|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LSF
Mithlond
May 6 2016, 8:11pm
Post #76 of 106
(1234 views)
Shortcut
|
The other two reasons you mentioned are also part of it, but PJ did state the reason I said in an article interview soonish after BOFA released. (It was linked in these forums awhile back). I believe they also said they like the "rule of three" of characters when going to new locations in the commentaries or Appendices. Point is, they were always intending to create a 3rd Mirkwood character. PJ said in the interview that it did not HAVE to be, but they wanted it to be, which I can see no problem with, since there is no reason why it can't be. I certainly don't see it as "pandering."
(This post was edited by LSF on May 6 2016, 8:18pm)
|
|
|
Starling
Gondolin
May 6 2016, 8:50pm
Post #77 of 106
(1225 views)
Shortcut
|
I have seen 'could care less' numerous times recently and it was confusing to me.
In terms of the topic at hand, I couldn't care less what people think of the inclusion of Tauriel. I adore her and I love her story.
Now I must go away and wring my hands and worry about whether I am a proper feminist or not...
Otaku, the Tauriel stuff above is not directed at you, I'm just too lazy to figure out where to put it!
|
|
|
wizzardly
Nargothrond
May 6 2016, 8:52pm
Post #78 of 106
(1222 views)
Shortcut
|
Even though Galadriel was not technically supposed to be in the story, PJ did include her and could have given her more screentime, instead of making up a completely pointless and empty character that made no sense, and derailed major elements of the plot.
(This post was edited by wizzardly on May 6 2016, 8:54pm)
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Elvenhome
May 6 2016, 9:06pm
Post #79 of 106
(1217 views)
Shortcut
|
Based on behind the scenes footage, director film commentaries, and other outsource materials, i.e. articles, books, etc. my understanding is Tauriel was including (1) because the filmmakers felt there was a need for a strong female character and (2) they liked the idea of Galadriel and Gimli and wanted to incorporated something like it in these films. (Though IMHO Kili and Tauriel is more reminiscent of Aragorn and Arwen, but that's for another discussion).
Before she was Tauriel, the character already existed as a female Mirkwood Elf named Itaril. As Itaril, she was supposed to fall for an Elf-lord who was probably a Rivendell Elf (or might have been Legolas). But her original purpose was mainly to provide a different, more common perspective from that of the Elf-lords Thranduil and Legolas. However, we can see that she was also intended to add a bit of romance as a side-story.
"Things need not to have happened to be true.
Tales and dreams are the shadow-truths that will endure
when mere facts are dust and ashes, and forgot."
- Dream of the Endless
|
|
|
Otaku-sempai
Elvenhome
May 6 2016, 9:12pm
Post #80 of 106
(1214 views)
Shortcut
|
Even though Galadriel was not technically supposed to be in the story, PJ did include her and could have given her more screentime, instead of making up a completely pointless and empty character that made no sense, and derailed major elements of the plot.
As you say, Galadriel already existed in Tolkien's legendarium and did have a role to play during the events of The Hobbit as a member of the White Council. The Council taking action against the Necromancer is well-within canon.
Additionally, PJ could have had Arwen appear as, with Aragorn grown to adulthood, she might reasonably have been with her father in Rivendell. However, I don't know if Liv Tyler was even available and willing--and Arwen would likely have been little more than a cameo, not adding appreciably to the story.
Tauriel (as Itaril) was at least intended to provide a more common perspective from the Wood-elves as opposed to that of powerful lords such as Thranduil and Legolas. If her role had not been expanded to include a romantic relationship with Kili then I doubt that many would be complaining about her as much.
"Things need not to have happened to be true.
Tales and dreams are the shadow-truths that will endure
when mere facts are dust and ashes, and forgot."
- Dream of the Endless
(This post was edited by Otaku-sempai on May 6 2016, 9:13pm)
|
|
|
lionoferebor
Nargothrond
May 6 2016, 10:42pm
Post #81 of 106
(1199 views)
Shortcut
|
Point is, they were always intending to create a 3rd Mirkwood character. PJ said in the interview that it did not HAVE to be, but they wanted it to be, which I can see no problem with, since there is no reason why it can't be. I certainly don't see it as "pandering."
