket, The Chronicles of Narnia, and Cold Mountain (off the top of my head) dragged in places and could have used a screenwriter who knew what and where to cut. "...or it drags to a standstill."
Could you elaborate on that comment? What is an example of a film in which the story drags to a standstill?
May your beer be laid under an enchantment of surpassing excellence for seven years!
~~~~~~~~Gandalf~~~~~~~
|
|
|
HUORN
The Shire
Dec 23 2007, 4:20am
Post #20 of 27
(1359 views)
Shortcut
|
I don't know much about filmmaking. You like when every word and scene have to lead to the conclusion of a plot and if it CAN be left out it SHOULD be left out. I'm the opposite. I want to pick up every non-blooper and pasle into the movie. To me non plot elements add color and depth to the movie. I did not even consider renting or busing the theater versions of the movies. I want the whole versions. I hated Fellowship in the theater but worshipped the extended opening scene about and The second age and loved the "concerning hobbits part".
You know, the special effects parts are fine. I would redo the cavalry scenes and had the horses in formation. If horses were coming at you all crazy like that, you knock out one guy in the front and those horses will trip all over each other. The Rohirrim were horsemasters and would have known better than that. The rest of the battle action is OK. I like how he made Legolas fight, even the shieldboarding at Helm's Deep. If somone ever does Silmarillion I hope it's a Japanese Anime or live action studio. I can't imagine how incredible the elves probably fought. It's like humans are dogs and elves are cats. Elves would be leaping with lighting fast attacks and superhuman archery. Anyway, the PJ LOTR action was money well spent and the scenes were effective enough, for me.
Jackson would win me over if just got the actors back in costume act out every quote in the book and replace all the dialogue in the current version. That's all. The sets could be redone. I think PJ kept much of the Shire set pieces intact in storage. Too bad those are the scenes I like well enough. And just get a good composer. Not just a good New Zealand good coductor. Get guy that did the Star Wars theme and the Harry potter theme to redwrite a new score for the movie. One version for movie fans and one for geeks.
Is that too much to ask?
If not, And you cut out the whole Arwen-Frodo ride and add Glorfindel and let Frodo ride alone and.... and .....OK that's too much. Just the lines thing will clear the bar.
|
|
|
Patty
Immortal
Dec 23 2007, 6:16pm
Post #21 of 27
(1348 views)
Shortcut
|
Good one.
For Gondor!
|
|
|
Sunflower
Valinor
Dec 23 2007, 10:40pm
Post #22 of 27
(1372 views)
Shortcut
|
|
To make a slightly bizarre point.....
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
...but from what I've read, The Beatles were the most heavily commercialized thing in history since Gone With The Wind, when they arrived on US shores in 1964. You name a possible tie-in product, they had it. Does anyone remember Beatlenut ice cream?
The important thing was that they were beginning their career at a time when the corporate scene was in wild flux, both in the music biz and in Hollywood, and they were soon able to break free from that. And nobody now remembers the toys or the ice cream, just "Penny Lane", anyway. 50 yrs from now, people won't remember the toy tie-ins for Star Wars, either, any more than they remember the corsets or cheezy costume knock-offs sold in stores in 1939 with GWTW.
The ancillary products don't bother me as much as corporate philiosophy influencing the work. There was little of that for LOTr, as Our Three had an unusual amount of creative control, both during filming and afterwards.
Oh and Rabbitooth, how do you do that "Moon Landing" font anyway?ROFL! .
I'm with you on Fran, and that's putting it mildly. But it may not be happening. I just hope that as Philippa at least is free of the contractual obligations, she may be free to re-team with Shore to do the Tolkien language adaptations for the score. I think Shore will get the score, as he's been very smart, maintaining good active relations with NL over the yrs. He even scored "The Last Mimzy", a NL flop 2 yrs ago.
Philippa as the stealth weapon, ha ha.` Peter and Fran's "weapon of mass destruction" in the face of Shaye's evil plans
(This post was edited by Sunflower on Dec 23 2007, 10:49pm)
|
|
|
Annael
Immortal
Dec 24 2007, 2:04am
Post #23 of 27
(1304 views)
Shortcut
|
thanks for sharing your opinion. Sorry you didn't like the films, hope your stomach has recovered (you're not Kellenar are you?).
Me, I didn't find them to be perfect adaptations of the book, but I never expected any such thing. I enjoyed them as I enjoy the various artists' attempts to capture scenes from the book: never exactly as I would draw them if I could, but I usually recognize what they portray and enjoy them anyway. And I fail to see how an artist or film-maker could "harm" the story. Last time I looked in my copy of the book, it was just fine.
repeat the sounding joy!
* * * * *
NARF and member of Deplorable Cultus since 1967
|
|
|
Sunflower
Valinor
Dec 25 2007, 4:01am
Post #24 of 27
(1302 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Just reading more of this thread....
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
..was in a rush last night and didn't have time to take it all in.
Huorn, you bring up the fact that Jo Rowling has a very great say in how the HP films are made, and this seems to be a large part of your admiration for them. Here's a question. Tolkien obviously can't have any say in how his works are interpreted; , he's dead. And his son and executor Christopher , not only refuses to have anything to do with the work, but is openly hostile to even the idea. What do you do about this? Refuse to make the films if there is no prospect of his personal seal of approval?
And it puzzles me as to how you can be so lenient with the HP films, not minding how the various directors stray from the story as long as "the spirit of the story" survives. This is the argument I use defending Jackson's films. And yet you pillory Jackson for doing the same thing--when, in my mind, directors such as Newell and esp David Yates have committed sins with HP far graver then that of PJ with LOTR. In your mind, anything is permissable as long as the author doesn't pillory it.
