|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CaptainObvious
Rivendell
Aug 5 2014, 6:32pm
Post #1 of 97
(1964 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Is anyone attached to the dwarves at this point? I'm not...
|
Can't Post
|
|
According to the teaser, we should be all torn up with worry about the dwarves, dreading their fate. But most of them have averaged a single line at best. I like Thorin, Balin and Bombur, but if the rest of them were to be tragically stepped on by a stone giant, I should not waste a sniffle on any of them. Tauriel has had more lines than nine of these dwarves put together, and she's not even a real character! Should this be?
I'm still wondering the names of certain members of the company, when they're onscreen. I feel slightly more sympathy for the actors playing them, because they spent two years shooting this film, playing the equivalent of glorified furniture. They probably thought when they first landed their parts, "I've made it! Hurrah!" Dean O'Gorman (Fili) was a staple on Young Hercules, he deserves to be doing more than he is.
Anyway, I've rambled on long enough. What's everyone else's thoughts? Does anyone care about these dwarves? Especially the dwarves who aren't Thorin andBalin?
|
|
|
Crunchable Birdses
Rohan
Aug 5 2014, 6:42pm
Post #2 of 97
(1087 views)
Shortcut
|
|
They still got more lines than Tolkien gave them.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
But yeah, could have done with some more character mo's
* crunch *
|
|
|
Estel78
Tol Eressea
Aug 5 2014, 6:50pm
Post #3 of 97
(1067 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Well, let's put it this way, i'm more attached to the movie dwarves than the ones in the book
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
It's the nature of the beast, having that many protagonists means less screentime for each individual. However, i do somewhat agree in that i think Fili and Kili was a missed opportunity. They are heir to the throne and stuff happens to them in movie 3 but i don't really care all that much. While Kili gets quite a bit of screentime the actor does nothing for me, he just comes across as generic pretty boy, no charisma. Fili on the other hand, which i like more, doesn't get anything to do. Bummer.
(This post was edited by Estel78 on Aug 5 2014, 6:52pm)
|
|
|
Subaruman
Bree
Aug 5 2014, 6:52pm
Post #4 of 97
(1040 views)
Shortcut
|
|
There have been plenty of lines with the other 11 dwarves
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
outside of Thorin & Balin.
I'm guessing you're using hyperbole when you state that Tuariel has had more lines than Dwalin, Bifur, Bofur, Fili, Kili, Oin, Gloin, Ori, Nori, and Dori (Bombur hasn't had any as far as I know). You can go through the effort of checking if you like, but that is far from the case.
I think many of us are emotionally invested in the characters at this point and it seems like many of the dwarves have been given far greater depth than could ever be found in TH text itself.
"Here is a book very unsuitable for dramatic or semi-dramatic representation. If that is attempted, it needs more space, a lot of space."
- J.R.R. Tolkien, 1956
(This post was edited by Subaruman on Aug 5 2014, 6:53pm)
|
|
|
tsmith675
Gondor
Aug 5 2014, 6:55pm
Post #5 of 97
(962 views)
Shortcut
|
Our destiny lies above us.
|
|
|
architecthis
Lorien
Aug 5 2014, 6:59pm
Post #6 of 97
(1021 views)
Shortcut
|
If Bofur was stepped on by a giant! I have never gotten used to the pig tails.
And I agree with your post - even the "more sympathy for the actors" part because while I don't feel like I know most of the dwarves, I do feel like I know the actors from watching countless videos of each of them discussing their on-screen counterparts.
|
|
|
DanielLB
Immortal
Aug 5 2014, 7:00pm
Post #7 of 97
(982 views)
Shortcut
|
Absolutely.
And since this is PJ's adaptation, he could kill off *any* of the Dwarves in the Battle (excluding Balin). My heart will sink regardless of who dies - whether it is Thorin, Dwalin, Dori or Bombur!
(This post was edited by DanielLB on Aug 5 2014, 7:00pm)
|
|
|
Lindele
Gondor
Aug 5 2014, 7:01pm
Post #8 of 97
(1055 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Gonna have to agree with everyone else
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
It seems like your reasoning is all jumbled. You don't care about the dwarves because they don't have enough lines, even though they have far less lines in the book...yet you say Tauriel isn't a 'real' character because she's not in the book...do you want what's in the book or not?
Tauriel is a real character, and a more central character to the story than many of the individual dwarves. Thus, she has more lines than some of them.
On another note...I do care about the dwarves. I don't think I ever felt one flick of emotion in the book even when [SPOILER] the main characters died....yet I am dreading what I will see in the film. I like all of the dwarves individually. They each have a very unique style, personality and look even though they didn't even amount to 'glorified furniture' in the book.