...but they wanted it to be...this is my point. With the inclusion of the other females in these films, the third Mirkwood elf did not HAVE to be a woman, rather the filmmakers wanted the third elf to be a woman. And while there is nothing wrong with adding one more woman to the bunch, why when a male could have carried the role just as well?
If you don't seeing as "pandering" what do you see it as?
|
|
|
LSF
Mithlond
May 6 2016, 10:54pm
Post #82 of 106
(1197 views)
Shortcut
|
Does there have to be a reason why? Does the mere existence of a woman have to be justified? Why not have Bard have three sons instead of the son and the daughters? Why couldn't Galadriel have been a man in the books? Why couldn't BatGirl have been BatBoy? Why couldn't Katniss from Hunger Games have been a boy? Why couldn't Hermione have been a boy? Why couldn't Rey from Star Wars have been a man? Because the creator wanted them to be female. That's all the reason I need.
I see it as "women exist and can have places in mainstream stories and entertainment."
(This post was edited by LSF on May 6 2016, 10:56pm)
|
|
|
Kilidoescartwheels
Doriath
May 6 2016, 11:35pm
Post #83 of 106
(1189 views)
Shortcut
|
There are those of us who read the book and wonder WHY the Dwarves were so unprepared for their quest. The difference is, Frodo was kind of forced into delivering the ring, whereas the Dwarves weren't forced, but decided to check out Erebor & see if they could get some treasure. That difference makes Frodo look brave, but the Dwarves look incompetent, at least to some of us. So, I suppose if you wanted a comedy then incompetent Dwarves would look okay, but this was never going to be a comedy, or a kid's movie.
Proud member of the BOFA Denial Association
|
|
|
Kilidoescartwheels
Doriath
May 6 2016, 11:42pm
Post #84 of 106
(1184 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Do you think there are no females in Mirkwood?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
In LoTR, when Frodo and Sam saw the wood elves leaving, probably half of them were female; ergo there would in fact be female elves in Mirkwood. So what's wrong with that? I liked Tauriel well enough, but could have done without the so-called romance. Galadriel is a powerful magical being, but Tauriel fills the (IMO obligatory) kick-butt female that every action movie needs now - and I'm perfectly fine with that as well, no matter how unrealistic it might be in real life.
Proud member of the BOFA Denial Association
|
|
|
LSF
Mithlond
May 6 2016, 11:48pm
Post #85 of 106
(1182 views)
Shortcut
|
|
when I read about the dwarves not being prepared...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
my thought was "Wait, so you want me to believe that 13 guys, who purposely set out to travel through the wilderness for months, where at the end they expect to find a dragon, only bring a couple knives between them? No thought to self-defense against wild animals or bandits or anything?" I think even as a child I would've thought that was stupid. I mean, I'm not expecting them all to be perfect warriors or anything, but when everyone brings a large musical instrument and not a weapon, I'm gonna question priorities.
|
|
|
LSF
Mithlond
May 6 2016, 11:50pm
Post #86 of 106
(1180 views)
Shortcut
|
All those "female" wood elves you saw were totally very androgynous and pretty men 
|
|
|
wizzardly
Nargothrond
May 6 2016, 11:55pm
Post #87 of 106
(1173 views)
Shortcut
|
I have no problem with there being women in movies...but there was no reason to add any into this story simply because there wasn't any. Many people have enjoyed this story since it was first published in 1937 without any women. Tauriel and the forced romance were completely un-Tolkienlike additions.
And there are many things that exist that weren't included in the hobbit movies...like walruses for example.
|
|
|
LSF
Mithlond
May 7 2016, 12:05am
Post #89 of 106
(1171 views)
Shortcut
|
Considering how early in the script/production process they were talking about Tauriel, I'm pretty sure her conception existed before Sigrid, Tilda, and Hilda (none of whom have particularly much to do). Galadriel is only really there for the DG subplot. I don't think those four particularly fill the "void," especially if three did not exist before she did.
|
|
|
LittleHobbit
Menegroth
May 7 2016, 3:05am
Post #90 of 106
(1160 views)
Shortcut
|
I have no problem with there being women in movies...but there was no reason to add any into this story simply because there wasn't any. Many people have enjoyed this story since it was first published in 1937 without any women. Tauriel and the forced romance were completely un-Tolkienlike additions.
And there are many things that exist that weren't included in the hobbit movies...like walruses for example.
Isn't ''Un-Tolkienlike additions'' a redundant term? Could there exist in your opinion ANY additions to the story that theorically could have been even a bit ''Tolkien like''?
(This post was edited by LittleHobbit on May 7 2016, 3:07am)
|
|
|
LittleHobbit
Menegroth
May 7 2016, 4:37am
Post #91 of 106
(1146 views)
Shortcut
|
What I meant was... you could just say ''additions''. No need for the ''un-Tolkien'' part. I am not nitpicking, I am just curious to know if you could be okay EVEN IN THEORY with ANY changes to the book.
|
|
|
ange1e4e5
Mithlond
May 7 2016, 12:53pm
Post #92 of 106
(1118 views)
Shortcut
|
|
You know, after watching The Last of the Mohicans,
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I think that Azog's killing of Fili is a reference to the scene where (spoilers!) Magua kills Uncas and throws his body down the cliff, as those he is closest to, his father, foster brother, and his love, watch helplessly as he dies and Magua throws his body down the cliff side. There's no words involved, only music, but the meaning is clear.
Then there's Fili's death, as his uncle, his brother, and his uncle's close friend watch as Azog delivers a speech to the uncle before killing Fili and disposing of him in the same way.
I always follow my job through.
(This post was edited by ange1e4e5 on May 7 2016, 1:02pm)
|
|
|
lionoferebor
Nargothrond
May 7 2016, 2:24pm
Post #93 of 106
(1105 views)
Shortcut
|
I don't see how the others, especially Galadriel, don't fill the void. Are they too not women? Do they not give us a sense that "women exist" in ME?
As for Tauriel coming first, once the other female characters were added there was no reason to keep the third elf as a female. Had the filmmakers wanted they could've made the third elf a male.
I am going to ask you a question. If the romance had been done away with, could Tauriel - if the filmmakers wanted - have been a male? Keep in mind, there are other females in these films and that the "rule of three" does not state/imply one of the three characters should be female. Also, I am very well aware the filmmakers can do as they so please, but could their want to include a romance have any thing to do with their decision to make the third elf female?
|
|
|
wizzardly
Nargothrond
May 7 2016, 3:58pm
Post #94 of 106
(1086 views)
Shortcut
|
Not everything PJ added was Un-Tolkienlike, however, a familiarity with Tolkien's work lends one a certain sensitivity to things that just don't seem to fit. Like for example, I find it extremely difficult to imagine Tolkien ever writing a cheesy middle-school level fanfic romance like the one that PJ decided needed to be shoehorned into the story. The LotR movies had some of these kinds of "additions", but PJ's hobbit had such an immense concentration of his own inventions that I could barely even detect any of the Tolkien left in it. So that's why I say Un-Tolkienlike.
|
|
|
ange1e4e5
Mithlond
May 7 2016, 4:11pm
Post #95 of 106
(1084 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Remind me how much Tolkien Peter Jackson has read, he at least is aware of Ungoliant.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Or Radagast is not a wizard.
I always follow my job through.
|
|
|
Kilidoescartwheels
Doriath
May 7 2016, 4:59pm
Post #96 of 106
(1079 views)
Shortcut
|
"I am going to ask you a question. If the romance had been done away with, could Tauriel - if the filmmakers wanted - have been a male? Keep in mind, there are other females in these films and that the "rule of three" does not state/imply one of the three characters should be female. Also, I am very well aware the filmmakers can do as they so please, but could their want to include a romance have any thing to do with their decision to make the third elf female?"
Well I will try to answer that - keep in mind, I'm not Peter Jackson nor do I presume to speak for him. Could the film-makers make the third Elf male? Of course they could have. The REAL question is, would it have been better? In my mind, no. A male third elf would have done little more than stand there and be the third Elf. There's no kind of dynamic there - nothing you can really do with it, IMO. As for Galadriel "filling the void," I think I already answered that. She's a magical being, not a warrior, and she was never at the Battle of Five Armies. Hilda's part was very small, and she was not any kind of Eowyn-type character. She was brave and willing to step up, which is admirable, but still it was a small part and since we don't see her again some speculate she was killed. Maybe, I don't know. Tilda - come on, she was a little girl, so no. Sigrid, maybe, but more than a few have complained that she seemed to be the "helpless female that screams alot and needs to be rescued." I guess the heroics were saved for Bain.
As I've said, I like Tauriel even if I could have done without the romance. You clearly don't like her, and that's fine, too. We're probably not going to agree on this. Tauriel was the Eowyn of these movies, and I think she was needed, but that's just me.
Proud member of the BOFA Denial Association
|
|
|
Smaug the iron
Mithlond
May 7 2016, 5:15pm
Post #97 of 106
(1076 views)
Shortcut
|
Sigrid, maybe, but more than a few have complained that she seemed to be the "helpless female that screams alot and needs to be rescued.
I nerver understood why Sigrid and Tilda gets so much criticism because they need to get rescued or screams a lot, they are children no worries, if I saw a army of orcs attacking me I would scream as well plus they have no weapons or experience fighting, yes I know Bain have no experience either but he was just lucky.
|
|
|
LSF
Mithlond
May 7 2016, 6:02pm
Post #98 of 106
(1065 views)
Shortcut
|
Why would they possibly redo all that design/story/casting/whatever else work they had done on Tauriel to make her male for no reason that late in the game? I don't know how late Hilda came into being, but I know that Sigrid and TIlda did not exist until Luke Evans was cast and came to NZ a few months after they had started principle photography, since it was his idea that Bard have more kids than just Bain. Considering how minor Hilda's role is, I can't imagine she was thought of anywhere near as early as Tauriel. According to a production timeline source, Evie Lily's casting announcement was 4 days after Luke Evans. So when Evie was cast, only Galadriel and maybe Hilda existed. So what are you going to tell her, "Oh, sorry, we have Galadriel and maybe a minor Lake-town woman, we don't need you anymore" and later "Oh, well we now also have two girls as Bard's daughters, we definitely don't need you anymore, we've got 4 female characters who say lines" and "We don't need you because we're going to turn Tauriel into a man now"?
Their "rule of three" is why we have Alfrid, so they don't think it has to mean one has to be female. Sure, she could've been male, but I would hardly call making an Original Character that they were going to make up anyway a female as "pandering."
As for the romance, I don't find it a problem that it was probably part of the reason for Tauriel being female, because there is more than that to her character and story. It was not the ONLY reason. Also... who's to say a male elf could not have had a romance with Kili, too? Making her male does not completely make that impossible (at least from a character and story pov) 
(This post was edited by LSF on May 7 2016, 6:08pm)
|
|
|
wizzardly
Nargothrond
May 7 2016, 7:13pm
Post #99 of 106
(1048 views)
Shortcut
|
|
pathetic beards...pathetic deaths
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Now that I think of it, PJ Fili, and PJ Kili's deaths may actually be appropriate to the characters as they were portrayed in these movies. These were obviously not the dwarves of Tolkien, and truthfully by the end, they didn't really deserve a more heroic send off.
|
|
|
ange1e4e5
Mithlond
May 9 2016, 12:54am
Post #100 of 106
(940 views)
Shortcut
|
The first is a clip from YouTube featuring Fili's execution by Azog. The second is Magua's killing of Uncas.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMRU5gQEFCc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYVz2G-r01U
The links don't have a hyperlink attached, but they can be copied and pasted.
I always follow my job through.
(This post was edited by ange1e4e5 on May 9 2016, 12:56am)
|
|
|
|
|
