Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Lord of the Rings:
New Viggo Mortensen interview on the "mess" that was Rings
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next page Last page  View All

Salmacis81
Tol Eressea


May 16 2014, 10:31pm

Post #101 of 160 (1086 views)
Shortcut
Yes... [In reply to] Can't Post

...I know that there are those who completely disagree with what Viggo said, but still respect his right to say those things. And I applaud them for not letting their own personal feelings get in the way.

What I was talking about were the 2 or 3 posters who were saying insulting things about Viggo just because they didn't agree with what he said, and the fact that these particular posters seem to make a habit out of hurling insults at anyone who utters something even remotely critical of PJ.


J Pierpont Flathead
Rivendell

May 16 2014, 10:36pm

Post #102 of 160 (1056 views)
Shortcut
Good Reasons [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Who's to say what a "good reason" is? You? Me? General Audiences?

I do, when I'm writing my thoughts about the things I enjoy or don't enjoy. You do, when you're writing about yours. Sound fair?


BlackFox
Valinor


May 16 2014, 10:38pm

Post #103 of 160 (1019 views)
Shortcut
Well... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
I thought you were going to say my applying dwarven gold as a metaphor for Jacksonian CGI was harsh. I'm glad that was a more acceptable assertion than what I have to say about artists and change generally.

You presented that as your opinion and, although I might not agree with you, I have nothing against people expressing their opinion, however different from mine. Smile


In Reply To
Change isn't bad when it's for a good reason. But isn't change for change's sake often frowned upon because it is empty and artificial; thoughtless? In The Hobbit, its the word 'beloved' in what I had to say that is operant for me. Some changes, even just a word of a well-known line, seem made without any cause other than putting the artists mark on it. Or maybe JRR wasn't good enough for them.

Yes, you're right. But I have a hard time believing that all the changes were made simply "for change's sake". Nor do I believe the filmmakers deliberately set out to "put their mark" on everything. I'm sure they made the changes for a reason. Some of their decisions they've explained, others not. Whether or not "a reason" constitutes as a "good" one, depends of the individual, meaning that for some it does and for some it doesn't.


"Our truest life is when we are in dreams awake." - Henry David Thoreau


Glorfindela
Valinor


May 16 2014, 11:01pm

Post #104 of 160 (1036 views)
Shortcut
'Any change' is not bad [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't think 'any change' is bad – but I do feel that in the case of DoS the changes made to the story were bad in some cases. It smacks of a certain kind of arrogance and disrespect towards the original author for a director to alter a beloved story to the extent PJ has, and to skew it so much that it has a kind of comic-book feel, and loses most of the 'heart' of the original work. The story is meant to be about Bilbo, Thorin and the Dwarves, and Gandalf, primarily, with strong secondary characters in Beorn and Thranduil as I recall. In DoS I feel that Bilbo and Thorin's story has very much got lost amid all the chaotic and unrealistic action scenes and a completely unneeded romance that has nothing to do with Tolkien.

I remember PJ often saying, when it came to LotR, that whenever he or the other writers got stuck, they would always refer to the original books for reference. There is absolutely none of that now. DoS has veered far away from the feel of the professor's work.

In my opinion.


In Reply To

In Reply To
The death of a story happens when the artists come along with something beloved and think doing things differently means doing it better.

That's pretty harsh. One could almost assume you're implying that any change is bad merely because it's, well, a change. Unimpressed



(This post was edited by Glorfindela on May 16 2014, 11:09pm)


Arannir
Valinor


May 16 2014, 11:03pm

Post #105 of 160 (1017 views)
Shortcut
Sorry. [In reply to] Can't Post

I wrongly thought your post was the answer to one of my other posts and got confused. As much as we may disagree on TH movies, we are on the very same page here.


“All good stories deserve embellishment."

Praise is subjective. And so is criticism.

"I am afraid it is only too likely to be true what you say about the critics and the public. I am dreading the publication for it will be impossible not to mind what is said. I have exposed my heart to be shot at."


Avnar
Rohan


May 17 2014, 6:50am

Post #106 of 160 (988 views)
Shortcut
100% agree with Viggo [In reply to] Can't Post

He hit the nail on the head.

I hate these new films... heartless horrible cgi infested messes!


