board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

Flawed but fabulous: PJ and me

Post Reply   Page 1 of 3  [ 45 posts ]
Jump to page 1 2 3 »
Author Message
Di of Long Cleeve
Post subject: Flawed but fabulous: PJ and me
Posted: Thu 09 Jun , 2005 11:53 pm
Frodo's girl through and through
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 989
Joined: Sun 06 Mar , 2005 10:08 pm
Location: The Shire
 
I thought I was all done with the LOTR film analysis. :neutral:

Apparently not. :D

I was getting off topic in the Arwen thread so decided to start a new topic on why I am sometimes so critical of PJ, despite being known as a revisionist at TORC and then, much more accurately, as a Transcendentalist.

The Transcendentalist approach rocks. This is exactly the attitude I shall take to the forthcoming Narnia movies, which I am feeling very excited about, because that fabulous trailer made me feel like December 2001 all over again. In other words, I will not - I hope! - be finding fault with the Narnia film if it differs from the book. No, the most important thing for me is whether or not the Narnia movies capture the spirit and the Christian allegory of CS Lewis's stories. That's the Transcendentalism I'm looking for. :)

I am no longer interested in comparing book and film differences in PJ. What I am interested in is discussing PJ's cinematic style ... and THIS is at the heart of any criticism I have of him.

How can I be so hard on PJ at times, when I have been such a champion for the films? Well, because this is LOTR, and I love LOTR with a dotty passion. So any film director taking this story on will get a hard time from Tolkien-nuts like me.

Secondly, because when PJ gets it right, he gets it SOOOOO right. Which makes the stupid stuff stand out all the more painfully.

Thirdly, because I think as a director PJ has great strengths - and weaknesses. I found 'Heavenly Creatures' impressive but uneven. I would say the same of ROTK.

PJ's gifts as a director are not in dispute - or they shouldn't be. Every time I criticise PJ, I think of how ghastly the LOTR films could have been, what an utter travesty they could have been, the story mangled beyond recognition by Miramax's distressing one-film deal ... and I am grateful. :) Truly grateful. Thank God for PJ and New Line: I mean it. It was the hand of Providence. PJ did something extraordinary, and he deserved all the commercial and critical success he garnered.

But, yes, I have quite strong criticisms of PJ now and then. It doesn't mean I don't appreciate the films.

PS. Ever since I got involved in LOTR fandom, it has heightened my film perception considerably. It's why I can watch Ridley Scott's 'Kingdom of Heaven' and regard it as enjoyable but still inferior to PJ's flawed but fabulous ROTK.

_________________

"Frodo undertook his quest out of love - to save the world he knew from disaster at his own expense, if he could ... " Letter no. 246

Avatar by elanordh on Live Journal


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 10 Jun , 2005 12:23 am
Offline
 
Posts: 5174
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Di, thanks for starting this thread! We were really starting to osgiliate Maiden's Arwen thread. I agree with what you have to say pretty much 100% One thing I noticed that Sassy said in the other thread.
Quote:
Throughout the entire film I found myself checking my book memory ...
To me, that's what spoilers were for. By the time I saw ROTK, I knew all the different ways that it was different from the book. So I could just watch it for what it was, a flawed but overwhelmingly powerful movie. That film moved me more then any other film I have ever seen. The fact that some it doesn't really make that much sense is a small price to pay for such powerful emotion.


Top
Profile Quote
Di of Long Cleeve
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 10 Jun , 2005 12:36 am
Frodo's girl through and through
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 989
Joined: Sun 06 Mar , 2005 10:08 pm
Location: The Shire
 
Voronwe ... it's not so much that I can't cope with things not making sense. I can easily cope with that, actually.

For some reason I've been watching Peter Weir's 'The Truman Show' again lately and I have picked up on a few things that make less sense when examined with cold logic than when you're caught up in watching the film. But these minor gaps in logic don't stop 'Truman' being one of my favourites of all time. It's a wondrous film and a very fluent, elegant, consistent piece of film-making.

No, it's not that. What I mind is PJ injecting an inappropriate tone. Which is why the drinking contest jars me so badly. And other things.

These things jerk me straight out of Middle-earth, and I find that harder to 'forgive' than any lapse in logic (which most, if not all, film narratives have).