I'd like to know what your opinion, then, of such HP strayings from the books as;
1)Cuaron not mentioning the origion of the Maurauders Map, and neglecting the Murauders story in general;
2)Barty Crouch Jr. being a Death Eater Through and Through instead of starting out as a sympathetic character and having a character arc;
3)the whole admission of most of the Quiddtich World Cup;
4) Micheal Gambon's Dumbledore;
5)Hermione as an obnoxious, pushy brat in the first film, instead of the Muggle-born who was self-conscious about her parentage and eager to prove herself in the face of the prejudice; --and, while we're on the subject of Hermione, Emma Watson in all 5 films acting with her eyebrows;
6)the whole omission of Neville's story from Film 4 on--the absence of the St Mungo's hospital scene in Film 5 was almost criminal, as it would have indeed been an "Oscar-worthy" scene for all involved; one of the best scenes of the entire series and one of the few scenes before Book 7 that speaks of a truly adult drama on film;
7)and finally, the one unforgivable sin of David Yates--one that may seriously impact Deathly Hallows--not including sight or sound of LIiy in "Snape's Worst Memory" scene. even if he didn;t know anything, of course, he could have thrown Lily in there for artistic reasons, foreshadowing of their marriage. I would have.
In terms of affecting the plot and quality of the the series, this last omission to me is one that makes "Whiny wimpy Aragorn" or "weak Frodo" pale in comparison. At least when Jackson made those "errors", he did it in a way that made for great cinema. Aragorn as the "reluctant modern hero" is totally believable. Liv Tyler was so sublime that when we had the Arwen dying" sttement and you saw her lying there, you felt a real joly, you rellay beleived she was the fairest thing in ME and Sauron's power growing would sap her life force. It wasn't corny at all. (Not that PJ didn;t do some corny things but they were minor script errors by comparison. .)
Whereas omitting such story and character lines from the HP films will make for an excellent kids film instead of great adult drama. When we get to Book 7, we';ll ssee. Yates keeps hyping the comedy in Book6 and saying "it'll be like American Grafitti.
As for author approval...well, JO is too gracious and polite to dismiss anything. But the poor extras on the HP5 DVD say a lot. No author endorsement or interview here, like she did with Cuaron.
BTW,I too am huge HP fan, I too have both US and UK editions. (Isn't Mary Grandpre's dragon picture in the new one gorgeous?) I used to work in a bookstore and did the HP parties for book 4 and 5 dressed in costume (Rita Skeeter, natch.)
This is all just IMO.
(This post was edited by Sunflower on Dec 25 2007, 4:08am)
|
|
|
HUORN
The Shire
Dec 26 2007, 2:47am
Post #25 of 27
(1260 views)
Shortcut
|
I like HP but I'm not a huge fan. I've never dressed up. I just read the books for the first time after this last movie. My wife has been trying to get me to read the books for years. I always thought it was kid stuff until this last movie. I liked the movies. Having seen the movies first and then read the books I didn't find huge changes from the story. I found out a lot more about the characters and story in the books. I think the movies and books are companion pieces. The longer the books get the more is cut out in the movie version but I can't think of anything really significant that is not just because of time constraints. Order of the Phoenix left out a lot of what was in the book but the important things were there and there was no added unnecessary stuff. Reading the books have made me understand the story on a deeper level, but I haven't felt the characters are different.
David Yates does not ring a bell and now I'm going to have to skim through the book and find out. Sorry, I've only read the books once.
Micheal Gambon's Dumbledore. Is the the second Dumbledore? If so I don't like him. The first Dumbledore was kind and wise and fatherly and the new one seems unapproachable and almost sinister.
I'm sorry but I'm not knowledgable enough on HP to really add much. If I was more into it I'd be annoyed by more, probably. I've had no problems with the casting and acting, except the second Dumbledore. One thing I'm curious about is Dobby. He plays a large role in the later books and the whole house elf storylines have completely left out of the movies.
The action in the movies is annoying and often too long. I dread when I start reaching that point in the books thinking It'll be a long annoying read and it turns out to be concise and interesting. For example the spider scene in the movie with the long spider chase is too much. In the book the car shows up and they escape and that's pretty much it. The final scene with Harry climbing up the statue and dropping the sword and all that. The book resolves the conflicts faster and more realistically and moves on.
Lily's ommission was pretty major. Very major now that you mention it. Huh. How is that going to play out in the last movie? Good point. They'll have to explain it later.
I read LOTR first, a few times. Certain scenes always stuck out in my mind and I always wanted to see them acted out. In the PJ movies it seems everyone of those scenes was changes in unnecessary ways. He cut scenes maybe for time's sake but then adds some crazy scene of a Warg attack on the wat to Helm's deep and aragorn fall off a cliff into a river and is washed away and dramatically makes it to Helm's Deep to save Theoden's cowardly butt. Was there a need for the mountain of skulls at paths of the dead? These things added nothing. Ahhh. The more I think about those movies the more annoyed I get. Entmoot, I'm ready to hear the ents rally to go to war, but no, PJ decides to have them not want to go to war. Gondor lights the beacons to call Rohan for help and I'm expecting Theoden to rise and lead his people to glory, but no, PJ decides Theoden should refuse and Aragorn has to take the lead. In the book Aragorn takes the Orthanc Palantir and reveals himself to Sauron and I forget what happens in the movie but it's not quite as bad ass. I can go on and on and on. PJ seems to just do high budget B movies. King Kong was not good. He puts so much time effort into over the top effects he neglects the story.
|
|
|
|
|
1