BlackFox
Valinor


May 17 2014, 7:58am

Post #107 of 160 (948 views)
Shortcut
In response [In reply to] Can't Post

This is exactly what I meant when I wrote:

Quote
But I have a hard time believing that all the changes were made simply "for change's sake". Nor do I believe the filmmakers deliberately set out to "put their mark" on everything. I'm sure they made the changes for a reason. Some of their decisions they've explained, others not. Whether or not "a reason" constitutes as a "good" one, depends of the individual, meaning that for some it does and for some it doesn't.

Any change made to the original story is bound not to be liked by some. Some changes spark more controversy and negative response than others. I don't necessarily agree with everything you said, but I understand where you're coming from and I respect your right to feel differently from the way I do.

Smile


"Our truest life is when we are in dreams awake." - Henry David Thoreau


Sildarion~Valenar
Bree


May 17 2014, 11:09am

Post #108 of 160 (924 views)
Shortcut
Please explain [In reply to] Can't Post

what might be the reason behind them changing

"This was a hobbit-hole. And that means comfort."

to

"This was a hobbit-hole. And that means good food, a warm hearth and all the comforts of home."

I am asking genuinely. No irony/sarcasm/ridicule involved. Smile


For me this only looks like the writers don't trust Tolkien's dialogue anymore. And while I am aware that not all of Tolkien's dialogues would work verbatim on-screen, but this one in particular seems perfect as it is. Without any problem.


"War must be, while we defend our lives against a destroyer who would devour all; but I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend."
~ Tolkien lets Faramir speak his own view on war and glory


(This post was edited by Sildarion~Valenar on May 17 2014, 11:10am)


BlackFox
Valinor


May 17 2014, 1:11pm

Post #109 of 160 (915 views)
Shortcut
I'm not the one you should be asking this [In reply to] Can't Post

I never said I knew the reasons behind every change. I could guess, but that would be pure speculation and I prefer not to go into that.

That said, I assume this is an example of a change you're not happy with. But now let me ask you this: is the film version not to your liking per se or is it the fact that it's not an exact quote from the book that makes you unhappy?

Smile


"Our truest life is when we are in dreams awake." - Henry David Thoreau


Sildarion~Valenar
Bree


May 17 2014, 1:17pm

Post #110 of 160 (921 views)
Shortcut
Oh sorry [In reply to] Can't Post

About the confusion.

And this is not a matter of whether I like the change or not. (as it is, I like the films for the most part and am not really the kind of purist - which is not a
derogatory term - to get bugged by every small change)
It is a matter of how much the makers respect the material here. I felt they stuck close to Tolkien as much as they could in LR.
And that probably they do not have the same kind of love for The Hobbit.


And hence my annoyance at them changing such an iconic line.

I asked tbe question since I am trying to figure out whether there is a justification to changing the line or was it a change for the sake of making changes?


"War must be, while we defend our lives against a destroyer who would devour all; but I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend."
~ Tolkien lets Faramir speak his own view on war and glory


(This post was edited by Sildarion~Valenar on May 17 2014, 1:22pm)


Rohirrim Rider
Rivendell


May 17 2014, 1:18pm

Post #111 of 160 (901 views)
Shortcut
I would imagine the change... [In reply to] Can't Post

...is to emphasise the 'home' elements of Bag End, a theme that plays across the rest of the film - Bilbo missing and longing for the comfort of his and then finally seeing how the Dwarves are denied theirs and using that as the motivation to help them.

That's what I take away from the change anyway. The elongated version certainly highlights it moreso than the book version.

Whether you agree on that change or whether it works is up to you but I can see the writers' logic.


(This post was edited by Rohirrim Rider on May 17 2014, 1:20pm)


BlackFox
Valinor


May 17 2014, 1:34pm

Post #112 of 160 (877 views)
Shortcut
Well put! // [In reply to] Can't Post

 


"Our truest life is when we are in dreams awake." - Henry David Thoreau


Altaira
Superuser / Moderator


May 17 2014, 1:57pm

Post #113 of 160 (869 views)
Shortcut
But, that's not what Viggo said [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm curious as to whether you actually read the interview. It's comments like these that only inflame the discussion by projecting one's own dislike of the movies onto Viggo.

If you read the whole interview, it's clear that Viggo is happiest on smaller projects where he collaborates closely with the director. No wonder coming onto a set where the movies were being shot out of sequence by multiple crews was overwhelming to him. Peter collaborated with the actors, allowing them to change lines or things their characters would do, but with such a big production it was never going to be the kind of sitting-in-a-quiet-coffee-shop-for-hours thing Viggo seems to prefer. Yet, what PJ did with all those crews shooting three movies at once was ground-breaking.