_________________

"Frodo undertook his quest out of love - to save the world he knew from disaster at his own expense, if he could ... " Letter no. 246

Avatar by elanordh on Live Journal


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 10 Jun , 2005 12:55 am
Offline
 
Posts: 5174
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Di, sometimes PJ's inappropriate tone (what Akallabeth so aptly described as painting smilies on a masterpiece) take me out the story, but mostly they must pass by me with a shrug. The drinking game doesn't particularly bother me, it lightens the mood a little at a place where the mood needs to be lightened a little. The shenanigans in POTD bother me a lot more, because they distract from what is otherwise some fine performances by Viggo and ( :Q ) Orlando.


Top
Profile Quote
MaidenOfTheShieldarm
Post subject: Re: Flawed but fabulous: PJ and me
Posted: Fri 10 Jun , 2005 1:05 am
Another bright red day
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2402
Joined: Sat 12 Mar , 2005 10:35 pm
Location: Far from the coast of Utopia
 
Voronwe wrote:
We were really starting to osgiliate Maiden's Arwen thread.
You certainly were. [ img ]:P
Di of Long Cleeve wrote:
Secondly, because when PJ gets it right, he gets it SOOOOO right. Which makes the stupid stuff stand out all the more painfully.
Exactly. It's not like LOTR is a bad movie with a few really bad parts. . . it's that some things are just so amazing that you think "That's it, that's Middle Earth, RIGHT THERE." He even manages this with non-canon stuff, like the Sons of the Steward scene. And there was the Riders of Rohan, and the Shire, and some of it is just so spot on that the other stuff, like Faramir (:rage:) just stick out as being really and truly awful. It's because you know that they came so close that makes it so bad that they didn't quite make it. . .

Which is also why, like you, I find bad things to be so very jarring. You're brought so far into it, and then certain scenes (like the drinking game :x :x ) pull you out of it even harder than if you weren't really into it in the first place.

And spoilers don't quite work for me because then I don't get pulled into it. I want everything to be fresh. . . but of course that leaves me open for nasty suprises, like Filmamir (:rage:).
Quote:
Thirdly, because I think as a director PJ has great strengths - and weaknesses. I found 'Heavenly Creatures' impressive but uneven. I would say the same of ROTK.
Very true. Makes for some really uneven movies.
Quote:
I think of how ghastly the LOTR films could have been, what an utter travesty they could have been, the story mangled beyond recognition by Miramax's distressing one-film deal ... and I am grateful. :) Truly grateful. Thank God for PJ and New Line: I mean it. It was the hand of Providence. PJ did something extraordinary, and he deserved all the commercial and critical success he garnered.
I always have this vague guilt for critising the movies because of that. . . like I should be grateful for what I got. (And I am! For the most part. . . )
Quote:
Ever since I got involved in LOTR fandom, it has heightened my film perception considerably. It's why I can watch Ridley Scott's 'Kingdom of Heaven' and regard it as enjoyable but still inferior to PJ's flawed but fabulous ROTK.
Me too! I feel like I've actualy become a more intelligent person thanks to fandom, especially TORC (m00bies) and now here. :)

Editted for incompleteness.

Last edited by MaidenOfTheShieldarm on Fri 10 Jun , 2005 2:07 am, edited 2 times in total.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Sassafras
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 10 Jun , 2005 1:23 am
through the looking glass
Offline
 
Posts: 2241
Joined: Wed 02 Feb , 2005 2:40 am
 
Voronwe_the_Faithful wrote:
One thing I noticed that Sassy said in the other thread.
Quote:
Throughout the entire film I found myself checking my book memory ...
To me, that's what spoilers were for. By the time I saw ROTK, I knew all the different ways that it was different from the book. So I could just watch it for what it was, a flawed but overwhelmingly powerful movie.
See, I didn't find TORC until after I had seen ROTK. :Q The only other person in the entire world I had to discuss the films with, was my daughter in Oregon via email, and we agreed on virtually everything; except she was even more outraged over Faramir's character assassination in TTT than I was. (Didn't stop her from waiting in line three consecutive years for the midnight showing though :D ).