I'm definitely sad for that you haven't experienced any emotion from the films so far...I think you're missing out!
|
|
|
architecthis
Lorien
Aug 5 2014, 7:03pm
Post #9 of 97
(1006 views)
Shortcut
|
that anytime someone criticizes the film fans respond by criticizing the book?
|
|
|
There&ThereAgain
Rohan
Aug 5 2014, 7:05pm
Post #10 of 97
(962 views)
Shortcut
|
|
How is Tauriel not a real character?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
"The world is indeed full of peril, and in it there are many dark places; but still there is much that is fair; and though in all lands love is now mingled with grief, it grows perhaps the greater."-J.R.R. Tolkien
"Thanks for the money!" -George Lucas
|
|
|
Bofur01
Lorien
Aug 5 2014, 7:07pm
Post #11 of 97
(961 views)
Shortcut
|
Please no! :(
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Aug 5 2014, 7:12pm
Post #12 of 97
(942 views)
Shortcut
|
I think they have brought them out as individual characters. It isn't only what the dwarves say, it's what they do, their expressions, what they wear - all those things give them personality on screen. Differentiating between thirteen dwarves was a real challenge. A lot of directors would have been tempted to drop a few of them - and there were people here in the early days who were sure that would happen - but they took on the whole bunch and I think they've made a really good job of it. I hate to admit it, but the film dwarves have far more individual personality than the book ones do.
So yes, I care about them. I think the characters in these films are part of the magic - and if you've been reading the other threads in here you'll already know that a lot of other people feel this way too.
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
Aug 5 2014, 7:19pm
Post #13 of 97
(970 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Can't speak for anyone else....
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
... but as someone who lhas loved the book for donkey's years and also loves film I'd say that in this instance it's fair to point out, given the question, that in the book Thorin, Balin and Bombur are the only dwarves with any marked characteristics. The others blend into a group.
That's OK in the book, it doesn't matter. But in the film you couldn't have ten main characters no one could tell apart. It's not really a criticism, books and films are just different.
|
|
|
Noria
Gondor
Aug 5 2014, 7:20pm
Post #14 of 97
(926 views)
Shortcut
|
|
It isn't necessarily a criticism of the book
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
to say that the Dwarves are more developed and more sympathetic in the movies. Most of them were just names in the book and are pretty well indistinguishable. That’s the way that Tolkien wrote it and it works fine there. The only book Dwarf I care about is Balin and I don’t even like Thorin.
But that won't work in the movies where we actually see the characters in so many scenes. Seeing the little moments that we do get, how cute they are, how funny and how badass, I do care about each of these guys.
After reading the OP, I thought about the individual Dwarves and I do feel that I know something about each of them from what we have seen on screen. Nothing profound maybe, but it is different for each of them.
|
|
|
Elanor of Rohan
Lorien
Aug 5 2014, 7:21pm
Post #15 of 97
(903 views)
Shortcut
|
I have already discussed it in another thread, so I won't repeat myself here.
But I am not afraid to declare publicly every time that I do care for these characters (and I loved the book as well): of course on film you can't have an undistinguished bunch of people and what the script writers have achieved is really far more than I expected.
|
|
|
architecthis
Lorien
Aug 5 2014, 7:24pm
Post #16 of 97
(927 views)
Shortcut
|
I agree with you. I don't think the post I replied to is in line with what you're saying though. The poster uses the lack of dialogue in the book to justify the lack dialogue in the film - which I do not understand since they are indeed very different.
|
|
|
architecthis
Lorien
Aug 5 2014, 7:26pm
Post #17 of 97
(903 views)
Shortcut
|
|
It's a justification, if not a criticism
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
but really my point was that the OP never even mentioned the book.
|
|
|
Riven Delve
Tol Eressea
Aug 5 2014, 7:27pm
Post #18 of 97
(904 views)
Shortcut
|
and not just to Thorin.  I am pretty invested in Fili (and feel very jealous when he doesn't get as much attention as Kili). I like Balin and Ori, but I think both of them are going to be fine since they (sort of) appear in FOTR.
Heck, I like them all, and have since AUJ. (See my very first post ever.) It's not so much the lines that each Dwarf has or doesn't have, but the time, care, and detail put into each one, not only by PJ and co., but by the actors themselves, who are invested in their characters, portraying them wholeheartedly even when they don't have a "line" or the camera isn't on them personally. I never expected, being a book-firster, to ever literally see all these Dwarves come to life or be anything but different-colored hoods, so I'm guess I'm just grateful that they're on the screen at all.
“Tollers,” Lewis said to Tolkien, “there is too little of what we really like in stories. I am afraid we shall have to try and write some ourselves.”
|
|
|
Salmacis81
Tol Eressea
Aug 5 2014, 7:31pm
Post #19 of 97
(897 views)
Shortcut
|
I wish a bit more time had been spent on the development of book characters like the background Dwarves, Beorn, and the Master of Lake-town, instead of spending all that time following the adventures of Legolas and Tauriel.
