|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mr. Arkenstone (isaac)
Tol Eressea
May 27 2015, 4:57pm
Post #26 of 95
(1062 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Imagine they would had used the characters of the book to flesh out more story
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Galion a drunken elf would have been memorable for sure.
Bilbo stealing food from the table of Thranduil would have been memorable for sure
Only, if you look for the moment of DOS EE where the dwarves and Gandalf and Bilbo meet Beorn, that is comedy, not goofy one, and is memorable
Roac could have been fleshed out more to explain story of Dale for example.
Even Dain, more Dain would have been excellent. I feel they dont trusted in the book enough. The Hobbit is a world in its own, in the book there are A LOT of hints of things that are not explained that could have been used.
The flagon with the dragon has the brew that is true
Survivor to the battle for the fifth trailer
Hobbit Cinema Marathon Hero
|
|
|
Mr. Arkenstone (isaac)
Tol Eressea
May 27 2015, 4:59pm
Post #27 of 95
(1064 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Fili and Kili being woman would have been cool
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Im not talking about not having Tauriel essence, but Im talking about not adding more characters that drag the focus off the party and his goal. im talking about USING the characters you already have in the book and make them BREATHE. not crowding the story even more as it already is in the book
The flagon with the dragon has the brew that is true
Survivor to the battle for the fifth trailer
Hobbit Cinema Marathon Hero
|
|
|
RosieLass
Valinor
May 27 2015, 5:03pm
Post #28 of 95
(1060 views)
Shortcut
|
|
It's not the fact that she fell in love that is the problem.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I'm a sucker for a good romance, as much as anyone.
It's the fact that that's ALL women in movies ever seem to do.
I.e., they're in the movie only because of their relationship with the male characters.
Why can't we have a strong female character who isn't in a relationship with anyone? Why can't we have a female character who just does stuff? You know, like the guys do?
A big issue these days is the way popular culture/media reinforces the notion that you have to be skinny and pretty to be acceptable. There's another notion -- that if you don't have a man, there's something wrong with you -- that is, IMO, equally insidious and equally damaging. That's why girls hook up with totally unsuitable guys and why women stay in relationships with horrible men. Because it's better to have anyone than no one. Right?
"Being negative only makes a difficult journey more difficult. You may be given a cactus, but you don't have to sit on it."
--Joyce Meyer
A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. LLAP
--Leonard Nimoy
|
|
|
RosieLass
Valinor
May 27 2015, 5:06pm
Post #29 of 95
(1054 views)
Shortcut
|
That's the Tauriel I liked. The Tauriel who wasn't afraid to stand up for what was right, even if she was the only one who thought it was right.
It was the lovelorn Tauriel stumbling around the battle field bleating for her boyfriend whom I didn't like.
"Being negative only makes a difficult journey more difficult. You may be given a cactus, but you don't have to sit on it."
--Joyce Meyer
A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. LLAP
--Leonard Nimoy
|
|
|
Mr. Arkenstone (isaac)
Tol Eressea
May 27 2015, 5:08pm
Post #30 of 95
(1052 views)
Shortcut
|
Guys are pictured to have to wind THE LADY, and many times they get involved into a hell of relationships.
Yes the thing of roles can hurt and make people follow their heads and fears instead of they hearts( a heart can tell you to stay single wheter if you are male or female)
In the case of the hobbit I am not judging that. Im off because they crowded the story even more, I would have prefered they had used the characters they had
And in this case a romance has no place I think (im not against it at all but not here)
However I like Tauriel, and Kili, but in another movie, not here
The flagon with the dragon has the brew that is true
Survivor to the battle for the fifth trailer
Hobbit Cinema Marathon Hero
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Immortal
May 27 2015, 5:08pm
Post #31 of 95
(1051 views)
Shortcut
|
Imagine they would had used the characters of the book to flesh out more story
Jackson did do this to some extent, but not (as you point out) with the more incidental characters already in the story. Bard effectively (if not in fact) becomes the guardsman who first questions the company when it arrives at Lake-town, although the circumstances are much altered. Thanduil is used much more extensively than in the book. The Dwarves (most of them, anyway) are given a role in Bilbo's interactions with Smaug, while the rest of the company have bits of business at the same time in Esgaroth. And, love it or hate it, there is the Kili/Tauriel thing.