I mean, I had some inkling from the first two that ROTK would not be book canon. I just didn't know what or how much. Imagine, if you will, sitting down in breathless anticipation, quite prepared to be swept away into your favourite place in the whole wide world and being rudely thrown out by every radical amendment, trying to quiet your critical inner voice, trying to dispense with logic and allow yourself to be swept along with the rich tidal wave of almost roccoco imagery. It was like being on a bleeding roller-coaster ride! The softer, more subtle moments were utterly swamped on first viewing. Luckily, the second, third and fourth time around I had time to relax the purist tendancies and was able to fall in love. :)

It is, beyond any shadow of doubt, one of the most powerful films I have ever seen. Just how much my love of LOTR is responsible for that perception is impossible to know. All I know is that I have watched these three films more than any other. And I am never bored. I am always entranced .... except when, as Di says ...
Quote:
What I mind is PJ injecting an inappropriate tone.
The drinking contest certainly. The Paths of the Dead. I hate Gimli's supposed comic blowing away the ghosts! I hate the skull avalanche. :rage: and I absolutely despise PJ's self-serving group cameo on the Black Ships. That directorial indulgence makes a mockery of Aragorn's palpable despair when he thinks he has failed. A fine bit of acting by Viggo there. Ruined by the "You and whose army?". Not to mention PJ's melodramatic death by arrow. :x

I also think Aragorn decapitating MOS is inappropriate in tone. But we wont go there. :D


Top
Profile Quote
Sunsilver
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 10 Jun , 2005 1:57 am
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2666
Joined: Mon 24 Jan , 2005 12:43 pm
Location: Gone to the dogs!
 
How powerful were these films?

I attended the LOTR Symphony at Roy Thompson Hall on Sunday.

The music was played against a backdrop of images by John Howe and Allan Lee projected on two screens. There were THREE different choir providing the vocals (Kitchener-Waterloo Choir, K-W Youth Choir, and K-W Children's Choir, plus two astonishingly talented young soloists)

It was so powerful, so beautiful, I wept. Not just once, either!

PJ and Howard Shore...a match made in Heaven! :love:

_________________

When the night has been too lonely, and the road has been too long,
And you think that love is only for the lucky and the strong,
Just remember in the winter far beneath the bitter snows,
Lies the seed, that with the sun's love, in the spring becomes The Rose[/size]


Top
Profile Quote
IdylleSeethes
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 10 Jun , 2005 2:13 am
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 911
Joined: Fri 11 Mar , 2005 5:10 pm
Location: Bretesche
 
After FOTR I realized I would have to waste my first viewing on reacting to the flaws and that a second, mostly pleasant, viewing was required to appreciate what was in the films.

I agree the real problems are those that eject you from the experience. I actually didn't mind the drinking game because of memories of my youth in the military. ALITTTFOTR I can survive watching, although it suffers on reflection. Everything to do with the AOTD is disturbing to me.

It will be interesting to see if PJ matured before KK, but the subject matter lends itself to his more immature tendencies.

_________________

Idylle in exile: the view over the laptop on a bad day
[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Di of Long Cleeve
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 10 Jun , 2005 8:09 am
Frodo's girl through and through
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 989
Joined: Sun 06 Mar , 2005 10:08 pm
Location: The Shire
 
Idylle ... AOTD??? :scratch

I could never keep up with all these acronyms. :D

You're so right about 'King Kong'! But after that it will be 'The Lovely Bones' - interesting to see if PJ's style has matured for that. Given the subject matter (I've not read the book but know what it's about) I should hope so!

'Heavenly Creatures' shows PJ's strengths - great use of imagery (I love Sassy's description of the imagery in ROTK as 'roccoco') and great use of atmosphere. He gets two great performances out of Kate Winslet and Melanie Lynskey, but I feel he does allow Winslet, talented lass though she is, to sometimes over-act. It's a very striking film, visually and emotionally, and that is absolutely true of his LOTR films too. :) It's also a bit over the top at times, and that is also true of PJ's LOTR!

Maiden ... I think it's precisely because the films are SO good - IMO - that we are allowed to be critical. ;)

Yes, Sunsilver, the Shore concert is wonderful. :)

_________________

"Frodo undertook his quest out of love - to save the world he knew from disaster at his own expense, if he could ... " Letter no. 246

Avatar by elanordh on Live Journal


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 10 Jun , 2005 12:51 pm
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
Quote:
other stuff, like Faramir () just stick out as being really and truly awful.
Oh yeah? :D What you find "truly awful", I find better than the book!

edit- Are you saying it's awful because it's awful film-making, or simply because it's different to what you hoped it would be? As much venom as there is towards Filmamir, I fail to see how anyone looking at the films purely as films could call his character bad film-making - it's mostly down to book comparisons, IMO.

edit again - yov was saying exactly the same! :)

Damn, I really should be working..