From this interview, and others of Viggo's I've read, it sounds like Viggo loved playing Aragorn, but didn't necessarily enjoy being involved with such a big production, especially one that involved more CGI as the movies progressed (which, one could argue, is partially Tolkien's fault - Ents and Mumakil, anyone?). It turns out it just wasn't a good fit for him personally. He took the role because of his son and found he was a bit of a square peg in a round hole. It's to his credit, and that of his co-actors and Peter, that the end result was an amazing Aragorn.

In the end, he's talking more about his personal preferences as an actor than judging the LOTR movies or Peter Jackson. One can agree or disagree with his preferences, but he in no way dissed the movies or the director that I can see.


Koru: Maori symbol representing a fern frond as it opens. The koru reaches towards the light, striving for perfection, encouraging new, positive beginnings.



"Life can't be all work and no TORn" -- jflower

"I take a moment to fervently hope that the camaradarie and just plain old fun I found at TORn will never end" -- LOTR_nutcase





J Pierpont Flathead
Rivendell

May 17 2014, 2:44pm

Post #114 of 160 (905 views)
Shortcut
Character [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
[Viggo] took the role because of his son and found he was a bit of a square peg in a round hole.

That's not necessarily a bad thing to project on screen for the character either. Aragorn is unlike anyone else in his company. Viggo arrived late and unfamiliar to a cast that had already been on location to train for quite some time. Aragorn was quite the same, joining the company after the start and unknown to most.


(This post was edited by J Pierpont Flathead on May 17 2014, 2:45pm)


J Pierpont Flathead
Rivendell

May 17 2014, 2:54pm

Post #115 of 160 (863 views)
Shortcut
Writing 101 [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
Please explain what might be the reason behind them changing

"This was a hobbit-hole. And that means comfort."

to

"This was a hobbit-hole. And that means good food, a warm hearth and all the comforts of home."

I am asking genuinely. No irony/sarcasm/ridicule involved.

I would not be so generous because I would ask the question rhetorically as if the point about poor writing were already made and obvious: It's the writer making their mark, changing things as they see fit when they feel the change is necessary to the way they want to tell the story. This change specifically looks to me like habitual writing where you want to list "this, that, and some third thing" - even if the original source is better. As someone mentioned previously, it looks a lot like arrogance and disrespect for the author when words are changed for change's sake and it has no other effect on story - i.e., no discernible reason.


Arannir
Valinor


May 17 2014, 3:24pm

Post #116 of 160 (857 views)
Shortcut
Very well and nicely put. [In reply to] Can't Post

Depsite my anger about some of the people who have raged against Viggo Mortensen here, the people disliking the movie do not do him a favour either by interpretating his comments in the most negative way possible.


“All good stories deserve embellishment."

Praise is subjective. And so is criticism.

"I am afraid it is only too likely to be true what you say about the critics and the public. I am dreading the publication for it will be impossible not to mind what is said. I have exposed my heart to be shot at."


shadowdog
Rohan

May 17 2014, 9:58pm

Post #117 of 160 (846 views)
Shortcut
This is where disagreements occur [In reply to] Can't Post

You state this as if it were absolute truth and not just your opinion:
"I hate these new films... heartless horrible cgi infested messes!"
Not all of us agree that they are: "heartless horrible cgi infested messes!" I enjoyed them and found them to be quite in tune with Tolkien. This is why I don't post in a lot of these threads. People give no room for discussion of aspects of the story and films when they shut the discussion down with absolute statements that allow no room for other opinions.


shadowdog
Rohan

May 17 2014, 10:04pm

Post #118 of 160 (808 views)
Shortcut
None taken [In reply to] Can't Post

I find the change makes the statement more in feeling with what a Hobbit hole is. I don't find a problem with it. It does not change the definition of a hobbit hole. Good food, warm hearth, and the comforts of home mean comfort.


Silverlode
Forum Admin / Moderator


May 17 2014, 10:57pm

Post #119 of 160 (842 views)
Shortcut
I assume [In reply to] Can't Post

the change was made to try to incorporate the rest of the quite detailed introductory description of Bag End, where Tolkien goes on to elaborate on the "comfort" comment by describing the layout and appointments of the hobbit hole for the whole of the next paragraph. In the book, he talks about the pantries, cellars, kitchens and dining rooms (good food), the snug, dry nature of a hobbit hole and its panelled walls, carpets and tiled floors but no smoke (warm hearth), and also about the ample provisions for visitors; the pegs for coats and hats, the bedrooms and bathrooms and polished chairs (the comforts of home).

I too would have preferred the original book version out of familiarity and sentiment, but that's my best guess as to why they made the change; they were trying to summarize the following paragraph as well.

Silverlode

"Dark is the water of Kheled-zâram, and cold are the springs of Kibil-nâla, and fair were the many-pillared halls of Khazad-dűm in Elder Days before the fall of mighty kings beneath the stone."



Bard'sBlackArrow
Lorien


May 18 2014, 6:51pm

Post #120 of 160 (722 views)
Shortcut
this does not bother me... [In reply to] Can't Post

I remember getting quite irked a couple of years ago when a Disney animation executive said people want their tentpole movies laden with [url="http://www.slashfilm.com/disney-exec-tentpole-movies-spectacle-story/"] spectacle rather than story.[\url]

Unfortunately, that is what most franchise films are these days (and why I was so pleasantly surprised/happy with Captain America: The Winter Soldier because it was characters/story first and big bombast later.)

Now getting back on tangent here, Mortensen is talking about LoTR and the Hobbit. I agree with his assessment. i do not think he's being rude, just stating his opinion. Ewan McGregor had the same issues with the Star Wars prequels.

I do feel that PJ has moved into the spectacle over story for the Hobbit films and in the latter LoTR films too, but that does not stop me from hoping the last Hobbit film will have some splendid character moments.

I'll stop here since I'm not much of a PJ fan and very much a Viggo fan. I understand why some fans will be upset by what Viggo said. I respect that and I'll go bugger off now.

... on the other side of tomorrow...


R11
Lorien

May 18 2014, 8:37pm

Post #121 of 160 (793 views)
Shortcut
Is it really not clear to you [In reply to] Can't Post

That that whole sentence is the poster's opinion? To me it's very clearly posted as the poster's absolute opinion.... At any rate, it's good to see Viggo being unafraid to openly state what has been obvious to some of us. He's always been an interesting man who has eschewed the "big time" Hollywood template...


ron


Avnar
Rohan


May 18 2014, 10:49pm

Post #122 of 160 (743 views)
Shortcut
Um... [In reply to] Can't Post

"I" ... "I think" ...and I stand by my opinion.

I have no agenda. I went into the hobbit hoping for a great film just like lotrs but what I got was a massacre of my favourite book!

And the reason I agree with Viggo is because I think he is bang on.

There is nothing subtle about these films...bird poo in Radagasts hair?? Huge amounts of snot dripping off the trolls?? The great goblin??

Pj is childish. And he ruined these films to amuse himself.


(This post was edited by Avnar on May 18 2014, 10:50pm)


Annatar598
Rohan


May 19 2014, 12:59am

Post #123 of 160 (742 views)
Shortcut
He took his family to DOS' premiere [In reply to] Can't Post

and tweeted glowing reviews about DOS. He loves the Hobbit movies apparently if his tweets are any indication.

"[Annatar598] is an overzealous apologist [for PJ]" - Certain TORn member.

Really? Alright...

Well, proud to be one I guess.


Oscarilbo
Lorien


May 19 2014, 8:57pm

Post #124 of 160 (613 views)
Shortcut
well... [In reply to] Can't Post

I think in the end, PJ's movies are as lengthy as they are, not just because he wants to stay as close to the books as cinematically possible, but because he doesn't want to sacrifice neither character development nor action. He always give us both!

Viggo is giving his opinion based on the already lengthy movies, and if they were done the way he envision them, they may have been very dense but tedious movies (of course as movies).

"The World is Changed, I feel it in the water. I feel it in the earth. I smell it in the air"


mae govannen
Tol Eressea


May 20 2014, 11:30am

Post #125 of 160 (627 views)
Shortcut
Thank you for straightening this out, Altaira, [In reply to] Can't Post

and clarifying what is actually the gist of the matter: Viggo only expressed his own preferences as an actor for another kind of films than those Sir PJ loves to make... and is particularly good at.

'Is everything sad going to come untrue?'
(Sam, 'The Field of Cormallen', in 'The Return of the King'.)

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.