"At the end of the journey, all men think that their youth was Arcadia..." - Phantom F. Harlock
|
|
|
Kilidoescartwheels
Valinor
May 27 2015, 5:21pm
Post #32 of 95
(1046 views)
Shortcut
|
Well despite my name I said in another post that Kili would have been a good choice for female, but let's leave Fili a guy - how 'bout Ori as a girl, with two over-protective older bros?
Proud member of the BOFA Denial Association
|
|
|
Kilidoescartwheels
Valinor
May 27 2015, 5:22pm
Post #33 of 95
(1044 views)
Shortcut
|
|
You'd like the new "Mad Max" movie then
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Hm, Tauriel vs. Imperator Furiosa - OUCH!
Proud member of the BOFA Denial Association
|
|
|
Milieuterrien
Rohan
May 27 2015, 6:16pm
Post #34 of 95
(1029 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I wonder which Tauriel's character trait ignites the fandom spark
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I wouldn't say it is the alleged romance between her and Kili, for this one is so short-lived in the movie.
As many other said here and there, she was mostly involved for the sake of the world, confronting her king on that point.
Even her relation with Kili can be interpreted as a picture of this involvement, IMO.
Tauriel absolutely doesn't want to show herself as cold-hearted as Thranduil, regarding dwarves and 'mortals' in general.
Thranduil's contempt toward mortality is something she doesn't share. Maybe Tauriel didn't understand that what Thranduil hates in mortality is not mortality itself, but the consequences of the choice of his beloved wife, who sacrificed herself, i.e. accepted to die.
Given the antagonism between Thranduil and Tauriel, what we may ask is : which side will the fandom chose ? Life (Thranduil) or sacrifice (Tauriel) ?
(This post was edited by Milieuterrien on May 27 2015, 6:17pm)
|
|
|
Bombadil
Half-elven
May 27 2015, 6:31pm
Post #35 of 95
(1020 views)
Shortcut
|
Some lines in the Movie say she was "Isolated"...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
She didn't know anything about Gundabad or Angmar..
"WHAT lied behind this?"
She didn't know anything about Leggy's Mother.
@First she viewed the Dwarves as an Enemy, since
SHE would Not toss a knife to Kili when we first meet her.
She might have spent a good Deal of her time in the south in
The Mirkwood Mountains...only to come North sometime
later, because of her fighting skills...
SHE is truly a Question Mark?.?.?.?
Had she EVER been to
Dale?
Doubt it.
www.charlie-art.biz
"What Your Mind can conceive... charlie can achieve"
|
|
|
RosieLass
Valinor
May 27 2015, 6:32pm
Post #36 of 95
(1014 views)
Shortcut
|
That kind of film doesn't really appeal to me. It sounds exhausting.
But yes, what I've heard of the character Furiosa is exactly the kind of female character we need more of.
"Being negative only makes a difficult journey more difficult. You may be given a cactus, but you don't have to sit on it."
--Joyce Meyer
A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. LLAP
--Leonard Nimoy
|
|
|
Kilidoescartwheels
Valinor
May 27 2015, 6:41pm
Post #37 of 95
(1012 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Well they DID flesh out two of them
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I think Bard and Thranduil were nicely fleshed out - and making Bard a family man helped explain why he stayed to fight instead of cut and run like Alfrid. It was pointed out on another thread that their book personas were reversed, with Thranduil being more interested in attacking the Dwarves and Bard being initially more reluctant, so that is one area in BOT5A where the script stayed closer to the book. Also there's my favorite line, "I may be a burglar but I'd like to think I'm an honest one." There was also another discussion about Alfrid, and whether the Master couldn't have done all that in the movie. Stephen Fry is certainly capable, so why the Master's part was given to Alfrid is a head-scratcher.
And there's all kinds of speculation regarding Dain/Billy Connelly. I don't know why PJ would hire such a high-profile actor (who did great with what little he was given) and then cut his part down to less than 5 minutes. And was he really completely replaced with CGI? If so, WHY? His health? His inability to move well enough - isn't that what stunt doubles are for? Yes, he'll get a coronation scene in the EE, big whoopti-do! Maybe he'll get TEN minutes, LOL! I blame the insisted 144 minute runtime for that, AND for cutting the funeral scene to the Dwarves kneeling around Thorin. But I don't think Tauriel had much to do with that.