Last edited by Iavas_Saar on Fri 10 Jun , 2005 1:00 pm, edited 2 times in total.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
yovargas
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 10 Jun , 2005 12:58 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 14774
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 12:11 pm
 
It amazes me that people still haven't gotten over Faramir. Okay, so he's different from the book. But within the context of the movie, there is nothing wrong with him as a character. The only thing I don't like (and the only major fault I find in TTT) is his too-sudden change of heart after the Nazgul encounter...that always felt a bit fake and rushed and overly-convenient. That moment aside, I can't see a thing wrong with him as the movie's character.


Top
Profile Quote
Alatar
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 10 Jun , 2005 1:08 pm
of Vinyamar
Offline
 
Posts: 8274
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 4:39 pm
Location: Ireland
Contact: ICQ
 
I have to agree, but then I never found book Faramir to be as fascinating a character as everyone else made him out to be. I distictly remember the Uh-Oh moment on my first reading when I found out he was Boromir's brother. Then his skillful interrogation of them (which was far from benign). The only difference from a practical point of view between Book and Film Faramir is that Film Faramir makes the correct decision later and with more cause.

Book Faramir has no reason other than the word of a strange hobbit and his own judgement of character as guide when he releases the most powerful weapon in the world "in the hands of a witless halfling" to enter Mordor. It's very noble, sure, but it's hardly bright.

Film Faramir sees the seductive power of the Ring first hand when he is tempted by it himself. He sees and undserstands the burden that Frodo has taken of his own free will. He sees and understands that these two hobbits with their friendship have a chance to achieve what Gondor cannot. Who would be there to help and struggle with Denethor as Sam did for Frodo. He now understands that bringing the Ring to Gondor would overthrow his Father. He makes an informed choice.

I have to agree with Iavas here, Film Faramir is a far more compelling character.

Alatar

_________________

[ img ]
These are my friends, see how they glisten...


Top
Profile Quote
yovargas
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 10 Jun , 2005 1:11 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 14774
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 12:11 pm
 
I wouldn't say far more compelling; I'd leave that description for Boromir. :) But I do find him a more interesting character dramatically.


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 10 Jun , 2005 1:26 pm
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
Quote:
I have to agree, but then I never found book Faramir to be as fascinating a character as everyone else made him out to be. I distictly remember the Uh-Oh moment on my first reading when I found out he was Boromir's brother. Then his skillful interrogation of them (which was far from benign). The only difference from a practical point of view between Book and Film Faramir is that Film Faramir makes the correct decision later and with more cause.

Book Faramir has no reason other than the word of a strange hobbit and his own judgement of character as guide when he releases the most powerful weapon in the world "in the hands of a witless halfling" to enter Mordor. It's very noble, sure, but it's hardly bright.

Film Faramir sees the seductive power of the Ring first hand when he is tempted by it himself. He sees and undserstands the burden that Frodo has taken of his own free will. He sees and understands that these two hobbits with their friendship have a chance to achieve what Gondor cannot. Who would be there to help and struggle with Denethor as Sam did for Frodo. He now understands that bringing the Ring to Gondor would overthrow his Father. He makes an informed choice.
:clap:

All debates lead to Faramir, sooner or later... ;)

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Di of Long Cleeve
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 10 Jun , 2005 1:56 pm
Frodo's girl through and through
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 989
Joined: Sun 06 Mar , 2005 10:08 pm
Location: The Shire
 
Alatar wrote:
Film Faramir sees the seductive power of the Ring first hand when he is tempted by it himself. He sees and undserstands the burden that Frodo has taken of his own free will. He sees and understands that these two hobbits with their friendship have a chance to achieve what Gondor cannot. Who would be there to help and struggle with Denethor as Sam did for Frodo. He now understands that bringing the Ring to Gondor would overthrow his Father. He makes an informed choice.
But to me this is what Book!Faramir does (and yes, I think he is tempted, but resists it). Book Faramir's decision to let Frodo go comes across as totally informed. It convinced me 21 years ago and it still convinces me. Of course it's crazy, according to his father's - and the world's - logic. But Faramir seems to have spiritual insight that letting Frodo go is the right thing to do. Tolkien has already convinced me that the way to defeat Sauron is NOT through might. That's the message established in Chapter 2 of FOTR. I believed it then, I believe it now!