But with that said, I do like the film versions of Balin, Dwalin, Bofur, Oin, and Gloin better than their book counterparts. I like Armitage's Thorin, but I still find myself wishing that he had a longer beard (same goes for Bofur, Fili, and Kili).
|
|
|
Salmacis81
Tol Eressea
Aug 5 2014, 7:34pm
Post #20 of 97
(893 views)
Shortcut
|
You'd think with 9 hours they'd be able to develop some of these characters much further than they have. I'd have preferred that to some of the overlong action scenes and PJ's own invented subplots.
|
|
|
QuackingTroll
Valinor
Aug 5 2014, 7:36pm
Post #21 of 97
(876 views)
Shortcut
|
|
In Pixar's 'UP' I really connected to the couple at the start - And they didn't speak!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Without any dialogue Pixar achieved an emotionally powerful sequence with two characters that we had no previous introduction to. Within a few minutes of the film starting half the audience was in tears.
PJ has three three-hour movies. I'm sure there's plenty of time yet to build some empathy toward the characters. We just haven't really needed that level of emotional connection to any of the dwarves other than Thorin and Balin.
(This post was edited by QuackingTroll on Aug 5 2014, 7:37pm)
|
|
|
Arannir
Valinor
Aug 5 2014, 7:37pm
Post #22 of 97
(873 views)
Shortcut
|
Sometimes I wonder whether it would really have been such a bad idea to not take all of them on the journey... although I know very well that this would have casued major eruptions with the fan community.
Before anyone tells me: "If there is time for Tauriel, there must be time for all dwarves." - I am not convinced. The dwarves always share scenes (more or less). You cannot just add scenes until all of them have their characters established that do not bring the story forward. Another issue is that you cannot give all of them some drama for themselves, some conflict or differing motivation for the quest. It could easily be way too constructed and forced.
But with the decision to include all of them - they have done their job, imho. I find all of the recognizable and most of them do have a character established by now. I think it is totally okay to have some of them in back-seat roles.
The only real criticism for me would be that Fili and Kili and their role as heirs to the throne was not highlighted enough.
"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." J.R.R. Tolkien
We all have our hearts and minds one way or another invested in these books and movies. So we all mind and should show the necessary respect.
|
|
|
Darkstone
Immortal
Aug 5 2014, 7:52pm
Post #23 of 97
(844 views)
Shortcut
|
******************************************
“The opinions that are held with passion are always those for which no good ground exists; indeed the passion is the measure of the holders lack of rational conviction. Opinions in politics and religion are almost always held passionately.”
-Bertrand Russell, Sceptical Essays
|
|
|
NamoMandos
The Shire
Aug 5 2014, 7:58pm
Post #24 of 97
(832 views)
Shortcut
|
that there have been problems with the characterization of the dwarves.
Personally, I think that PJ was mistaken in thinking that he could flesh out each of the dwarves as their own unique character in these films. Keep in mind, that the company of dwarves is not like the fellowship of the ring in LOTR - each member or subgroup of the fellowship had their own unique journey to go on, and as a result, each of them gets fleshed out (to some degree) as a character in their own right. When it comes to Thorin's company however, for the purposes of the story they really are just one homogeneous lump and no real differentiation of motives or personality is needed in order to drive the story forward or make it interesting.
In the initial marketing for these films, it certainly seemed like we would get a company of dwarves that was fully fleshed out as individual characters. I was looking forward to this, but I was skeptical that PJ would be able to pull it off well. In the end, I would say that unfortunately, he has not managed to pull it off well at all. What we are left with, IMO, is a very halfhearted attempt to make us care about these characters, and aside from a few of the principles (ie. Thorin, Balin, Kili) we know very little about them, and care about them even less. I am not just trying to be negative here; this is how I really feel. My emotional investment in the dwarves of these films has been minimal.
The reason why the dwarves in the novel work so well is because Tolkien never even attempts to flesh most of them out as characters; he just lets them be what they are - a classic, generic band of adventurers. Instead, he spends his time on developing the character who matters most - Bilbo. Personally, I find Bilbo's transformation to be far more compelling than the contrived backstory of anyone one of the dwarves - but unfortunately, I feel that he has gotten the short end of the stick in these ill-conceived adaptations.
|
|
|
SafeUnderHill
Rohan
Aug 5 2014, 8:00pm
Post #25 of 97
(824 views)
Shortcut
|
that anytime someone criticizes the film fans respond by criticizing the book?
try and explain why the film version was an improvement over the book for the cinematic medium.
|
|
|
|
|
1