HERE'S a thought experiment (yeah, my boss is out of town and I'm between projects ): What if PJ had cut the scenes of Legolas & Tauriel running up to Gundabad, and instead they'd stuck around to help the Laketowners. They would still be there when Thranduil shows up, after having banished Tauriel and angering his son! What kind of tension would THAT create? They would probably take Gandalf's side, yes? And surely the fact that Legolas followed Bolg as he fled toward Gundabad could be enough of a clue to think a second army is coming? In fact, couldn't they have written that into the script, that Legolas knows there's an army of Gundabad Orcs, but is still caught off guard by Azog's army getting there sooner because of the Were-Worms? Could such a move (along with less Alfrid) have given PJ enough time to develop Dain a little more, or include the funeral/coronation scenes? I don't know, it's just speculation on my part.
Proud member of the BOFA Denial Association
|
|
|
AndHeHandedHimTheTobaccoJar
Bree
May 27 2015, 7:27pm
Post #38 of 95
(999 views)
Shortcut
|
Technically, Tauriel's character is actually in the book as a male...
Also, considering that Tolkien sort of already fleshed out the characters of Fíli and Kíli, and it was significant that they were his nephews, them being female would not work.
(This post was edited by AndHeHandedHimTheTobaccoJar on May 27 2015, 7:29pm)
|
|
|
Avandel
Half-elven
May 27 2015, 7:29pm
Post #39 of 95
(994 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Well, to get more specific....
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Well, of course, re any thread, but think it's worth repeating - we can all disagree/agree but all are fans.
Finally, let me say that although I agree with Avandel on lots of subjects (the Durins in particularEvilHeart), the idea that you shouldn't add any new characters to a movie adaptation because it goes against "canon" is not one of them.
Well, I should QUALIFY that, well, gee, way back before BOFA, if the *correct* footage re the Durins had been released in the first place I certainly wouldn't be fussing about canon - indeed, I've posted that Tolkien would have booted me right out of his classes, for asking any number of indignant questions re the Hobbit.
So for me 1) it's a question of DEGREE of presence re screen time and how this character functions in the narrative and 2) the reasons she is there at all.
So I apologize for not being more specific. IMO the addition of a female elf to me, dovetails with fleshing out the dwarf characters - e.g., I agree with PJ, in that film is a different media than a book. In a woodland setting, as described - the North including Laketown, to me it's on point that females of all races wield weaponry, and can and do fight - in DOS and BOFA there are other female elves wielding bows, swords. And I would expect women of a hunting/fishing community to be generally strong, tough, comfortable with knives and so on.
But - and I think Bomby is on point here, and I had posted similar before - the idea of an inexplicably favored young attractive female from tragic circumstances who is good at everything (more or less) and "wiser and more insightful" than her elders and rebellious whom everyone loves is not a novel or new presentation of a character.
Which to me was a seriously wasted opportunity to introduce a really INTERESTING female elf character, perhaps. Maybe she's all scarred because of whatever took her parents. Maybe she is older and/or just plain cranky a lot of the time. Or terribly shy. Or has a wicked sense of humor.Maybe someone like "Aunty" in Beyond Thunderdome - someone a little ambiguous. Or cynical. "Less wise, and more dangerous".
E.g., if you're gonna alter canon, IMO, make it interesting - which was certainly done with Bilbo, the dwarves, Radagast (I guess), Beorn, Azog - e.g., none of these characters are as I envisioned from the book, but ultimately I think incredibly successful. And Tauriel isn't even in the book, and while I can't say she doesn't "look like an elf", for me it's not a novel introduced character - more of something Disney might have developed and put out.
So that was a disappointment for me - I understand that "young girls" may not find MY kind of female character appealing. IMO hard to say - but for myself, I wish Tauriel had been IMO one of the coolest female characters ever.
Re #2 - well, Tauriel just IMO didn't need to be there as much as she was. Yes, as the OP says in a response, I wanted more dwarf screen time - and Beorn, for that matter. And I would have like to have known what Thranduil was doing, towards the end.
Whether a "feminine presence" re BOFA, or even a new "guy" character, so OK, this new character is going to be on screen a lot. And did that LARGE screen presence work? For me, no.
Because of the function of the character through BOFA, which ended up being a rather (for me) tired rendition of a "tragic romance" (e.g. re Bomby's post, something someone with a TV has seen a lot of, in one form or another - and I'll also add, I think in general, the idea of two brothers falling protecting their uncle/king/family in general would be somewhat unusual to a degree even in modern media - I think?, not being an expert on modern media and I don't watch a lot of series shows.)
I've posted this before - but for me, if only they had ratcheted Tauriel's role back some - less is more. Finally, IMO, to put EL into a scenes that I don't think are her strong suites - heavily dramatic - or Orlando Bloom for that matter - worked. Actors doing their best, but with both of these actors, I think they are better off with action or brief reaction moments.
And that's not some terrible insult - no-one IMO in these movies was "awful". But some of the EL BOFA scenes (which IMO had other issues) would have required the talents of a Ken Stott to really make me FEEL them - for instance, Ken Stott can just look at Bilbo and there's a whole world of thought there.
Other things that occurred just make me uncomfortable re the dynamics and even the script - at least to me, when Thranduil speaks to Tauriel about his son, while it was obvious this was a long-term relationship with his "captain of the guard" I still had a sense of it being a "professional" relationship.
Then all of a sudden we seem to have a father/daughter dynamic going on (you will not turn away - not this time...) which to me implied a lot more closeness and was just, for me, jarring - in the way Kili or Bilbo chastising Thorin was not. Because Thorin/Kili/Bilbo/Dwalin HAVE that kind of relationship.
Not to mention the teenage daughter rebellion-I-know-better-than-you was to me, when I think about it, illogical. Point an arrow at a 6,000 year old king of legend, a deadly swordsman, with his soldiers behind him? I think how much more appropriate it would have been if Legolas had confronted his father - and for me, more interesting, and would have tied into the last scene of Legolas better. As it stands, for me, from DOS to BOFA, Legolas inexplicably jumps from loyalty to his father to rebel?
So, for me, it's the question of DEGREE pf presence, not whether Tauriel is there at all - and her general characterization, which I would have preferred to be more atypical heroine (within the reasonable boundaries of Tolkien's world). And I also tho, think many things were done right - re EL she is a believable fighter. Some of her scenes IMO are quite good. Nor did PJ sneak in (as so many directors do) a costume that is *inexplicably* low cut for an elf, or someone running around the woods. Nor was there any scene where *inexplicably* Tauriel loses some of her clothes which was refreshing for me re movies.
Re the OP - well, anyway, according the original post, within a given demographic the character is a success at least to a degree, and the movies made millions. I would have preferred a different handing *shrug*. But it could have been so much worse, across the board re:
What if instead of adding Tauriel PB decided to make one or more of the Dwarves into females? Better? Worse? About the same? Think about it.
Oh, I have. All kinds of things . There's no end to the terrors a director can develop in a film. For a while, after hearing about the announcement of Tauriel, I was terrified she was going to be a love interest for THORIN.
Well, re your comment - after an initial "eeeuwww" I suppose, realistically, it would depend. HUGE canon change - but then again, realistically, a skilled director MIGHT pull it off, and pull it off well. Then again, why bother?
A female dwarf in the Company would probably be functioning "like a man" on a hard journey, e.g. like whoever the woman soldier was in one of the Alien films, so would a female dwarf function in the narrative differently? Enough to even bother making that change, just for the sake of it?
Re:
And those that love the original story always have the option of NOT seeing the movie. I didn't particularly want to see "Noah" because yeah, they turned one of his sons into an adopted daughter. Yeah, THAT is a canon I don't particularly want to see someone "rewrite," but clearly lots of other people out there didn't have a problem with it.
*Grins* - well, I didn't have a problem with it re Noah. I just didn't like the movie "eh" and was glad I didn't pay theater prices. Whereas I DID have a problem with Tom Cruise playing Jack Reacher and have never seen that film.
And there ARE those I guess who have refused to see the Hobbit movies at all, or saw AUJ and that was it for them *shrug*. For me this post is dissecting my own feelings about a specific character treatment in some detail, not a reflection of the films as whole, which actually "in general" have become my favorite films, thanks to the strength of the performances and PJ's sumptuous treatment of Middle Earth - landscapes, sets, script, costumes, and lighting.
With that in mind - whatever quibbles I have re the films, again I have to keep in mind that THESE films, re another thread commenting on the problems that occurred during the Hobbit development, may not have EVER existed, which for me would have been a great loss at this point.
No Durins as we know them, no MF's Bilbo, no hearing Sir Ian give those opening lines that had me "wriggling in delight" at the beginning of AUJ , no Smaug, no Laketown, no Thranduil, no wonderful dwarves, no MP as Beorn, no incredible spiders, no haunting music, no Orcrist as we know that sword, no beautiful white stag, no Bree scene, no jaw-dropping Thorin speeches, no entry to Erebor/Misty Mountains scene (two of the most beautiful and moving scenes I have ever scene on film), no Bilbo sneaking the key, no Galadriel walking through Dol Guldur, no spectacular clash between Thorin and Thrandul with those stunning closeups, no spectacular scenes of Bard and Smaug, NO SMAUG!!!! NO THORIN and FILI and KILI!!!, no Dain, no bees or ponies, no amazing barrel sequence - did I mention NO THORIN????
*Sob* - it's too painful to even think of at this point, for me. So I can deal with some quibbles here and there re the films, because there is too much glorious here in the Hobbit films.
|
|
|
Avandel
Half-elven
May 27 2015, 8:02pm
Post #40 of 95
(975 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Nice comments IMO and interesting
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Re:
Even Dain, more Dain would have been excellent. I feel they dont trusted in the book enough. The Hobbit is a world in its own, in the book there are A LOT of hints of things that are not explained that could have been used.
Or not trusted the AUDIENCE enough a times? E.g., thinking back to Faramir dragging Frodo back to Gondor - I think the explanation was at the time "they wanted to show the audience the power of the Ring" -
tho IMO by that time I would have thought the Ring's power was blatantly obvious, and Faramir's depiction IMO suffered from what I loved in the book - that Faramir had such depth of thought and wisdom, and let Frodo and Sam go (which of course, does, eventually happen in the film)
And with the Hobbit films, trusting that NOT having a female elf would not have affected children/young girls' viewings of the films, or desire to see them. After all re appealing to children, there was also a dragon, dwarves, Bilbo, Radagast, and Bard's children, trolls, Legolas.
Re:
Bilbo stealing food from the table of Thranduil would have been memorable for sure
Only, if you look for the moment of DOS EE where the dwarves and Gandalf and Bilbo meet Beorn, that is comedy, not goofy one, and is memorable Oh, yes, IMO.
|
|
|
marary
Lorien
May 27 2015, 9:50pm
Post #42 of 95
(949 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Mad Max's Furiosa had one VERY crucial advantage over The Hobbit's Tauriel!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Mad Max (famously) passed the Bechdel test with flying colors. Tons of women in all shapes, sizes, abilities, and flavors of badass. One women even got to be a love interest. It didn't rattle anyone's cage because there were literally 15 other women being badasses and having unique storylines.
The Hobbit did not pass the Bechdel test, so Tauriel is thrown under much harsher scrutiny. Being the only female character to play a major role is just... well, really not fair, and I root for Tauriel from this meta-perspective; I bet people wouldn't mind the romance so much if there were other significant female roles.
Black Widow in the Avengers (an all-around awesome character, IMO), comes under scrutiny for having a romance/fertility (stereotypical "female") storyline because she is the sole woman on the main team.
I liked Tauriel. I like the actress, and I enjoy watching her story play out, and her fight choreography rocked my socks. But the reception cards were stacked against her by being the only main-featured woman in the films. But we are foiled again! It's already pushing it enough to have one non-canon character... they couldn't have introduced more women to level the playing field without punching a few more holes in canon.
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
May 27 2015, 10:17pm
Post #43 of 95
(936 views)
Shortcut
|
I suppose that's where older actresses have the advantage - Judi Dench - Maggie Smith and the like. They get strong, interesting roles without the obligatory love interest. Not, I hasten to add, because older women can't fall in love but because no one assumes it's why they're there. And I'm sure there are films featuring strong female characters, but I do take your point. Similarly on the skinny, the pretty and the unattached.
At least Hilda Bianca didn't fall for anyone....
(PS - wrong. Sometimes no one is a MUCH better option!)
(PPS - couldn't resist, though I know the question was rhetorical)
|
|
|
marary
Lorien
May 27 2015, 10:22pm
Post #44 of 95
(938 views)
Shortcut
|
Another issue: Tauriel's character arc gets criticized for including a romance. I get it. I really do. You create a capable female character and give her an interesting ideological struggle with her leader... and then throw in a romance? Yawn. Why do women always have to be reduced to love interest?
^This is the modern viewer speaking.
In the LOTR books and film trilogy, you have three female characters: Galadriel, Arwen, and Eowyn.
Two of these characters have a romance-storyline. Because Tolkien wrote it that way. (Galadriel is already married.) Plenty of other female in Tolkien lore also have romance-stories.
In that respect, it was, actually, rather in keeping with the spirit of Tolkien for Tauriel to have a romance as well. She stacks up quite fairly with Eowyn on so many points that I don't particularly find her an offense to Tolkien lore. (Even defying her king to "do the right thing"- so did Eowyn!)
Let's go with the premise that including a female character in the Hobbit was a good call.
Should they have written Tauriel in line with the female-romance trope perpetuated by Tolkien himself? Or should they have subverted it*?
*One might even say that they did. Kili was possibly more a foil for Tauriel than Tauriel was for Kili. Kili was certainly not her sole motivation. And they save each other as the damsel-in-distress pretty tit-for-tat, possibly even in Tauriel's favor. (Also not so out of Tolkien-bounds, just look at Luthien rescuing her poor Beren-in-distress!)
That being said, I do find it refreshing when films like Mad Max come along and have awesome stories for women that don't involve romance and subvert all kinds of tropes. It makes me psyched as a feminist viewer, and I think it forces out more creative storytelling.
It's also fun when books like Game of Thrones smash the noble hero trope into pieces. And then it's fun to retreat back into Tolkien's world, where I can read about Aragorn and Frodo actually triumphing over evil and forget that anything bad every happened to Ned Stark and his family!
Tolkien is wonderful. But his world is a place where classic tropes are held, rather than subverted.
(This post was edited by marary on May 27 2015, 10:34pm)
|
|
|
dormouse
Half-elven
May 27 2015, 10:33pm
Post #45 of 95
(926 views)
Shortcut
|
Lots of women like to see a female presence in things.
It pleases me to notice that Tauriel isn't the female elf in the King's guard. Look closely and there are several other female elves which makes more sense of her presence, I think. As for Tolkien, I'm not sure that he would have written a female elf into the royal guard or a similar role but then, at the time when he was writing it was very unusual for women in the real world to be employed in combat roles. There weren't any in the British army for sure, women in uniform were given support roles - intelligence, office work, driving and catering. But he wrote plenty of strong female characters, particularly in the Silmarillion.
As for your question about female elf versus female dwarf, I have to say I'd 100 times rather they had invented a female character than turn one of Thorin's company female. I've know Fili, Kili, Ori, Dori, Nori, Bifur, Bofur, Bombur and so on since I was eight years old so it would have been horribly disconcerting to have one of them suddenly change sex.
|
|
|
Milieuterrien
Rohan
May 27 2015, 11:38pm
Post #46 of 95
(911 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The Hobbit and the Bechdel test
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
You may have to consider some number and strength features in the Hobbit movies :
Of course everybody turn around Tauriel-the-allegedly-unexistant and for sure we may understand why, but let's not forget other heroic or impressive appearances, seen or unseen :
- Among the unseen, we have Thranduil's wife, so insignificant that her death among the orcs blew away Thranduil's mind : Gundabad, one point.
- We also have the bargeman's wife... A 'beautiful one' who gave him three childs and certainly not a male majority : Esgaroth, one point.
- Then, keeping on with Bard, we have his two daughters, who not only scream but also fight the best they can each time they encounter some orc :
If fighting orcs is a Bechdel-criteria : Laketown, two points.
- Following with Laketown, Hilda Bianca is certainly not the last one to wear the trousers : she stands up against Alfrid and almost immediately, by her sole speach, carries to her cause half of the survivors of the devastation. Shore of the Lake : one point
- Then in Dale, all of the women, including ...er.. excluding Alfrid, go to the fight : Dale, two points.
- Leaving Dale, let's have a look to... the Wargs. Who's their leader, hmm ? Wargs, one point.
- Now the spiders. Whole of them, girls of Ungoliant. Yes they lose against Bilbo's ring, but before that they had succeeded in cocooning a whole bench of armed dwarves. Mirkwood, one point.
- And the Elves ? As Dormouse noticed, we can see among them some she-guards. And obviously it wasn't one of them who slept while keeping the barrels. Thranduil's Estates, two points.
- Who Else ? Ah yes, Galadriel. Didn't she blow out a big orc, carry and save Gandalf, blow away Sauron himself ? Dol Guldur, ten points.
- And Tauriel, we can count her for seven points : Mirkwood/Spiders, Thranduil Estates/discover of the source of the escape, Barrels/orcs, Laketown/orcs, Laketown/flight from Smaug, Bree/standout against Thranduil, Ravenhill/standout against Bolg - she survives.
- Among PJ's team. Philippa AND Fran.
Among the males now :
- All the dwarves, somewhat flawed
- Among the men, except Bard and Percy, mostly flawed : the Master and Alfrid of course, but also the guards and Braga
- Among the elves, much of the killed ones are males
- Among the hobbitses, Bilbo is the standout
In fact, Lobelia Sackville-Baggins is the sole (relatively) deceptive female human-like character in the whole trilogy...
Did Mad Max really do better ?
|
|
|
Bombadil
Half-elven
May 27 2015, 11:44pm
Post #47 of 95
(899 views)
Shortcut
|
|
OTHER.. WayCOOL Qualities Tauriel has?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
1. Most excellent hearing.
When she talking to Kili on the Shore, she hears Legolas come up
from behind her..Almost like she has Eyes in the Back of her HEAD,
but it's her Super Hearing.
2. Limber & Light as Feather.
One that stands out? is in Bard's House when she Races up a Wall
& bounces down to kill an Orc.
Another time she jumps UP ON Bolg
& Both fall off a Cliff.
3. SUPER Sight?
From way down in Dale she hears Bilbo & Gandalf talking
"Where Ravenhill." "UP North"
Well, she can see Them from quite s distance,
& Sees Kili fighting Later..
Bom's perfectly fine, a with a BADASS Female ELF Warrior!
SHE may NOT be as Strong as Legolas,
but she held her own with Bolg
for Quite some time.
www.charlie-art.biz
"What Your Mind can conceive... charlie can achieve"
|
|
|
Kilidoescartwheels
Valinor
May 28 2015, 1:27am
Post #48 of 95
(896 views)
Shortcut
|
Depends on what you call "better." I've read SO many complaints about Bard's daughters doing nothing but screaming (not that I expect a little girl to pick up a sword and fight an Orc twice her size), but I've gotta take away the points for them. Tilda only threw one plate, Oin threw several. And how do you KNOW the spiders are all female? And the Warg leader? Sorry, that point goes as well.
Did Mad Max do better? Well, they had a female motorcycle gang helping them, there were only two men (one of which died), and Furiosa did all her bad-ass stuff with a mechanical arm! Black Widow can't even beat that! So yeah, Mad Max probably wins the Bechdel test. Now, which is the better movie? Definitely the Hobbit.
Proud member of the BOFA Denial Association
|
|
|
Mr. Arkenstone (isaac)
Tol Eressea
May 28 2015, 7:27am
Post #49 of 95
(856 views)
Shortcut
|
|
We are forgeting the teens have and NEED a sense of reality
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
This is beyond justificable, when a dwarf like Ori picks ups a hammer in the runn and backwards hits the head of a Rhino size wolf that is coming on his back and that the wolf dies instantly. Ori does so in the goblin tunnels aswell.
Or the head banging in Dain ¡COME ON! hahaha I would have liked more to see DAIN using is IRON foot instead his Iron Head, why is he wearing that awesome helmet for?
Or dwarves falling over a cliff the size of barad dur and being hurt in the slightlest.
I have said it many times, or you stay by a character words that dwarves have special features or people get nuts
The flagon with the dragon has the brew that is true
Survivor to the battle for the fifth trailer
Hobbit Cinema Marathon Hero
|
|
|
Milieuterrien
Rohan
May 28 2015, 7:45am
Post #50 of 95
(855 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Kids do have a sense of reality
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
... and they happen to learn the difference between reality, fiction and jokes.
Ori's hammerings are obvious jokes, as well as his slinging, as well as Bombur or Balin's twirls, as well as the Goblin tunnels chase
Concerning the battles, the Jacksons took the parodic approach as often as they could, as parody is one of the only, if not the only, ways to show battles to children.
Of course Tolkien sparsely parodied his own work, first because he most probably wasn't this kind of man, and second because his purpose was to introduce legendaries into Academics, and self-parody would have undermined that ambition.
IMO imaginary tales don't have to be taken as seriously as historic facts, otherwise where will we put the academic cursor ? Farther and farther from reality. And that's what I suspect is the present trend unfortunately.
|
|
|
|
|