Whereas PJ only succeeds in messing with my head. OK, so Film Faramir sees how powerful the Ring is. He sees Frodo nearly put the thing on in front of the Nazgul. And that convinces him to let Frodo go. HUH???? :scratch

How is that supposed to be 'more cause'? It. Doesn't. Make. Any. Sense.


Boy, this is just like old times. ;)

_________________

"Frodo undertook his quest out of love - to save the world he knew from disaster at his own expense, if he could ... " Letter no. 246

Avatar by elanordh on Live Journal


Top
Profile Quote
Wilma
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 10 Jun , 2005 2:02 pm
Takoyaki is love
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2994
Joined: Tue 22 Feb , 2005 12:55 pm
Location: Oshawa, Ontario, Canada
 
Faramir :love:

*Swooooooooon*

_________________

Itoshiki Sensei from Sayonara Zetsubou Sensei. Avatar by: sparklessence

"There is no such thing as coincidence in this world, only hitsuzen." - Yuko Ichihara and Kimihiro Watanuki - xxxHolic

"I'm modest, I'll keep my knickers on and die!" - My sister Grace commenting on Bear Gryllis on an episode of Oprah :rofl:

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Di of Long Cleeve
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 10 Jun , 2005 2:25 pm
Frodo's girl through and through
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 989
Joined: Sun 06 Mar , 2005 10:08 pm
Location: The Shire
 
But who makes ya swoon MORE, Wilma, Book Faz or Film Faz? :devil:

Book!Faramir is one of the literary :love: of my life, along with Mr. Knightley from 'Emma'. (Frodo, of course, has always been my favourite character in LOTR, but I never had a romantic reaction to him until I got wind of the films. :D )

Film!Faramir is gorgeous too. He also is the :love: David Wenham was so well cast for this role. If only PJ hadn't messed with my head in TTT! I just pretend none of that ever happened. :D

Hey, it's my thread, I'll Osgiliate it if I want to. :Wooper:

_________________

"Frodo undertook his quest out of love - to save the world he knew from disaster at his own expense, if he could ... " Letter no. 246

Avatar by elanordh on Live Journal


Top
Profile Quote
Primula_Baggins
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 10 Jun , 2005 2:35 pm
Living in hope
Offline
 
Posts: 7291
Joined: Sat 29 Jan , 2005 5:54 pm
Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
 
Hey, in this thread, going to Osgiliath is literally on topic. :D

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
yovargas
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 10 Jun , 2005 3:04 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 14774
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 12:11 pm
 
Di of Long Cleeve wrote:
Whereas PJ only succeeds in messing with my head. OK, so Film Faramir sees how powerful the Ring is. He sees Frodo nearly put the thing on in front of the Nazgul. And that convinces him to let Frodo go. HUH???? :scratch

How is that supposed to be 'more cause'? It. Doesn't. Make. Any. Sense.
Unfortunately, you're right. As I said above, his sudden change of mind here is the only major fault I find with TTT. But, while it bugs me, I don't really care that much because Faramir is SOOOOOOO not the focus of this moment. This is ALL about Frodo and Sam and good lord is that stuff powerful. It is definately one of my fav moments in the trilogy - absolutely heartstopping. And an extra little sw :love: :love: n for Sam's speech. :)


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 10 Jun , 2005 3:24 pm
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
Quote:
It. Doesn't. Make. Any. Sense.
Yes. It. Does.

Faramir realises that any Gondorian who took the Ring would fall to it even more than Frodo.. and he also sees that there are no Sams in Gondor.

Yes Frodo has just been in danger, and will be again.. but there are nazgul all over Gondor, the Ring would be no safer in Minas Tirith. He also knows how far Frodo and Sam have already come, and probably guesses as well that Sauron will be expecting the Ring to stay in Gondor, and not go into Mordor in the hands of two halflings. The Ring is safer with two inconspicuous hobbits who have a much more stable relationship with it than a city of men would.

It was the right decision and a wise decision, and Faramir was perceptive and selfless enough to make it.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 1 of 3  [ 45 posts ]
Return to “Made in Dale: Hobbies and Entertainment” | Jump to page 1 2 3 »
Jump to: