Fellowship of the Ring, the movie
David Goldfarb
I'll admit to a little bit of disappointment: I was hoping that it
would win me over totally to the point where I'd start clamoring for
Jo to go see it. It didn't do that. (And I do think that Jo is
best advised to continue her policy of censoring it from her world.)
Spoilers follow --
Nearly all of the actors were quite good. From the pictures and trailers
I'd seen, I was a bit iffy about Gandalf and Saruman, but Ian McKellen
won me over at once, and Christopher Lee after a short time. The big
disappointment was Cate Blanchett as Galadriel; she seemed a bit stiff,
and I really wish she could have pulled off her big temptation speech
without being all tarted up with CGI.
I find, oddly, that I've never had a clear picture of Aragorn in my
mind; so the one from the movie works well enough there. (Though he
was a bit young-looking -- almost everyone was, though it's understandable.)
The visuals were amazing, from the flood of the Bruinen to the Balrog.
Just about all the special effects worked *perfectly*, and the landscapes
were great, from the Misty Mountains to the Shire.
In general, when they followed Tolkien things were excellent. There
were an unfortunately large number of places where they felt a need
to embroider, and the embroidery was never for the better. For instance,
"To be a Ring-bearer is to be always alone." Um, what? Or having
Gandalf bump his head, or all the hugging. And the "jumping the gap
in the staircase" scene would have been better cut entirely, and the
time used for something that they'd cut -- maybe showing Galadriel's
effect on Gimli.
There's a hell of a lot to nitpick in the film. Still, I enjoyed it,
would recommend it to anyone who's not a serious Tolkien purist, and
am looking forward to the sequels.
--
David Goldfarb <*>|"O Captain! my Captain! The engines' race is run.
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | Though our ship has weathered every rack, our
gold...@csua.berkeley.edu | victors' prize is won;
| I canna change the laws of physics. You've burned
| them out, they're done."
P Nielsen Hayden
We liked it a lot; we'll probably see it again this weekend. We are
both lifelong lovers of the trilogy, we were both aware of the many
ways the movie alters and telescopes the story, and neither of us were
bothered by that in principle. If anything, on reflection, I almost
wish Jackson had cut and telescoped a little more; the movie is full
of wonderful bits I wanted to see just a little more of. I want there
to be a four-hour "director's cut" somewhere down the line.
I'm a Tolkien purist like this: I would be apalled if someone
published an arbitrarily cut-and-reordered version of the books.
Peter Jackson's movie isn't the books, it's an epic fantasy movie
based on the books, a work of art in close dialogue with a different
work of art. In those terms it's a roaring success. And as with any
dialogue, it encourages us to put our own two cents in.
This isn't a review, just some notes, and I'll use David Goldfarb's
handy spoiler barrier.
On Thu, 20 Dec 2001 10:10:30 +0000 (UTC),
David Goldfarb <gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
> Spoilers follow --
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Nearly all of the actors were quite good. From the pictures and trailers
> I'd seen, I was a bit iffy about Gandalf and Saruman, but Ian McKellen
> won me over at once, and Christopher Lee after a short time.
The Gandalf vs Saruman fight scene, not in the book, was for me the
weakest thing in the movie.
> The big
> disappointment was Cate Blanchett as Galadriel; she seemed a bit stiff,
> and I really wish she could have pulled off her big temptation speech
> without being all tarted up with CGI.
On the other hand, lots of people have said this, so I was surprised
at how effective and moving the big Frodo-and-Galadriel scene was for
me.
A fellow Tor editor, Jim Minz, remarked that just as there are things
the book does better than any movie could (obviously), there are also
a few things the movie does better than the book, and the effects
surrounding any use of the Ring are an excellent example of that.
> I find, oddly, that I've never had a clear picture of Aragorn in my
> mind; so the one from the movie works well enough there. (Though he
> was a bit young-looking -- almost everyone was, though it's understandable.)
Like many (not all) of the characters, Aragorn matched up with my
pre-existing image to a startling degree. Mortenstern's performance
in the role is terse and effective; you can see things being bottled
up for payoff in the next two. Meanwhile, Boromir, a character
confine to the first movie, is played _very_ well by Sean Bean, and
the two of them together turn in a death-of-Boromir scene which is
resolent with the best kind of ancient-warrior heroism.
> In general, when they followed Tolkien things were excellent. There
> were an unfortunately large number of places where they felt a need
> to embroider, and the embroidery was never for the better. For instance,
> "To be a Ring-bearer is to be always alone." Um, what? Or having
> Gandalf bump his head, or all the hugging. And the "jumping the gap
> in the staircase" scene would have been better cut entirely, and the
> time used for something that they'd cut -- maybe showing Galadriel's
> effect on Gimli.
I don't agree with all of this, certainly not the idea that the
movie's flaws map neatly onto where they departed from the text.
(Cutting Bombadil was a good move, for instance, and I found I had no
problem with replacing Glorfindel with Arwen as Frodo's rescuer just
before Rivendell; Liv Ullman handles the role with surprising poise.)
Gandalf bumping his head repeatedly in Bag End is an effectively
movie-ish way to show Gandalf in his carefully-cultivated
dotty-old-man persona. I did quite seriously miss Gimli's falling for
Galadriel, which was foreshadowed and then never shown, leading me to
believe it exists on the cutting room floor.
Things that work wonderfully: Ian McKellen gets an enormous amount of
mileage out of tiny facial expressions. One of the movie's best
moments is when, at the Council, Frodo volunteers to take the
Ring...and we see on Gandalf's face two split-second expressions in
quick succession: relief, followed by grief. (You are never more than
a couple of minutes away from some reminder of the fact that in some
sense this entire story is an enormous tragedy and that some wounds
never heal.)
Bilbo is good. The movie plays up, more overtly than the book, his
corruption by the Ring; it also leaves you noticing that he is the
only person in the Ring's history to give it up voluntarily.
Merry and Pippin are mostly comic relief, although they are used well,
and there's a warm and lively scene (that I don't believe is in the
book) of Boromir teaching them basic sword self-defense. As we know,
Bob, they are much more major characters in the second two books, and
their behavior at the end of this movie nicely sets that up.
Moria is terrific; the Balrog is one of the scariest things I've
_ever_ seen on screen; Gandalf's confrontation with him is a searing
intrusion of powers beyond the mortal world. When Gandalf says "I am
a keeper of the sacred fire and you shall not pass," you know in your
gut that, as Tolkien once remarked, Gandalf is an angel.
I have to get off to work; possibly more on this later. As you can
see from the all-over-the-place nature of this, I'm still processing.
--
Patrick Nielsen Hayden : p...@panix.com : http://www.panix.com/~pnh
Electrolite: http://www.panix.com/~pnh/electrolite.html
Mike Kozlowski
P Nielsen Hayden <p...@panix.com> wrote:
>This isn't a review, just some notes, and I'll use David Goldfarb's
>handy spoiler barrier.
>> Spoilers follow --
>Like many (not all) of the characters, Aragorn matched up with my
>pre-existing image to a startling degree. Mortenstern's performance
Mortensen.
>I don't agree with all of this, certainly not the idea that the
>movie's flaws map neatly onto where they departed from the text.
>(Cutting Bombadil was a good move, for instance, and I found I had no
>problem with replacing Glorfindel with Arwen as Frodo's rescuer just
>before Rivendell; Liv Ullman handles the role with surprising poise.)
Liv Tyler.
>Gandalf bumping his head repeatedly in Bag End is an effectively
>movie-ish way to show Gandalf in his carefully-cultivated
>dotty-old-man persona. I did quite seriously miss Gimli's falling for
>Galadriel, which was foreshadowed and then never shown, leading me to
>believe it exists on the cutting room floor.
I wouldn't be at all surprised to see some more scenes added back in on
the DVD; that seems to be nearly standard these days, for better or worse.
>Moria is terrific; the Balrog is one of the scariest things I've
>_ever_ seen on screen;
This is one of the few places I disagree with you -- the Balrog was...
well, not bad, but the flaming demon look was kind of generic (if,
admittedly, apropos). If you'd pressed me for exactly what it should look
like, I couldn't have come up with anything better, mind; but it's a
disappointment in that respect only because in the rest of the movie,
Jackson consistently exceeded my visual imagination and expectations.
Yes, _that's_ the Shire, more accurately than I could ever have described
it, and that's Lothlorien and Rivendell, and Caradhras, and Moria, and
that's Gandalf, and Aragorn, and Gimli, and...
So, the Balrog was just sort of, "Yeah, I guess that's pretty good."
--
Mike Kozlowski
http://www.klio.org/mlk/
Leif Magnar Kj|nn|y
>In article <slrna23rs...@panix3.panix.com>,
>P Nielsen Hayden <p...@panix.com> wrote:
Ain't no more spoilers here, nosir, just an irrelevant aside, so I'll
just delete the spoiler barrier.
>> [...] Liv Ullman [...]
>
>Liv Tyler.
I was going to comment on this but you beat me to it. One of the
better recent typos/brainos. The thought of what the movie would
have been like with Liv Ullmann in the role is truly boggleworthy.
A lot more boring, probably.
Incidentally, the theater in which I saw the movie is *named* after
Liv Ullmann, because, well, this is where she's from.
--
Leif Kj{\o}nn{\o}y | "Its habit of getting up late you'll agree
www.pvv.org/~leifmk| That it carries too far, when I say
Math geek and gamer| That it frequently breakfasts at five-o'clock tea,
GURPS, Harn, CORPS | And dines on the following day." (Carroll)
P Nielsen Hayden
Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org> wrote:
(correcting me)
[...]
> Mortensen.
[...]
> Liv Tyler.
What I get for early-morning posting!
>>Gandalf bumping his head repeatedly in Bag End is an effectively
>>movie-ish way to show Gandalf in his carefully-cultivated
>>dotty-old-man persona. I did quite seriously miss Gimli's falling for
>>Galadriel, which was foreshadowed and then never shown, leading me to
>>believe it exists on the cutting room floor.
>
> I wouldn't be at all surprised to see some more scenes added back in on
> the DVD; that seems to be nearly standard these days, for better or worse.
Yup. The rolling Tor Books staff discussion of the movie (ongoing!)
is in agreement on this: we want that four-hour version, and we're
convinced it will exist.
>>Moria is terrific; the Balrog is one of the scariest things I've
>>_ever_ seen on screen;
>
> This is one of the few places I disagree with you -- the Balrog was...
> well, not bad, but the flaming demon look was kind of generic (if,
> admittedly, apropos). If you'd pressed me for exactly what it should look
> like, I couldn't have come up with anything better, mind; but it's a
> disappointment in that respect only because in the rest of the movie,
> Jackson consistently exceeded my visual imagination and expectations.
> Yes, _that's_ the Shire, more accurately than I could ever have described
> it, and that's Lothlorien and Rivendell, and Caradhras, and Moria, and
> that's Gandalf, and Aragorn, and Gimli, and...
>
> So, the Balrog was just sort of, "Yeah, I guess that's pretty good."
We all have different quibbles. I wasn't wild about the look of Lorien
or Rivendell; I always saw Lorien, particularly, as more neoclassical.
Mark Atwood
> A fellow Tor editor, Jim Minz, remarked that just as there are things
> the book does better than any movie could (obviously), there are also
> a few things the movie does better than the book, and the effects
> surrounding any use of the Ring are an excellent example of that.
Indeed. It was rather hard (at least for me) to tell from reading the
books that it was not effectively just a "ring of invisibility" from
the immediate POV of the wearer.
This way, you can *tell* that the wearer is "Someplace Else
That Is Also Here".
And the appearance of the ringwraths to the wearer as opposed to how
they looked in normal "reality" was just perfect.
--
Mark Atwood | Well done is better than well said.
m...@pobox.com |
http://www.pobox.com/~mra
Bill Shunn
> (Cutting Bombadil was a good move, for instance, and I found I had no
> problem with replacing Glorfindel with Arwen as Frodo's rescuer just
> before Rivendell; Liv Ullman handles the role with surprising poise.)
Liv *Tyler*, unless the anti-aging makeup was *really really* good.
bill
-----------
Bill Shunn
bi...@shunn.net
http://www.shunn.net
http://www.missionaryman.net
Trinker
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
F
O
R
T
H
E
T
W
O
T
O
W
E
R
S
B
E
L
O
W
Graydon Saunders wrote:
> I think it's going to come back in flashback when Gimli nearly gets into
> a fight with Eomer, myself. I have the suspicion that they're going to
> get Cate Blanchet into all of the movies.
http://us.imdb.com/Title?0167261
Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, The (2002)
Cast overview:
Elijah Wood .... Frodo Baggins
Sean Astin .... Samwise 'Sam' Gamgee
Dominic Monaghan .... Meriadoc 'Merry' Brandybuck
Billy Boyd .... Peregrin 'Pippin' Took
Ian McKellen .... Gandalf The White
Viggo Mortensen .... Aragorn
John Rhys-Davies .... Gimli
Orlando Bloom .... Legolas Greenleaf
Liv Tyler .... Arwen Undomiel
Cate Blanchett .... Galadriel
Brad Dourif .... Grima Wormtongue
David Wenham .... Faramir
John Noble .... Denethor
rest of cast listed alphabetically
Jay Laga'aia .... Uglúk, Chief of the Uruk-hai.
Christopher Lee .... Saruman
David G. Bell
p...@panix.com "P Nielsen Hayden" wrote:
> We liked it a lot; we'll probably see it again this weekend. We are
> both lifelong lovers of the trilogy, we were both aware of the many
> ways the movie alters and telescopes the story, and neither of us were
> bothered by that in principle. If anything, on reflection, I almost
> wish Jackson had cut and telescoped a little more; the movie is full
> of wonderful bits I wanted to see just a little more of. I want there
> to be a four-hour "director's cut" somewhere down the line.
>
> I'm a Tolkien purist like this: I would be apalled if someone
> published an arbitrarily cut-and-reordered version of the books.
> Peter Jackson's movie isn't the books, it's an epic fantasy movie
> based on the books, a work of art in close dialogue with a different
> work of art. In those terms it's a roaring success. And as with any
> dialogue, it encourages us to put our own two cents in.
>
> This isn't a review, just some notes, and I'll use David Goldfarb's
> handy spoiler barrier.
>
> On Thu, 20 Dec 2001 10:10:30 +0000 (UTC),
> David Goldfarb <gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> > Spoilers follow --
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Nearly all of the actors were quite good. From the pictures and trailers
> > I'd seen, I was a bit iffy about Gandalf and Saruman, but Ian McKellen
> > won me over at once, and Christopher Lee after a short time.
>
>
> The Gandalf vs Saruman fight scene, not in the book, was for me the
> weakest thing in the movie.
I'll note here that there was a Gandalf vs Saruman scene in the BBC
radio version, scripted by Brian Sibley. He was given pre-publication
access to "Unfinished Tales" and took this, and a few other scenes, from
this source. It happened to explain why Gandalf wasn't able to help on
the journey to Rivendell.
Since I haven't seen the film yet, I wouldn't like to comment on just
what the film scene might do, but I think there is an important
difference between "not in the book" and "not in Tolkien".
--
David G. Bell -- Farmer, SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.
Mr. Punch's Advice to a Young Man About to Become a Farmer:
"Marry, instead."
Marilee J. Layman
(David Goldfarb) wrote:
>Cate Blanchett as Galadriel
It seems that she's in every movie I see promoted lately.
--
Marilee J. Layman
Bali Sterling Beads at Wholesale
http://www.basicbali.com
P Nielsen Hayden
"David G. Bell" <db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 20 Dec, in article <slrna23rs...@panix3.panix.com>
> p...@panix.com "P Nielsen Hayden" wrote:
>> The Gandalf vs Saruman fight scene, not in the book, was for me the
>> weakest thing in the movie.
>
> I'll note here that there was a Gandalf vs Saruman scene in the BBC
> radio version, scripted by Brian Sibley. He was given pre-publication
> access to "Unfinished Tales" and took this, and a few other scenes, from
> this source. It happened to explain why Gandalf wasn't able to help on
> the journey to Rivendell.
Um, that material is in the book, as best I understand what you're
saying; it's all given in flashback in the Council of Elrond. All I'm
objecting to is making it an actual comic-bookish _fight_ -- what my
assistant Fred Herman called "wizard-fu".
Dan Kimmel
"Marilee J. Layman" <mjla...@erols.com> wrote in message
news:4mn42u8u1m9ubmcdj...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 20 Dec 2001 10:10:30 +0000 (UTC), gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU
> (David Goldfarb) wrote:
>
> >Cate Blanchett as Galadriel
>
> It seems that she's in every movie I see promoted lately.
It's more than seems. She's even in "The Shipping News."
Sue Mason
>
>
>We all have different quibbles. I wasn't wild about the look of Lorien
>or Rivendell; I always saw Lorien, particularly, as more neoclassical.
I just got home from LOTR.
Wow.
Rivendell really reminded me of Portmerion, for some reason.
I also felt the Council of Elrond was a little hasty, I knew who all
the characters were, I'm not so sure about some of the audience.
Gimli with a Welsh accent... ?
The comments of joe public were interesting.
The cinema was full and there seemed to be a lot of people there who
hadn't read the books - often being dragged along with someone who
had.
The audience were very well behaved, no talking, only a few visits to
the loo, a handful of kids (it's a school night and finished at 11pm).
Several comments of "That's the *end*?" with the closing titles but
said in the way which makes you think that they wanted to know what
happens next, not in an anticlimactic way, if you get my drift.
I felt like saying "Go read the books!"
Off to bed, it's getting on for midnight and I'm up at 7 for work (but
then off until 2nd Jan - ah, the joys of working in the building
trade).
Sue Mason
s...@arctic-fox.freeserve.co.uk
Dragons, unicorns and pagan designs in wood at
http://www.plokta.com/woodlore/
Thomas Yan
gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU (David Goldfarb) wrote:
>
> Well, I've been to see the Tolkien movie. On the whole I liked it.
> I'll admit to a little bit of disappointment: I was hoping that it
> would win me over totally to the point where I'd start clamoring for
> Jo to go see it. It didn't do that. (And I do think that Jo is
> best advised to continue her policy of censoring it from her world.)
-snip-
That's funny! I also had hoped it would have been good enough for me
to at least silently recommend to Jo, and afterwards decided it was
nowhere near that good.
I didn't realize until I checked IMDB that the actor for Saruman was
the same actor for Flay in "Ghormengast", which shared many actors with
"Harry Potter".
(Tangent: I was very surprised that the actor/director of "Last Night"
played Thomas Pinter in "Exotica". I totally did not recognize him in
LN, despite having seen E at most a few months earlier.)
--
Thomas Yan (ty...@twcny.rr.com) Note: I don't check e-mail often.
Be pro-active. Fight sucky software and learned helplessness.
Apologies for any lack of capitalization; typing hurts my hands.
Progress on next DbS installment: pp1-38 of pp1-181 of _Taltos_
Del Cotter
Thomas Yan <ty...@twcny.rr.com> said:
>I didn't realize until I checked IMDB that the actor for Saruman was
>the same actor for Flay in "Ghormengast", which shared many actors with
>"Harry Potter".
Christopher Lee. I can't believe you've never heard of Christopher Lee.
--
. . . . Del Cotter d...@branta.demon.co.uk . . . .
JustRead:heLeakyEstablishment:PatrickOBrianTheHundredDays:SMStirlingOnTh
eOceansOfEternity:TerryPratchettTheFifthElephant:KenMacLeodCosmonautKeep
ToRead:ChinaMievillePerdidoStreetStation:MichaelMarshallSmithOnlyForward
Thomas Yan
Del Cotter <d...@branta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, in rec.arts.sf.fandom,
> Thomas Yan <ty...@twcny.rr.com> said:
>
> >I didn't realize until I checked IMDB that the actor for Saruman was
> >the same actor for Flay in "Ghormengast", which shared many actors with
> >"Harry Potter".
>
> Christopher Lee.
Heh. When I saw the name by itself at the end of the movie, I thought,
am I supposed to recognize that name? At which point I thought they
meant Jason Lee, and then tried to figure out who the hell Jason Lee
had played.
> I can't believe you've never heard of Christopher Lee.
From where? Lessee, I think the only movies I've seen him in are:
Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001)
"Gormenghast" (2000)
Sleepy Hollow (1999)
Gremlins 2: The New Batch (1990)
? Howling II (1985)
Three Musketeers, The (1973)
I don't think I started really paying attention to actors until after
the mid 80s, possibly not until the early 90s.
(I do plan to see "The Wicker Man".)
O Deus
> >> The Gandalf vs Saruman fight scene, not in the book, was for me the
> >> weakest thing in the movie.
>
> saying; it's all given in flashback in the Council of Elrond. All I'm
> objecting to is making it an actual comic-bookish _fight_ -- what my
> assistant Fred Herman called "wizard-fu".
And it managed to look spectacularly silly as well as tacky and seemed
to consist of Saruman and Gandalf shoving each around with the power
of their staffs. But this fit in with the first half of the movie
making Gandalf look hapless and far too cuddly when it wasn't using
him as comic relief.
O Deus
> bothered by that in principle. If anything, on reflection, I almost
> wish Jackson had cut and telescoped a little more; the movie is full
> of wonderful bits I wanted to see just a little more of. I want there
> to be a four-hour "director's cut" somewhere down the line.
If anything the first half of the movie needed to be edited a little
better and cut down to something closer to two hours. New Line has
clearly indulged Jackson and the result is a flabby movie.
> > Nearly all of the actors were quite good. From the pictures and
trailers
> > I'd seen, I was a bit iffy about Gandalf and Saruman, but Ian McKellen
> > won me over at once, and Christopher Lee after a short time.
Though switching their roles around might have been a better idea. Lee
has an impressive presence but he lacks the kind of overpowering
charisma Saruman's deceptive nature should have projected, something
McKellen could have done far better. And Christopher Lee could have
done a better job of projecting Gandalf's inner strenght and resolve,
while McK's Gandalf is too cuddly and addled by far.
> The Gandalf vs Saruman fight scene, not in the book, was for me the
> weakest thing in the movie.
Second weakest after the awfull Arwen at the Ford scene. But it's the
result of a decision to place Saruman as the prime enemy in the first
film, rather than Sauron. This has a valid dramatic basis, but it also
weakens Sauron and Gandalf produced the ridiculous spinning duel.
While the real Gandalf viewed Saruman with contempt, the movie's
Gandalf witlessly rides to him for advice and seems to deserve all the
scorns that Saruman proceeds to heap on him for his stupidity.
> On the other hand, lots of people have said this, so I was surprised
> at how effective and moving the big Frodo-and-Galadriel scene was for
> me.
Yes it actually was effective and Blanchett nailed the role, unlike
Liv Tyler who came off like a little girl playing dress up.
> I don't agree with all of this, certainly not the idea that the
> movie's flaws map neatly onto where they departed from the text.
> (Cutting Bombadil was a good move, for instance, and I found I had no
Well Bombadil was out of place in the novels too and served as a relic
of Tolkein's initial uncertainity before merging the Simmarilion with
the Hobbit sequel. On the other hand the loss of the Barrow Wight is a
shame and will make it that more difficult to explain how the
Ringwraith is to be killed...unless they have Arwen do that too (-:
> problem with replacing Glorfindel with Arwen as Frodo's rescuer just
> before Rivendell; Liv Ullman handles the role with surprising poise.)
It's Liv Tyler and her appearance is nothing short of disastrous. But
it's not simply Arwen replacing Glorfindel, it's the cutting away of
Frodo's real encounter with the Black Riders in favor of Frodo being
dragged off by a minor charachter, simply for the sake of creating a
romantic interest for Aragorn, a young actress to enhanche the movie's
audience appeal and whatever feminist agendas Fran and Philipa added
to the mix.
> Gandalf bumping his head repeatedly in Bag End is an effectively
> movie-ish way to show Gandalf in his carefully-cultivated
> dotty-old-man persona.
In the proper context maybe, but it only serves to maintain Gandalf as
a hapless personality who never quite comes into his own until Moria.
> I did quite seriously miss Gimli's falling for
> Galadriel, which was foreshadowed and then never shown, leading me to
> believe it exists on the cutting room floor.
Perhaps, but then Legolas and Gimli have remained deeply
underdeveloped, while Aragorn has predictably seen far more
development in a show of predictably Hollywood logic.
> Things that work wonderfully: Ian McKellen gets an enormous amount of
> mileage out of tiny facial expressions. One of the movie's best
> moments is when, at the Council, Frodo volunteers to take the
> Ring...and we see on Gandalf's face two split-second expressions in
> quick succession: relief, followed by grief. (You are never more than
> a couple of minutes away from some reminder of the fact that in some
> sense this entire story is an enormous tragedy and that some wounds
> never heal.)
Or you would if not for the removal of the Scouring of the Shire
material from the movies, thus severing the novel's trajectory which
begins and ends in the Shire and serves as a metaphor for the
condition of the Ringbearers themselves.
David G. Bell
m...@pobox.com "Mark Atwood" wrote:
> P Nielsen Hayden <p...@panix.com> writes:
> > A fellow Tor editor, Jim Minz, remarked that just as there are things
> > the book does better than any movie could (obviously), there are also
> > a few things the movie does better than the book, and the effects
> > surrounding any use of the Ring are an excellent example of that.
>
> Indeed. It was rather hard (at least for me) to tell from reading the
> books that it was not effectively just a "ring of invisibility" from
> the immediate POV of the wearer.
>
> This way, you can *tell* that the wearer is "Someplace Else
> That Is Also Here".
>
> And the appearance of the ringwraths to the wearer as opposed to how
> they looked in normal "reality" was just perfect.
This is something they managed in the Bakshi animation too. Maybe not
perfect, but the Weathertop sequence was an eye-opener. Which suggests
some things that film can do particularly well.
jere7my tho?rpe
P Nielsen Hayden <p...@panix.com> wrote:
*Yup. The rolling Tor Books staff discussion of the movie (ongoing!)
*is in agreement on this: we want that four-hour version, and we're
*convinced it will exist.
I am led to believe that the first cut of the film was four and
one-half hours long, so you (and I) may be in luck.
(And if Jackson is particularly clever, Bill the Pony will assert
his rightful role as dramatic focus of the series!)
----j7y
--
*********************************** <*> ***********************************
jere7my tho?rpe / 734-769-0913 "Oh, yeah. Old guys becoming pandas --
jer...@mac.com _that's_ the future." Mike Nelson, MST3K
Trinker
O Deus wrote:
>
> simply for the sake of creating a
> romantic interest for Aragorn,
scripted by the master himself in an appendix...
--Trinker
David Goldfarb
>On Thu, 20 Dec 2001 10:10:30 +0000 (UTC),
> David Goldfarb <gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
> Spoilers follow --
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> Nearly all of the actors were quite good. From the pictures and trailers
>> I'd seen, I was a bit iffy about Gandalf and Saruman, but Ian McKellen
>> won me over at once, and Christopher Lee after a short time.
>
>
>The Gandalf vs Saruman fight scene, not in the book, was for me the
>weakest thing in the movie.
Weaker even than the the big spiky suit of armor at the beginning, making
a ring and then going out to smash people with a mace? Tolkien kept
Sauron offstage for very good reasons.
I didn't really like the fight scene, but I thought it was understandable
and somewhat forgiveable.
>> In general, when they followed Tolkien things were excellent. There
>> were an unfortunately large number of places where they felt a need
>> to embroider, and the embroidery was never for the better.
>
>I don't agree with all of this, certainly not the idea that the
>movie's flaws map neatly onto where they departed from the text.
Actually, you're right; in the heat of the moment I misspoke, and like
Captain Corcoran I amend that "never" to a "hardly ever".
>(Cutting Bombadil was a good move, for instance, and I found I had no
>problem with replacing Glorfindel with Arwen as Frodo's rescuer just
>before Rivendell; Liv Ullman handles the role with surprising poise.)
Yes, I agree with you on both of those. I also liked the scene
at Rivendell between Aragorn and Arwen, even if it wasn't in the book.
(And they got a reference to Rosie Cotton in at the beginning where
it belonged, so that she doesn't just come out of the blue as someone
for Sam to marry.) And Boromir teaching Merry and Pippin to fight
was nice.
As against that, we have the Council of Elrond nearly turning into
a brawl; Narsil remaining broken; an Aragorn who fears the past;
Frodo being way too passive; Saruman being Sauron's lackey instead
of his would-be rival.
--
David Goldfarb <*>|
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | Private .sig -- please do not read.
|
gold...@csua.berkeley.edu |
P Nielsen Hayden
David Goldfarb <gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
> Patrick Nielsen Hayden wrote:
>>On Thu, 20 Dec 2001 10:10:30 +0000 (UTC),
>> David Goldfarb <gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
>> Spoilers follow --
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Nearly all of the actors were quite good. From the pictures and trailers
>>> I'd seen, I was a bit iffy about Gandalf and Saruman, but Ian McKellen
>>> won me over at once, and Christopher Lee after a short time.
>>
>>
>>The Gandalf vs Saruman fight scene, not in the book, was for me the
>>weakest thing in the movie.
>
> Weaker even than the the big spiky suit of armor at the beginning, making
> a ring and then going out to smash people with a mace? Tolkien kept
> Sauron offstage for very good reasons.
We disagree about that. I thought the prologue did a whole bunch of
jobs very effectively. I note that, among my growing number of
acquaintances who have never been Tolkien fans but like the movie, so
far 100% of them liked and were grateful for the prologue.
Rev. Cyohtee - O'kōhome Ehohatse
forth:
>In article <h4eO5cC+bpI8Ew$n...@branta.demon.co.uk>,
> Del Cotter <d...@branta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, in rec.arts.sf.fandom,
>> Thomas Yan <ty...@twcny.rr.com> said:
>>
>> >I didn't realize until I checked IMDB that the actor for Saruman was
>> >the same actor for Flay in "Ghormengast", which shared many actors with
>> >"Harry Potter".
>>
>> Christopher Lee.
>
>Heh. When I saw the name by itself at the end of the movie, I thought,
>am I supposed to recognize that name? At which point I thought they
>meant Jason Lee, and then tried to figure out who the hell Jason Lee
>had played.
>
>> I can't believe you've never heard of Christopher Lee.
>
>From where? Lessee, I think the only movies I've seen him in are:
>
> Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001)
> "Gormenghast" (2000)
> Sleepy Hollow (1999)
> Gremlins 2: The New Batch (1990)
> ? Howling II (1985)
> Three Musketeers, The (1973)
>
>I don't think I started really paying attention to actors until after
>the mid 80s, possibly not until the early 90s.
>
>(I do plan to see "The Wicker Man".)
Well, there are the true classics, like Dracula from 1958 (one of the
few actors to get Dracula anywhere near as good as Lugosi) as well as
almost a dozen more Dracula films over 30+ years, The Mummy 1959,
Curse of Frankenstein 1957, just to name a few. I realize you may not
be a big fan of classic horror movies, but Christopher Lee is one of
the big names in movie history. I had heard of him long before I ever
saw any of his films.
--
Cyo cyo...@ucan.foad.org
http://www.barbarian.org/~cyohtee http://www.barbarian.org
"Beans. My great grand daddy's recipe. With a secret ingredient." -- McCoy
"Beans and bourbon. An explosive combination." -- Kirk (Star Trek V)
rich brown
warning.
David Goldfarb wrote:
>Nearly all of the actors were quite good. From the pictures and trailers
>I'd seen, I was a bit iffy about Gandalf and Saruman, but Ian McKellen
>won me over at once, and Christopher Lee after a short time. The big
>disappointment was Cate Blanchett as Galadriel; she seemed a bit stiff,
>and I really wish she could have pulled off her big temptation speech
>without being all tarted up with CGI.
I agree with the assessment, pretty much. One thing that impressed the hell out
of me was that, in separate interviews, Elijah Wood (Frodo), Ian McKellen
(Gandalf) and Viggo Mortensen (Strider/Aragorn) _all_ said that whenever they
were in the least doubt about how to portray their characters, they found the
answer to their questions in reading the book. Not the screenplay. Not
consulting with the director. Reading the book!!!! I dunno. That just blows
me away....
The segment with Galadriel is, to my mind, the major disapppointment of the
movie. Frodo's the only one who looks into the mirror of Galadriel and one of
the things he sees -- the scouring of the Shire -- as I understand it will not
be part of the movie.
>I find, oddly, that I've never had a clear picture of Aragorn in my
>mind; so the one from the movie works well enough there. (Though he
>was a bit young-looking -- almost everyone was, though it's understandable.)
>
>The visuals were amazing, from the flood of the Bruinen to the Balrog.
>
>Just about all the special effects worked *perfectly*, and the landscapes
>were great, from the Misty Mountains to the Shire.
In one of the promotional pieces that have appeared on television for the LotR
movie, the person responsible for creating the special effects said that they
all hoped the effects would be appreciated but only to the extent that they
made the story more believable: "The story itself is by far the most important
thing." That, too, amazes me....
>In general, when they followed Tolkien things were excellent. There
>were an unfortunately large number of places where they felt a need
>to embroider, and the embroidery was never for the better. For instance,
>"To be a Ring-bearer is to be always alone." Um, what? Or having
>Gandalf bump his head, or all the hugging. And the "jumping the gap
>in the staircase" scene would have been better cut entirely, and the
>time used for something that they'd cut -- maybe showing Galadriel's
>effect on Gimli.
Indeed. I was a bit disappointed, given that Gandalf gives the full "You cannot
pass!" speech from the book, that neither Aragorn or Boromir try to run back to
help (as they do in the book) -- that could have easily replaced jumping the
staircase gap and would have been fair better.
>There's a hell of a lot to nitpick in the film. Still, I enjoyed it,
>would recommend it to anyone who's not a serious Tolkien purist, and
>am looking forward to the sequels.
The Tolkien purists are also going to be upset at all the telescoping of the
beginning -- Tom Bombadil and the adventure on the Barrow downs are eliminated,
Frodo leaves the Shire much sooner after Bilbo's departure than in the book,
Merry & Pippin are chance-met stealing mushrooms in Farmer Maggot's fields (and
not part of a "conspiracy" with Sam) and Frodo doesn't make the pretence of
moving to Buckland...but as the movie comes in just a hair under three hours, I
don't find myself annoyed by any of this.
Dr Gafia (rich brown)
--
"The optimist believes we live in the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist fears this is true." --James Branch Cabell
rich brown
with him totally) view of the film, with this minor exception:
>Bilbo is good. The movie plays up, more overtly than the book, his
>corruption by the Ring; it also leaves you noticing that he is the
>only person in the Ring's history to give it up voluntarily.
I agree, at least, that Bilbo was done well in the movie. But I quibble that he
gave up the ring "voluntarily" -- he >wanted< to give it up but he needed all
of Gandalf's help and urging to do it in the end. (It was a nice touch, in the
movie, that he dropped it on the floor...and that Gandalf did not dare to touch
it to pick it up.)
Tom Bombadil puts on the ring and it doesn't affect him at all -- but then,
he's a personification of Nature, which is neither good nor evil and hence is
not affected by either.
Sam is the only one who puts on the ring and gives it up without a qualm.
Johan Anglemark
<l6h62u4l0f8degup0...@4ax.com>:
>Thomas Yan <ty...@twcny.rr.com> rose up and issued forth:
>> Del Cotter <d...@branta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Thomas Yan <ty...@twcny.rr.com> said:
>>>
>>> I can't believe you've never heard of Christopher Lee.
>>
>>From where? Lessee, I think the only movies I've seen him in are:
>>
>> Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001)
>> "Gormenghast" (2000)
>> Sleepy Hollow (1999)
>> Gremlins 2: The New Batch (1990)
>> ? Howling II (1985)
>> Three Musketeers, The (1973)
>>
>>I don't think I started really paying attention to actors until after
>>the mid 80s, possibly not until the early 90s.
>>
>>(I do plan to see "The Wicker Man".)
>
>Well, there are the true classics, like Dracula from 1958 (one of the
>few actors to get Dracula anywhere near as good as Lugosi) as well as
>almost a dozen more Dracula films over 30+ years, The Mummy 1959,
>Curse of Frankenstein 1957, just to name a few. I realize you may not
>be a big fan of classic horror movies, but Christopher Lee is one of
>the big names in movie history. I had heard of him long before I ever
>saw any of his films.
Same here. It's like not knowing who Clint Eastwood or Boris Karloff is.
-j
--
Johan Anglemark - http://anglemark.pp.se
Lejd av Upsala SF-sällskap - http://sfweb.dang.se
rich brown
from the subject line.
David Goldfarb concludes with a few disappointments, ending with:
>...Saruman being Sauron's lackey instead
of his
>would-be rival.
I quibble with your quibble. Saruman speaks as a lackey but, IIRC, in the book
I seem to recall that he was pretending to be an ally to Sauron while secretly
planning a double-cross. That's partly why he developed his "super-orcs"....
Again, IIRC, there's a scene where Pippin looks into an I Palantir and Sauron
thinks Saruman is showing him the halfling he's captured -- and Sauron sends
out a Nazgul to pick him up.
Kelly Lockhart
news:3C225E3B...@yahoo.com...
> Cate Blanchett .... Galadriel
That bodes well for a Gimli/Galadriel flashback, indeed.
> Brad Dourif .... Grima Wormtongue
That is interesting. I like Dourif very much as an actor.
> Jay Laga'aia .... Uglúk, Chief of the Uruk-hai.
One of the things that I thought Jackson did -extremely- well was the look
of the Uruk-hai. Somewhere out there, Vince McMahon of the WWF is trying to
figure out how to get Uglúk in a pay-per-view match. (grin)
--
Kelly Lockhart
Chattanooga, Tennessee
kellyl...@sprynet.com
Evelyn C. Leeper
You mean like in BACK TO THE FUTURE III? :-)
--
Evelyn C. Leeper
http://www.geocities.com/evelynleeper
"A free society is one where it is safe to be unpopular."
--Adlai Stevenson
Kelly Lockhart
news:Xns917EA0EEE5502j...@195.58.103.121...
> Same here. It's like not knowing who Clint Eastwood or Boris Karloff is.
Who's Clint Eastwood?
(just kidding)
Del Cotter
Thomas Yan <ty...@twcny.rr.com> said:
> Del Cotter <d...@branta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> I can't believe you've never heard of Christopher Lee.
>
>From where? Lessee, I think the only movies I've seen him in are:
>
> Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001)
> "Gormenghast" (2000)
> Sleepy Hollow (1999)
> Gremlins 2: The New Batch (1990)
> ? Howling II (1985)
> Three Musketeers, The (1973)
:The Man With The Golden Gun:? Lee played Scaramanga.
He's also more recently been the voice of Death in animated films of
Terry Pratchett's novels, but there's no reason you would have seen
those, I suppose.
>I don't think I started really paying attention to actors until after
>the mid 80s, possibly not until the early 90s.
For years he was mainly famous for playing Dracula and Fu Manchu, but
I'm probably guilty of assuming you're as familiar with the Hammer
horror films as most "Brits" are. Would you recognise the late Peter
Cushing's name?
(I always wanted to see _The Lost World_ filmed with Brian Blessed as
Challenger and Peter Cushing as Summerlee, but it'll never happen now,
sigh)
James Nicoll
Del Cotter <d...@branta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>For years he was mainly famous for playing Dracula and Fu Manchu, but
>I'm probably guilty of assuming you're as familiar with the Hammer
>horror films as most "Brits" are. Would you recognise the late Peter
>Cushing's name?
>
>(I always wanted to see _The Lost World_ filmed with Brian Blessed as
>Challenger and Peter Cushing as Summerlee, but it'll never happen now,
>sigh)
CGI, in the period when it's possible to flawlessly duplicate
humans and before the makers decide to go for supernormal levels of
attractiveness in the characters.
James Nicoll
--
"Don't worry. It's just a bunch of crazies who believe in only one
god. They're just this far away from atheism."
Wayne & Schuster
Marcus L. Rowland
>
>(I always wanted to see _The Lost World_ filmed with Brian Blessed as
>Challenger and Peter Cushing as Summerlee, but it'll never happen now,
>sigh)
Next week the BBC is screening a two-part version made with effects and
dinosaurs by the _Walking With Dinosaurs_ team, with Bob Hoskins as
Professor Challenger, made in Xena country in New Zealand. Can't
remember off-hand who has the other main roles. Sounds like the story
will be followed fairly faithfully, except that they decided that the
story needs some feminine interest, so we've got two extra characters;
Peter Falk as a mad missionary and someone whose name I can't remember
as his daughter.
--
Marcus L. Rowland
Forgotten Futures - The Scientific Romance Role Playing Game
http://www.ffutures.demon.co.uk/ http://www.forgottenfutures.com/
"We are all victims of this slime. They... ...fill our mailboxes with gibberish
that would get them indicted if people had time to press charges"
[Hunter S. Thompson predicts junk e-mail, 1985 (from Generation of Swine)]
Chris The Magician O'Shea
> the BBC
> radio version, scripted by Brian Sibley
In a film review (of LotR) this evening, the BBC confirmed that they would
be reissuing the BBC Radio version of LotR early in 2002 on cassette and
CD ... just thought you might like to know ...
Chris
--
Chris "The Magician" O'Shea
witty .sig on order, please allow 7-14 puns for delivery
rasff @ con . org . nospam (lose the .nospam if you want to email me)
Evelyn C. Leeper
>
> :The Man With The Golden Gun:? Lee played Scaramanga.
>
> He's also more recently been the voice of Death in animated films of
> Terry Pratchett's novels, but there's no reason you would have seen
> those, I suppose.
Are these any good? I had the opportunity to buy one a while ago,
but wasn't sure on it.
Thomas Yan
Del Cotter <d...@branta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, in rec.arts.sf.fandom,
> Thomas Yan <ty...@twcny.rr.com> said:
>
> > Del Cotter <d...@branta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >> I can't believe you've never heard of Christopher Lee.
> >
> >From where? Lessee, I think the only movies I've seen him in are:
-list snipped-
> :The Man With The Golden Gun:? Lee played Scaramanga.
Possibly. I'm now rather confused as to which James Bond movies I have
seen and which I haven't; they've all started to run together. (I find
this mildly annoying because I'd like to be able to list exactly the
ones I have seen.)
> He's also more recently been the voice of Death in animated films of
> Terry Pratchett's novels, but there's no reason you would have seen
> those, I suppose.
I noticed at least one of those listed at IMDB, but you're right that I
have not seen them.
> >I don't think I started really paying attention to actors until after
> >the mid 80s, possibly not until the early 90s.
>
> For years he was mainly famous for playing Dracula and Fu Manchu, but
> I'm probably guilty of assuming you're as familiar with the Hammer
> horror films as most "Brits" are. Would you recognise the late Peter
> Cushing's name?
-snip-
Yes. I'm not sure when I realized he was the fortune teller in "Dr.
Terror's House of Horrors" [1], which I now see also starred Christopher
Lee. I think I know him mostly from "Star Wars", in part because I
remember my father correcting my belief that "Peter Cushing" was the
name of the actor who played Obi Wan.
[1] Which I remember chiefly because I first saw most of it at a friend
of the family's house, and the hosts wouldn't let us see the
dismembered hand segment because they thought it was too scary for
us. "I had nightmares for a week", one of them said.
I think I saw it before "Star Wars", but I'm not entirely sure of
that.
I don't trust my memory, but it seems I was a bit relieved because I
had connected his name to the fortune teller DTHoH and had wondered why
"he / Obi Wan" looked different.
I think it was only in the last decade that I saw "Bridge on the River
Kwai".
*** mild spoiler for "The Phantom Menace" ***
I realized that Queen Amidala had a double among her handmaidens. I
thought Natalie Portman played both parts and was wondering how the
make-up made them look so similar yet subtly different, especially at
the scene when she reveals the deception. Then I saw the credits or
was told that there were was another Skyw^H^H^H^H actor involved.
Kip Williams
>
> "Johan Anglemark" <jo...@anglemark.pp.se> wrote in message
> news:Xns917EA0EEE5502j...@195.58.103.121...
>
> > Same here. It's like not knowing who Clint Eastwood or Boris Karloff is.
>
> Who's Clint Eastwood?
>
> (just kidding)
"That limey corksogger."
--
--Kip (Williams) ...at http://members.home.net/kipw/
"I'm not sure everybody in America is laughing at that."
--Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) responding to Jolly John Ashcroft
David Goldfarb
Graydon Saunders <gra...@dsl.ca> wrote:
>On Fri, 21 Dec 2001 12:46:05 +0000 (UTC),
>David Goldfarb <gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU> scripsit:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> Weaker even than the the big spiky suit of armor at the beginning, making
>> a ring and then going out to smash people with a mace? Tolkien kept
>> Sauron offstage for very good reasons.
>
>end of the War of the Last Alliance; they died doing it, and Isuldur cut
>the ring from the hang of Sauron with the hilt-shard of Narsil. This is
>in the _main_ text, not an appendix.
Yes, I know that full well. Although the course of the battle as we're
told it is rather different than what's shown in the movie. My main
objection is that I found the depiction of Sauron to be utterly without
power or terror -- the movie's Balrog was far more impressive than Sauron.
>> As against that, we have the Council of Elrond nearly turning into
>> a brawl;
>
>Influence -- extremely explicit; the ring is talking in the Black
>Speach! -- of the ring.
And the great and mighty of the Free Peoples should be so easily and
completely influenced by it? I don't think so. While we're on the topic,
the movie had the Free Peoples as *unable* to use the Ring, rather than
able but unwilling. That's serious harm to Tolkien's themes.
>> Frodo being way too passive;
>
>Gweef? I think their take on Frodo is impecable. They haven't actually
>used the _word_ 'duty', but it seems to be there as a motivation.
In the book, Frodo is wounded *while attacking* the Nazgul, not lying
on his back in terror. In the book, Frodo finds strength at the Ford
to defy them, rather than just sitting there.
--
David Goldfarb <*>|"You are trapped in that bright moment where you
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | learned your doom."
| -- Samuel R. Delany, _City of a Thousand Suns_
gold...@csua.berkeley.edu |
David Goldfarb
rich brown <drga...@aol.com> wrote:
>Sam is the only one who puts on the ring and gives it up without a qualm.
He never takes it for his own; he sees it only as a burden to be borne
to destruction. And he has it for a far shorter time than anybody else;
only a few hours, as opposed to years. Nor does he give it up completely
without qualms -- remember the bit where he offers to take it back from
Frodo? Still, your fundamental point (that Tolkien portrays Sam as having
an underlying strength deriving from his humility) seems right.
--
David Goldfarb <*>|"Sunset over Houma. The rains have stopped.
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | Clouds like plugs of bloodied cotton wool dab
| ineffectually at the slashed wrists of the sky."
gold...@csua.berkeley.edu | -- Alan Moore
Mary Kay Kare
> We liked it a lot; we'll probably see it again this weekend. We are
> both lifelong lovers of the trilogy, we were both aware of the many
> ways the movie alters and telescopes the story, and neither of us were
> bothered by that in principle. If anything, on reflection, I almost
> wish Jackson had cut and telescoped a little more; the movie is full
> of wonderful bits I wanted to see just a little more of. I want there
> to be a four-hour "director's cut" somewhere down the line.
>
> I'm a Tolkien purist like this: I would be apalled if someone
> published an arbitrarily cut-and-reordered version of the books.
> Peter Jackson's movie isn't the books, it's an epic fantasy movie
> based on the books, a work of art in close dialogue with a different
> work of art. In those terms it's a roaring success. And as with any
> dialogue, it encourages us to put our own two cents in.
I completely agree with this. I have loved and constantly re-read those
books since I was 16. I esp. agree with that 4hr directors cut hope.
That was the *shortest* 3 hours I ever sat through.
>
> This isn't a review, just some notes, and I'll use David Goldfarb's
> handy spoiler barrier.
>
> On Thu, 20 Dec 2001 10:10:30 +0000 (UTC),
> David Goldfarb <gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> > Spoilers follow --
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Nearly all of the actors were quite good. From the pictures and trailers
> > I'd seen, I was a bit iffy about Gandalf and Saruman, but Ian McKellen
> > won me over at once, and Christopher Lee after a short time.
>
>
> The Gandalf vs Saruman fight scene, not in the book, was for me the
> weakest thing in the movie.
I agree. I'd have been happy to see it cut so that other things later
on could have more time.
>
>
> > The big
> > disappointment was Cate Blanchett as Galadriel; she seemed a bit stiff,
> > and I really wish she could have pulled off her big temptation speech
> > without being all tarted up with CGI.
>
>
> On the other hand, lots of people have said this, so I was surprised
> at how effective and moving the big Frodo-and-Galadriel scene was for
> me.
I found it a little disappointing myself. And I was quite unhappy that
more of the Fellowship/Galadriel interactions were not shown. I think
this is one of the biggest flaws in the adaptation.
>
> A fellow Tor editor, Jim Minz, remarked that just as there are things
> the book does better than any movie could (obviously), there are also
> a few things the movie does better than the book, and the effects
> surrounding any use of the Ring are an excellent example of that.
Yep.
>
>
> > I find, oddly, that I've never had a clear picture of Aragorn in my
> > mind; so the one from the movie works well enough there. (Though he
> > was a bit young-looking -- almost everyone was, though it's understandable.)
>
>
> Like many (not all) of the characters, Aragorn matched up with my
> pre-existing image to a startling degree. Mortenstern's performance
> in the role is terse and effective; you can see things being bottled
> up for payoff in the next two.
He was quite close, but I think with those cheek-bones and that chin
he'd be a better Elrond while the fellow who played Elrond wos much
closer to my idea of Aragorn. The other thing visual things that
bothered me were all those damn blonde elves with point ears and brown
eyes. Elves were supposed to be dark haired and grey eyed dammit! (The
elves, with starlight in their eyes and hearts, have always been
Tolkien's most important creation for me.) Also, Elijah Wood is just
too dammed pretty and young looking to be Frodo. He looks about 12
years old, and hobbits and not supposed to be pretty. Bilbo, on the
other hand was just about perfect. That's how a hobbit should look.
Yeah, I know Frodo's a lot younger, but he's 33 for heaven's sake.
Meanwhile, Boromir, a character
> confine to the first movie, is played _very_ well by Sean Bean, and
> the two of them together turn in a death-of-Boromir scene which is
> resolent with the best kind of ancient-warrior heroism.
Boromie was good, but I hated that death scene. I think Tolkien would
have been embarassed by it and hated it too.
>
>
> > In general, when they followed Tolkien things were excellent. There
> > were an unfortunately large number of places where they felt a need
> > to embroider, and the embroidery was never for the better. For instance,
> > "To be a Ring-bearer is to be always alone." Um, what? Or having
> > Gandalf bump his head, or all the hugging. And the "jumping the gap
> > in the staircase" scene would have been better cut entirely, and the
> > time used for something that they'd cut -- maybe showing Galadriel's
> > effect on Gimli.
>
>
> I don't agree with all of this, certainly not the idea that the
> movie's flaws map neatly onto where they departed from the text.
> (Cutting Bombadil was a good move, for instance, and I found I had no
> problem with replacing Glorfindel with Arwen as Frodo's rescuer just
> before Rivendell; Liv Ullman handles the role with surprising poise.)
Ooopsie. That would be Liv Tyler. HTH
> Gandalf bumping his head repeatedly in Bag End is an effectively
> movie-ish way to show Gandalf in his carefully-cultivated
> dotty-old-man persona.
And Bag End was just *so* perfect. I want to go live there.
> I did quite seriously miss Gimli's falling for
> Galadriel, which was foreshadowed and then never shown, leading me to
> believe it exists on the cutting room floor.
Yep. I think, as I said above, that's possibly the most serious flaw in
the movie, I think. If it does exist, I devoutly hope it gets into that
4 hour director's cut.
>
> Things that work wonderfully: Ian McKellen gets an enormous amount of
> mileage out of tiny facial expressions. One of the movie's best
> moments is when, at the Council, Frodo volunteers to take the
> Ring...and we see on Gandalf's face two split-second expressions in
> quick succession: relief, followed by grief. (You are never more than
> a couple of minutes away from some reminder of the fact that in some
> sense this entire story is an enormous tragedy and that some wounds
> never heal.)
>
McKellen was wonderful. Exactly what Gandalf should be. Gimli too.
Did anyone but me notice Legolas's magic never empty quiver of arrows?
I wasn't entirely happy with portrayal of the elves, Rivendell, or
Lothlorien--and I think we spent far too little time in Lothlorien. How
are we supposed to be sad at its loss come the end, if we never got to
know it?
MKK
Mary Kay Kare
> On 20 Dec 2001 14:02:45 GMT,
> P Nielsen Hayden <p...@panix.com> scripsit:
> > I'm a Tolkien purist like this: I would be apalled if someone
> > published an arbitrarily cut-and-reordered version of the books.
> > Peter Jackson's movie isn't the books, it's an epic fantasy movie
> > based on the books, a work of art in close dialogue with a different
> > work of art. In those terms it's a roaring success. And as with any
> > dialogue, it encourages us to put our own two cents in.
>
> Someone -- it was not, alas, me, and if someone attributes this to me I
> shall wax wroth -- came up with the comparison that, when Feanor took
> (some tiny fraction of) the unsullied light of the Two Trees and put it
> in the Silmarils, no one told him that he'd made really inferior magic
> trees; they said 'oh, cool!' (or Quenya words to that effect.)
Oh, cool!
>
> I think that's the best way to view the movies, myself, and viewed that
> way this one is a _huge_ success.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The fight scenes in general impressed me. _kicking knees!_ They've got
> the heros _kicking knees!_
Ooo! That reminds me. My favorite scene is on Amon Hen, where Frodo
has just left and Aragorn turns to confront the horde of orcs. That's
how a king looks.
MKK
Mary Kay Kare
> >> Spoilers follow --
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> This is one of the few places I disagree with you -- the Balrog was...
> well, not bad, but the flaming demon look was kind of generic (if,
> admittedly, apropos). If you'd pressed me for exactly what it should look
> like, I couldn't have come up with anything better, mind; but it's a
> disappointment in that respect only because in the rest of the movie,
> Jackson consistently exceeded my visual imagination and expectations.
> Yes, _that's_ the Shire, more accurately than I could ever have described
> it, and that's Lothlorien and Rivendell, and Caradhras, and Moria, and
> that's Gandalf, and Aragorn, and Gimli, and...
>
> So, the Balrog was just sort of, "Yeah, I guess that's pretty good."
Shouldn't have had horns.
MKK
gfa...@savvy.com
Mary Kay Kare <mar...@kare.ws> wrote:
> Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org> wrote:
[. . .]
> Shouldn't have had horns.
This in no way contradicts the text, which is almost entirely silent as to
the appearance of the Balrog. All we are told is that it is "a dark form,
of man-shape maybe, yet greater," and that it has wings. It's open to
speculation and interpretation whether it also has horns, a trunk, antlers,
an ant-eater's snout, a tail, Andorian antenna, and possibly wears a pink
tutu and a Notre Dame sweat shirt, along with high heels, kneepads, long
black lace gloves, and a nice brooch to accessorize with.
--
Gary Farber Boulder, Colorado
gfa...@savvy.com
Andrew Plotkin
> In article <20011221094509...@mb-dd.aol.com>,
> rich brown <drga...@aol.com> wrote:
>>Sam is the only one who puts on the ring and gives it up without a qualm.
> He never takes it for his own; he sees it only as a burden to be borne
> to destruction. And he has it for a far shorter time than anybody else;
> only a few hours, as opposed to years. Nor does he give it up completely
> without qualms -- remember the bit where he offers to take it back from
> Frodo?
*Nobody* gives up the Ring without qualms. Except Bombadil.
> Still, your fundamental point (that Tolkien portrays Sam as having
> an underlying strength deriving from his humility) seems right.
Yes, I agree.
--Z
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
*
* Make your vote count. Get your vote counted.
James Nicoll
Actually, no I don't. Not if I have to collect in person.
Marilee J. Layman
<d...@branta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>(I always wanted to see _The Lost World_ filmed with Brian Blessed as
>Challenger and Peter Cushing as Summerlee, but it'll never happen now,
>sigh)
Are you guys getting the new series The Lost World over there?
They've already resorted to Westerns in dreams and so forth.
--
Marilee J. Layman
Bali Sterling Beads at Wholesale
http://www.basicbali.com
gfa...@savvy.com
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2001 14:58:50 +0000, Del Cotter
> <d...@branta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>(I always wanted to see _The Lost World_ filmed with Brian Blessed as
>>Challenger and Peter Cushing as Summerlee, but it'll never happen now,
>>sigh)
> Are you guys getting the new series The Lost World over there?
> They've already resorted to Westerns in dreams and so forth.
I've seen a few episodes, and it struck me as pretty much tripe. Slightly
pretty tripe, to be sure, and if one is in the mood for mindless
"adventure," harmless enough, but if there's more there there, I didn't
catch it on my samplings.
David Joseph Greenbaum
in fleeting electrons:
>It's open to speculation and interpretation whether it also has horns, a
>trunk, antlers, an ant-eater's snout, a tail, Andorian antenna, and
>possibly wears a pink tutu and a Notre Dame sweat shirt, along with
>high heels, kneepads, long black lace gloves, and a nice brooch to
>accessorize with.
Actually, I liked the warm-up suit with "VILLANOVA" emblazoned in fire
across the back...
Dave G.
--
Here David Niven's goofier and much minaturized twin attempts to
kill himself with an overdose of coffee. Little does he know it's
Sanka. He won't stay up all night with the coffee jitters - no sir!
He'll stay up all night cursing the freak accident that made him
a doll-sized man - but one with man-sized appetites!
The Blue Rose
scribed in cyber virtuality
*snip Patrick and David Goldfarbs intro bits*
>> > Spoilers follow --
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Nearly all of the actors were quite good. From the pictures and trailers
>> > I'd seen, I was a bit iffy about Gandalf and Saruman, but Ian McKellen
>> > won me over at once, and Christopher Lee after a short time.
>>
>>
>> The Gandalf vs Saruman fight scene, not in the book, was for me the
>> weakest thing in the movie.
>
>I agree. I'd have been happy to see it cut so that other things later
>on could have more time.
I am with you on this, I thought it was quite sad and pathetic to see
two men who were supposed to be so powerful fighting like that, i am
sure there is some obscure significance im not getting but I didnt
like it either.
>> > The big
>> > disappointment was Cate Blanchett as Galadriel; she seemed a bit stiff,
>> > and I really wish she could have pulled off her big temptation speech
>> > without being all tarted up with CGI.
>>
>>
>> On the other hand, lots of people have said this, so I was surprised
>> at how effective and moving the big Frodo-and-Galadriel scene was for
>> me.
>
>I found it a little disappointing myself. And I was quite unhappy that
>more of the Fellowship/Galadriel interactions were not shown. I think
>this is one of the biggest flaws in the adaptation.
I thought Galadriel was very cold and manipulative. I thought she was
supposed to be much warmer and colder and that whole CGI Queen of
Despair was just silly.
>> A fellow Tor editor, Jim Minz, remarked that just as there are things
>> the book does better than any movie could (obviously), there are also
>> a few things the movie does better than the book, and the effects
>> surrounding any use of the Ring are an excellent example of that.
>
>Yep.
>>
I thought the Ring Wraiths were really well done and that whole
screaming wind thing was brilliant
>> > I find, oddly, that I've never had a clear picture of Aragorn in my
>> > mind; so the one from the movie works well enough there. (Though he
>> > was a bit young-looking -- almost everyone was, though it's understandable.)
>>
>>
>> Like many (not all) of the characters, Aragorn matched up with my
>> pre-existing image to a startling degree. Mortenstern's performance
>> in the role is terse and effective; you can see things being bottled
>> up for payoff in the next two.
>
I'm firmly in the ARAGORN IS BRILLIANT team :-) I know hes supposed to
be older, but the whole cast was quite young, and I thought he had the
intensity and the self possession and the.........darkness that
Aragorn carries with him.
>He was quite close, but I think with those cheek-bones and that chin
>he'd be a better Elrond while the fellow who played Elrond wos much
>closer to my idea of Aragorn. The other thing visual things that
>bothered me were all those damn blonde elves with point ears and brown
>eyes. Elves were supposed to be dark haired and grey eyed dammit!
Thankyou!! There was someting about the elves bugging me all night,
and now I know what it was! Of course the cognitive dissonance of
seeing Craig Parker dressed up as an elf was *shudder*
> (The
>elves, with starlight in their eyes and hearts, have always been
>Tolkien's most important creation for me.) Also, Elijah Wood is just
>too dammed pretty and young looking to be Frodo. He looks about 12
>years old, and hobbits and not supposed to be pretty.
I didnt like Wood as Frodo, I agree he looks far too young, but by the
end of the movie I was quite frustrated with him. From what I
remember Frodo is torn with his own fears and frustrations and spends
a lot of time in serious internal strife and contemplation. EW just
seemed to stand around alot with a stricken look on his face (which he
did quite well) but it was just not quite right for me
> Bilbo, on the
>other hand was just about perfect. That's how a hobbit should look.
>Yeah, I know Frodo's a lot younger, but he's 33 for heaven's sake.
Bilbo was marvellous!
>
>Meanwhile, Boromir, a character
>> confine to the first movie, is played _very_ well by Sean Bean, and
>> the two of them together turn in a death-of-Boromir scene which is
>> resolent with the best kind of ancient-warrior heroism.
>
>Boromie was good, but I hated that death scene. I think Tolkien would
>have been embarassed by it and hated it too.
>>
Hmmmm I thought his death was noble, and the final scene was I think
important for future Aragorn things to deal with. Thats the first
time in the movie we see him accepting some of the responsibility for
the Kingship of Gondor.
>And Bag End was just *so* perfect. I want to go live there.
*grin* other than the fact you wouldnt fit, its not there anymore.
Part of the agreement with the appropriate parties when building the
film sets was they all had to come down afterwards. This was
commented on as being a loss as far as possible tourist revenues went,
but went a long way to keeping the set building costs down, as they
could use much less expensive materials.
*snip*
>Did anyone but me notice Legolas's magic never empty quiver of arrows?
Oooh oooh I did! And did you see the superfast shooting at the end?
>I wasn't entirely happy with portrayal of the elves, Rivendell, or
>Lothlorien--and I think we spent far too little time in Lothlorien. How
>are we supposed to be sad at its loss come the end, if we never got to
>know it?
I think that was the point of Elronds little speech, Galadriels
comment about going away to the West, and why Arwen does what she does
in the little scene with Aragorn.
Overall I liked it, I thought it was very true to the book, yes there
were scenes missed out etc, but it was much truer than anything else I
have ever seen made into a movie, and more importantly, it kept to
the *spirit* of the book :-)
Stacey
--
Stacey Hill "on the other hand, you have different fingers"
http://www.geocities.com/terragenblue for TERRAGEN and XENODREAM images
Alison Hopkins
Mary Kay Kare wrote in message <1f4qceg.1aw89jb1s07enpN%mar...@kare.ws>...
>Graydon Saunders <gra...@dsl.ca> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The fight scenes in general impressed me. _kicking knees!_ They've got
>> the heros _kicking knees!_
Oh, that shot of the goblins swarming down the pillars in Moria.
>
>Ooo! That reminds me. My favorite scene is on Amon Hen, where Frodo
>has just left and Aragorn turns to confront the horde of orcs. That's
>how a king looks.
>
This is what I find impressive; you can see Aragorn change, and evolve in to
what he will be. This is why I want ROTK Now, Please. That, and I loved all
the bits Jackson simply put in, that were in the book, without as it were,
mentioning them. You know, the hobbit's leaf brooches after they left
Lorien? Stuff like that.
Ali
Marcus L. Rowland
>>(I always wanted to see _The Lost World_ filmed with Brian Blessed as
>>Challenger and Peter Cushing as Summerlee, but it'll never happen now,
>>sigh)
>
>Next week the BBC is screening a two-part version made with effects and
>dinosaurs by the _Walking With Dinosaurs_ team, with Bob Hoskins as
>Professor Challenger, made in Xena country in New Zealand. Can't
>remember off-hand who has the other main roles.
Found the cast list:
Challenger Bob Hoskins
Summerlee James Fox
Lord Roxton Tom Ward
Edward Malone Matthew Rhys
Agnes Cluny Elaine Cassidy
Theo Kerr Peter Falk
Illingworth Robert Hardy
Gladys Joanna Page
McArdle Tim Healy
Mrs Summerlee Tessa Peake-Jones
Cluny and Kerr are the ringers, not in the original story, and I don't
remember Mrs. Summerlee either. The odd omissions are Mrs. Challenger
(the little woman literally put on a pedestal), the native bearer Zambo,
and the two evil guides Gomez and Manuel. I think they must feel that
their roles are somehow non-PC for today's audience. Some minor
characters such as Malone's editor and the chauffeur Austin aren't
listed but I suspect are simply being played by lesser-known actors.
Of course as the author of the Professor Challenger RPG I feel it my
duty to watch this. God, the hardships of a literary life ;-)
Damien Neil
>> So, the Balrog was just sort of, "Yeah, I guess that's pretty good."
>
> Shouldn't have had horns.
Agree. Looked too much like a cow.
It came to the edge of the fire and the light faded as if a cloud
had bent over it. Then with a rush it leaped the fissure. The flames
roared up to greet it, and wreathed about it; and a black smoke
swirled in the air. Its streaming mane kindled, and blazed behind
it. In its right hand was a blade like a stabbing tongue of fire;
in its left it held a whip of many thongs.
'Ai, ai!' wailed Legolas. 'A Balrog! A Balrog is come!'
The movie Balrog wasn't bad. The one in my head scares me more.
- Damien
aRJay
<mar...@kare.ws> writes
<snip>
> Also, Elijah Wood is just
>too dammed pretty and young looking to be Frodo. He looks about 12
>years old, and hobbits and not supposed to be pretty. Bilbo, on the
>other hand was just about perfect. That's how a hobbit should look.
>Yeah, I know Frodo's a lot younger, but he's 33 for heaven's sake.
>
Yes but that would be the equivalent of 20 (ish) for one of the tall
folk.
>McKellen was wonderful. Exactly what Gandalf should be. Gimli too.
>
>Did anyone but me notice Legolas's magic never empty quiver of arrows?
>
Yes and no I am sure that during the fights the number of arrows in
there reduced, also when he double shotted the cave troll I got the
impression that he was using black orcish arrows.
>I wasn't entirely happy with portrayal of the elves, Rivendell, or
>Lothlorien--and I think we spent far too little time in Lothlorien. How
>are we supposed to be sad at its loss come the end, if we never got to
>know it?
Rivendell worked pretty well for me, would have been perfect if I was a
bigger fan of Alan Lee's work. Lothlorien didn't work at all well, I had
always pictured it with the trees further apart.
--
aRJay
"In this great and creatorless universe, where so much beautiful has
come to be out of the chance interactions of the basic properties of
matter, it seems so important that we love one another."
- Lucy Kemnitzer
Del Cotter
Thomas Yan <ty...@twcny.rr.com> said:
> Del Cotter <d...@branta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> :The Man With The Golden Gun:? Lee played Scaramanga.
>
>Possibly. I'm now rather confused as to which James Bond movies I have
>seen and which I haven't; they've all started to run together. (I find
>this mildly annoying because I'd like to be able to list exactly the
>ones I have seen.)
I sympathise; I actually had to spend a second thinking whether it might
not actually have been Christopher *Plummer* who'd been Mister Three-
Nipples in :TMWTGG:. It was actually Lee, but I'm sure Plummer has been
a Bond baddy in one film.
Del Cotter
>Del Cotter <d...@branta.demon.co.uk> writes
>>(I always wanted to see _The Lost World_ filmed with Brian Blessed as
>>Challenger and Peter Cushing as Summerlee, but it'll never happen now,
>>sigh)
>
>Next week the BBC is screening a two-part version made with effects and
>dinosaurs by the _Walking With Dinosaurs_ team, with Bob Hoskins as
>Professor Challenger, made in Xena country in New Zealand. Can't
>remember off-hand who has the other main roles. Sounds like the story
>will be followed fairly faithfully, except that they decided that the
>story needs some feminine interest, so we've got two extra characters;
>Peter Falk as a mad missionary and someone whose name I can't remember
>as his daughter.
Weren't there enough Mad Scientists in the story they
could have given a Beautiful Daughter to?
See, what they should have done was taken a leaf out of
Peter Jackson's book and changed Summerlee's sex and age
for some tasty Challenger/Summerlee UST.
David G. Bell
<1f4qbmw.f51us3du23adN%mar...@kare.ws> mar...@kare.ws
"Mary Kay Kare" wrote:
> P Nielsen Hayden <p...@panix.com> wrote:
>
> > This isn't a review, just some notes, and I'll use David Goldfarb's
> > handy spoiler barrier.
> >
> > On Thu, 20 Dec 2001 10:10:30 +0000 (UTC),
> > David Goldfarb <gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Spoilers follow --
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > The Gandalf vs Saruman fight scene, not in the book, was for me the
> > weakest thing in the movie.
>
> I agree. I'd have been happy to see it cut so that other things later
> on could have more time.
How, I wonder, will it seem when the next installment shows Gandalf the
White dealing so easily with Saruman? As he does. How will this fight
illuminate the overall defeat of Saruman?
We can't be sure yet, but I can see how a scene can work better in terms
of the complete story. I don't think this is as pointless as the
meeting of Han Solo with Jabba the Hutt that was introduced into the
revised Star Wars movies, but that scene has the same basic problem of
being superfluous, if the movie is seen in isolation.
--
David G. Bell -- Farmer, SF Fan, Filker, and Punslinger.
Mr. Punch's Advice to a Young Man About to Become a Farmer:
"Marry, instead."
Edward McArdle
nice Mr Bond!
In article <3C23627D...@optonline.net>, "Evelyn C. Leeper"
<ele...@optonline.net> wrote:
>Johan Anglemark wrote:
>>
>> My trusted friend Rev. Cyohtee - O'kōhome Ehohatse wrote in msg
>> <l6h62u4l0f8degup0...@4ax.com>:
>>
>> >Thomas Yan <ty...@twcny.rr.com> rose up and issued forth:
>> >> Del Cotter <d...@branta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> >>> Thomas Yan <ty...@twcny.rr.com> said:
>> >>>
>> >>> I can't believe you've never heard of Christopher Lee.
>> >>
>> >>From where? Lessee, I think the only movies I've seen him in are:
>> >>
>> >> Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The (2001)
>> >> "Gormenghast" (2000)
>> >> Sleepy Hollow (1999)
>> >> Gremlins 2: The New Batch (1990)
>> >> ? Howling II (1985)
>> >> Three Musketeers, The (1973)
>> >>
>> >>I don't think I started really paying attention to actors until after
>> >>the mid 80s, possibly not until the early 90s.
>> >>
>> >>(I do plan to see "The Wicker Man".)
>> >
>> >Well, there are the true classics, like Dracula from 1958 (one of the
>> >few actors to get Dracula anywhere near as good as Lugosi) as well as
>> >almost a dozen more Dracula films over 30+ years, The Mummy 1959,
>> >Curse of Frankenstein 1957, just to name a few. I realize you may not
>> >be a big fan of classic horror movies, but Christopher Lee is one of
>> >the big names in movie history. I had heard of him long before I ever
>> >saw any of his films.
>>
>> Same here. It's like not knowing who Clint Eastwood or Boris Karloff is.
>
>You mean like in BACK TO THE FUTURE III? :-)
Dan Kimmel
"Del Cotter" <d...@branta.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:R3Sy6rBI...@branta.demon.co.uk...
> On Fri, 21 Dec 2001, in rec.arts.sf.fandom,
> Thomas Yan <ty...@twcny.rr.com> said:
>
> > Del Cotter <d...@branta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >> :The Man With The Golden Gun:? Lee played Scaramanga.
> >
> >Possibly. I'm now rather confused as to which James Bond movies I have
> >seen and which I haven't; they've all started to run together. (I find
> >this mildly annoying because I'd like to be able to list exactly the
> >ones I have seen.)
>
> I sympathise; I actually had to spend a second thinking whether it might
> not actually have been Christopher *Plummer* who'd been Mister Three-
> Nipples in :TMWTGG:. It was actually Lee, but I'm sure Plummer has been
> a Bond baddy in one film.
You know, Plummer would make a great Bond villain, but he's never actually
done it. His filmography is at:
http://us.imdb.com/Name?Plummer,+Christopher
Alan Woodford
ra...@nospamCON.ORG (Chris "The Magician" O'Shea) wrote:
>In article <20011220.20...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk>,
>db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk ("David G. Bell") wrote:
>
>> the BBC
>> radio version, scripted by Brian Sibley
>
>In a film review (of LotR) this evening, the BBC confirmed that they would
>be reissuing the BBC Radio version of LotR early in 2002 on cassette and
>CD ... just thought you might like to know ...
>
>
Damn. Just after I have spent hours copying my tape box set to CD's
:-)
Oh well. Life is like that, isn't it!
Alan Woodford
Men in Frocks, protecting the Earth with mystical flummery!
rich brown
>In article <20011221094509...@mb-dd.aol.com>,
>rich brown <drga...@aol.com> wrote:
>>Sam is the only one who puts on the ring and gives it up without a qualm.
>
>He never takes it for his own; he sees it only as a burden to be borne
>to destruction. And he has it for a far shorter time than anybody else;
>only a few hours, as opposed to years. Nor does he give it up completely
>without qualms -- remember the bit where he offers to take it back from
>Frodo? Still, your fundamental point (that Tolkien portrays Sam as having
>an underlying strength deriving from his humility) seems right.
Good points, all of them, but it's worth noting that others (Boromir most
notably) are strongly drawn to it, even though they've never touched it, while
others yet of considerably greater strength and resolve (Gandalf, Galladriel,
Aragorn, e.g.) dare not even touch it lest they be overborn. And while some
part of Sam's offer to take back the ring from Frodo is almost certainly the
influence of the ring itself, I can't help but feel that a larger part of it
was the desire to save Frodo from the unbelievably heavy and painful burden.
But, yeah, points taken.
Dr Gafia (rich brown)
--
"The optimist believes we live in the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist fears this is true." --James Branch Cabell
Cally Soukup
> In article <slrna23rs...@panix3.panix.com>,
> P Nielsen Hayden <p...@panix.com> wrote:
>>This isn't a review, just some notes, and I'll use David Goldfarb's
>>handy spoiler barrier.
As will I.
>>> Spoilers follow --
>
>>Moria is terrific; the Balrog is one of the scariest things I've
>>_ever_ seen on screen;
> This is one of the few places I disagree with you -- the Balrog was...
> well, not bad, but the flaming demon look was kind of generic (if,
> admittedly, apropos). If you'd pressed me for exactly what it should look
> like, I couldn't have come up with anything better, mind; but it's a
> disappointment in that respect only because in the rest of the movie,
> Jackson consistently exceeded my visual imagination and expectations.
I became convinced of the Balrog when it opened its mouth and we were
looking into a furnace, heat-effects and all. I was almost expecting
to feel the heat radiating from the screen. And the smoke-wings were
perfect. YBalrogMV.
--
"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend
to the death your right to say it." -- Beatrice Hall
Cally Soukup sou...@pobox.com
Mary Kay Kare
Mike Kozlowski
Chris "The Magician" O'Shea <ra...@CON.ORG.nospam> wrote:
>In a film review (of LotR) this evening, the BBC confirmed that they would
>be reissuing the BBC Radio version of LotR early in 2002 on cassette and
>CD ... just thought you might like to know ...
It's already out; I bought it earlier this year on CD.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0553456539
--
Mike Kozlowski
http://www.klio.org/mlk/
Mike Kozlowski
David G. Bell <db...@zhochaka.org.uk> wrote:
> "Mary Kay Kare" wrote:
>> P Nielsen Hayden <p...@panix.com> wrote:
>> > The Gandalf vs Saruman fight scene, not in the book, was for me the
>> > weakest thing in the movie.
>>
>> I agree. I'd have been happy to see it cut so that other things later
>> on could have more time.
>
>How, I wonder, will it seem when the next installment shows Gandalf the
>White dealing so easily with Saruman? As he does. How will this fight
>illuminate the overall defeat of Saruman?
I've been thinking about that scene (which I also found rather
disappointing), and have decided that I have no suggestions on how to
handle it better. I think it needs to happen onscreen -- we need to know
that Saruman and Gandalf fought and Gandalf lost, and having Gandalf tell
everyone about it later works far less well in a movie than in the book.
And if it's a necessary scene, well, what are the other options? A big
pyrotechnic razzle-dazzle fest? Hardly seems proper. A Sword in the
Stone-esque shape-changing competition? Er, no.
I'm mildly dissatisfied with what was there, but I have no better
suggestions.
Mary Kay Kare
> Mary Kay Kare wrote in message <1f4qceg.1aw89jb1s07enpN%mar...@kare.ws>...
> >
>
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> Oh, that shot of the goblins swarming down the pillars in Moria.
And then back up again when the Balrog showed up. Very nicely done.
>
> You know, the hobbit's leaf brooches after they left
> Lorien? Stuff like that.
They were all wearing those cloak pins. I said I wanted one and Jordin
laughed and said they'd no doubt be available in numerous places! I
thought them very graceful and attractive.
MKK
Ruchira Datta
Trinker <trinke...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>S
>P
>O
>I
>L
>E
>R
>S
>
>F
>O
>R
>
>T
>H
>E
>
>T
>W
>O
>
>T
>O
>W
>E
>R
>S
>
>B
>E
>L
>O
>W
>
>Graydon Saunders wrote:
>
>> I think it's going to come back in flashback when Gimli nearly gets into
>> a fight with Eomer, myself. I have the suspicion that they're going to
>> get Cate Blanchet into all of the movies.
>
>
>http://us.imdb.com/Title?0167261
>Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, The (2002)
>
>
>Cast overview:
>Ian McKellen .... Gandalf The White
I was thinking after the movie that Gandalf's "death" was one thing that
those of us who have read the books would never get the full impact of.
But if it can be spoiled just by looking at IMDB...
Ruchira Datta
da...@math.berkeley.edu
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
> They were all wearing those cloak pins. I said I wanted one and Jordin
> laughed and said they'd no doubt be available in numerous places! I
> thought them very graceful and attractive.
When I was a teenager I would instantly buy any piece of trashy
jewellery which featured a leaf. Some of them were actually quite nice.
But I very much doubt any gadgetry will approach what I thought a right
and proper piece of Elvish jewellery should like.
--
Anna Feruglio Dal Dan
http://www.fantascienza.net/sfpeople/elethiomel
Gens una sumus
Chris The Magician O'Shea
wrote:
>
> >In a film review (of LotR) this evening, the BBC confirmed that they
> would >be reissuing the BBC Radio version of LotR early in 2002 on
> cassette and >CD ... just thought you might like to know ...
>
> It's already out; I bought it earlier this year on CD.
>
> http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0553456539
No, that's the one that's already out, the BBC announced they'd be doing a
"re-issue" which probably means a different cover and a higher price (but
you never know, maybe they'll put in a "making of..." as well! And then a
DVD of "Walking with Hobbits":)
Though I notice that the US version is 13 discs and the UK version is 14
discs (includes "an extra CD of the music from the soundtrack") but of
course it is much more expensive :-( (75 pounds against 65 dollars,
bbcshop.com (UK) and bbcproducts.com (USA) ... or Amazon prices
Amazon.co.uk 85 pounds, Amazon.com $48.96 ) and since CDs aren't region
coded, even adding the 23% tax and duty plus international postage still
means ordering from the US is *much* cheaper ...
--
Chris "The Magician" O'Shea
witty .sig on order, please allow 7-14 puns for delivery
rasff @ con . org . nospam (lose the .nospam if you want to email me)
John Lorentz
ra...@nospamCON.ORG (Chris "The Magician" O'Shea) wrote:
>In article <20011220.20...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk>,
>db...@zhochaka.demon.co.uk ("David G. Bell") wrote:
>
>> the BBC
>> radio version, scripted by Brian Sibley
>
>In a film review (of LotR) this evening, the BBC confirmed that they would
>be reissuing the BBC Radio version of LotR early in 2002 on cassette and
>CD ... just thought you might like to know ...
It's out here in the States--saw it at Powell's the other day for
$69.95. Here's the link to their web site:
http://www.powells.com/cgi-bin/biblio?inkey=62-0553456539-0
(And they _do_ ship.)
--
John
Thomas Yan
wrote:
> > "Mary Kay Kare" wrote:
> >> P Nielsen Hayden <p...@panix.com> wrote:
> >> > The Gandalf vs Saruman fight scene, not in the book, was for me the
> >> > weakest thing in the movie.
> >>
> >> I agree. I'd have been happy to see it cut so that other things later
> >> on could have more time.
> I've been thinking about that scene (which I also found rather
> disappointing), and have decided that I have no suggestions on how to
> handle it better. I think it needs to happen onscreen -- we need to know
> that Saruman and Gandalf fought and Gandalf lost, and having Gandalf tell
> everyone about it later works far less well in a movie than in the book.
-snip-
I think it would have worked off-screen for me. A cut from
Gandalf looking disconcerted as all the doors slammed shut to
Gandalf imprisoned and beat up would have worked for me.
Maybe in between a shot looking at the doors to room from outside,
showing them shaking and cracking with flashing light and thundering
sound.
--
Thomas Yan (ty...@twcny.rr.com) Note: I don't check e-mail often.
Be pro-active. Fight sucky software and learned helplessness.
Apologies for any lack of capitalization; typing hurts my hands.
Progress on next DbS installment: pp1-38 of pp1-181 of _Taltos_
Alison Hopkins
Chris "The Magician" O'Shea wrote in message ...
>In article <a027nt$3i1$2...@news.panix.com>, m...@klio.org (Mike Kozlowski)
>wrote:
>
>>
>> >In a film review (of LotR) this evening, the BBC confirmed that they
>> would >be reissuing the BBC Radio version of LotR early in 2002 on
>> cassette and >CD ... just thought you might like to know ...
>>
>> It's already out; I bought it earlier this year on CD.
>>
>> http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0553456539
>
>No, that's the one that's already out, the BBC announced they'd be doing a
>"re-issue" which probably means a different cover and a higher price (but
>you never know, maybe they'll put in a "making of..." as well! And then a
>DVD of "Walking with Hobbits":)
>
And they are also repeating it on some soon Saturday.
>Though I notice that the US version is 13 discs and the UK version is 14
>discs (includes "an extra CD of the music from the soundtrack") but of
>course it is much more expensive :-( (75 pounds against 65 dollars,
>bbcshop.com (UK) and bbcproducts.com (USA) ... or Amazon prices
>Amazon.co.uk 85 pounds, Amazon.com $48.96 ) and since CDs aren't region
>coded, even adding the 23% tax and duty plus international postage still
>means ordering from the US is *much* cheaper ...
>
Ah, but I do like the 14 CD set, precisely because it has the separate music
CD. Just call me sad. <g>
The Beeb has just shown a rather nice programme about JRRT, which juxtaposed
the Vaughan Williams Tallis Fantasia with the Professor. Something I've
always felt went together, and deeply pleasing.
Ali
Ali
David Goldfarb
aRJay <aR...@escore.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <1f4qbmw.f51us3du23adN%mar...@kare.ws>, Mary Kay Kare
><mar...@kare.ws> writes
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
><snip>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> Also, Elijah Wood is just
>>too dammed pretty and young looking to be Frodo. He looks about 12
>>years old, and hobbits and not supposed to be pretty. Bilbo, on the
>>other hand was just about perfect. That's how a hobbit should look.
>>Yeah, I know Frodo's a lot younger, but he's 33 for heaven's sake.
>>
>Yes but that would be the equivalent of 20 (ish) for one of the tall
>folk.
Actually, for most of the action of the trilogy, Frodo is 50. Hobbits
seem to live about half again as long as we tall folk, so that would
be the equivalent of early '30s.
My guess at the moviemakers' thinking: they wanted a central character
who was young and pretty as a quick way to involve the audience with
him; and who looked innocent as a contrast with the evil surrounding him.
I find this understandable and forgiveable.
--
David Goldfarb <*>| "When the cat calls at midnight, your shorts
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | will ignite."
|
gold...@csua.berkeley.edu | -- J. Michael Straczynski
Laura Burchard
David Goldfarb <gold...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>My guess at the moviemakers' thinking: they wanted a central character
>who was young and pretty as a quick way to involve the audience with
>him; and who looked innocent as a contrast with the evil surrounding him.
>I find this understandable and forgiveable.
Also, Frodo has had the One Ring since he was 33 (20 or so for a human),
and it keeps the possessor from aging.
--
Laura Burchard -- l...@radix.net -- http://www.radix.net/~lhb
Livejournal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/tavella/
"Good design is clear thinking made visible." -- Edward Tufte
Mark Jones
<m...@klio.org> did utter the following:
It occurred to me that I might have liked seeing this:
Gandalf and Saruman standing at the extreme edges of the screen
staring at one another, staves gripped tightly in their hands as a
CGI "heatwave" shimmer slowly builds between them. Cut to close-ups
of each man occasionally, showing them in increasing distress--white
knuckles, sweat, deep breathing--as well as possbly having various
items in the room suddenly implode or fly to smash into a wall.
Eventually the shimmer of power reaches a climax, and Gandalf is
thrown backward--just once--to smash into the wall and slide down in
an unconscious heap. Saruman triumphant!
Same end result, but a lot less wizard fu.
--
"If you're gonna shoot, shoot. Don't talk."
--Tuco, _The Good the Bad and the Ugly_
Mark Jones
<gra...@dsl.ca> did utter the following:
>On Sat, 22 Dec 2001 18:15:56 GMT,
>Anna Feruglio Dal Dan <ada...@tin.it> scripsit:
>> When I was a teenager I would instantly buy any piece of trashy
>> jewellery which featured a leaf. Some of them were actually quite nice.
>> But I very much doubt any gadgetry will approach what I thought a right
>> and proper piece of Elvish jewellery should like.
>
>There's a fellow in Ontario who electroplates actual leaves gold or
>silver; sometimes he pre-treats the leaves so only the vein pattern
>remains before he does this.
>
>The result comes, for me, very close to my notion of Elvish jewelry.
>(the ones in the movie don't, at all, but I didn't expect them to.)
Are these just pieces of art, or are they actual jewelry to wear?
That sounds awfully fragile to me.
Marilee J. Layman
Dan) wrote:
>Mary Kay Kare <mar...@kare.ws> wrote:
>
>> They were all wearing those cloak pins. I said I wanted one and Jordin
>> laughed and said they'd no doubt be available in numerous places! I
>> thought them very graceful and attractive.
>
>When I was a teenager I would instantly buy any piece of trashy
>jewellery which featured a leaf. Some of them were actually quite nice.
>But I very much doubt any gadgetry will approach what I thought a right
>and proper piece of Elvish jewellery should like.
Actually, I have a hairclip that's sort of like that, I had one up on
eBay last week:
http://www.basicbali.com/auction/bali60.jpg
A friend who buys other things from the same manufacturer told me she
*knew* I'd buy those hairclips.
--
Marilee J. Layman
Bali Sterling Beads at Wholesale
http://www.basicbali.com
Marilee J. Layman
>In article <ob582u4tvfcsd1qno...@4ax.com>
>Marilee J. Layman <mjla...@erols.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Dec 2001 14:58:50 +0000, Del Cotter
>> <d...@branta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>(I always wanted to see _The Lost World_ filmed with Brian Blessed as
>>>Challenger and Peter Cushing as Summerlee, but it'll never happen now,
>>>sigh)
>
>> Are you guys getting the new series The Lost World over there?
>> They've already resorted to Westerns in dreams and so forth.
>
>I've seen a few episodes, and it struck me as pretty much tripe. Slightly
>pretty tripe, to be sure, and if one is in the mood for mindless
>"adventure," harmless enough, but if there's more there there, I didn't
>catch it on my samplings.
It's not bad if you're up at 3am and don't want to have commercials in
the background.
Chris The Magician O'Shea
fn...@dial.pipex.com (Alison Hopkins) wrote:
> The Beeb has just shown a rather nice programme about JRRT, which
> juxtaposed
> the Vaughan Williams Tallis Fantasia with the Professor. Something I've
> always felt went together, and deeply pleasing.
Ah, that was what the music that wasn't Koyahnisqatsi (Philip Glass) was
... knew it was familiar, I heard it at the proms years ago and bought
the CD afterwards but haven't played it in far too long ... I must admit I
thought the Glass was also very appropriate since it went with the idyllic
rural vs industrialised evil plot (life out of balance)
--
Chris "The Magician" O'Shea
gfa...@savvy.com
I wasn't unhappy in the slightest in the first place. Do I sound unhappy,
above? I was kinda going for "funny". . . .
(I did forget that it had a flaming mane, though.)
But you were perfectly clear the first time. I wuz just noting that, as
described, the movie version doesn't sound non-canonical.
--
Gary Farber Boulder, Colorado
gfa...@savvy.com
Chris The Magician O'Shea
> > :The Man With The Golden Gun:? Lee played Scaramanga.
>
> Possibly. I'm now rather confused as to which James Bond movies I have
> seen and which I haven't; they've all started to run together. (I find
> this mildly annoying because I'd like to be able to list exactly the
> ones I have seen.)
Key points to identify The Man With The Golden Gun
1) Third Nipple on the villain (Bond has a fake one made up so he can
pretend to be Scaramanga)
2) Christopher Lee
3) little gold pistol made up from cigarette lighter, pen, cufflink
(apparently) and cigarette box. Made by Calibri for the film, and actually
worked (to fire a cap anyway, though rumour had it that it would fire a
blank or even a real bullet)
http://www.thegoldengun.co.uk/tmwtgg/tmwtgggadgetsdf.htm
4) Nick Nack (Hervé Villechaize), the same short statured actor who was in
Fantasy Island (playing a character called Tattoo) telling Ricardo
Montalban "zee plane boss, zee plane!"
5) Roger Moore
6) A lot of it is set in the Far East (specifically it is set in and
around China)
gfa...@savvy.com
[. . .]
> Key points to identify The Man With The Golden Gun
> 1) Third Nipple on the villain (Bond has a fake one made up so he can
> pretend to be Scaramanga)
> 2) Christopher Lee
> 3) little gold pistol made up from cigarette lighter, pen, cufflink
> (apparently) and cigarette box. Made by Calibri for the film, and actually
> worked (to fire a cap anyway, though rumour had it that it would fire a
> blank or even a real bullet)
> http://www.thegoldengun.co.uk/tmwtgg/tmwtgggadgetsdf.htm
> 4) Nick Nack (Hervé Villechaize), the same short statured actor who was in
> Fantasy Island (playing a character called Tattoo) telling Ricardo
> Montalban "zee plane boss, zee plane!"
> 5) Roger Moore
> 6) A lot of it is set in the Far East (specifically it is set in and
> around China)
7) Most cover-your-eyes-and-ears-while-you-watch-so-none-gets-in-your-head
horrifically unwatchable awful Bond film ever, without a doubt. Wot a piece
of utter and complete crap.
Scaramanga is Bond: super-competent. Bond is comic relief: incompetent.
The film was made intentionally more of a "comedy" than _Casino Royale_.
Then Bond shoots Scaramanga at the end; the end.
It's an insult to the word "travesty" to call this film a travesty.
Kristopher
>
> Scaramanga is Bond: super-competent. Bond is comic relief:
> incompetent. The film was made intentionally more of a
> "comedy" than _Casino Royale_. Then Bond shoots Scaramanga
> at the end; the end.
>
> It's an insult to the word "travesty" to call this film a
> travesty.
I'm guessing that you didn't like it, then?
Kristopher
gfa...@savvy.com
I expected people would work out my opinion from the subtle and low-key way
I put it.
O Deus
> O Deus wrote:
> >
> > simply for the sake of creating a
> > romantic interest for Aragorn,
>
>
> scripted by the master himself in an appendix...
If we put everything in the Appendix and the Unfinished Tales and the
Simmarilion in the movie...
Besides the reason LOTR achieved what it did, is precisely because
Frodo was the main charachter and Aragorn, the usual "destined king"
cliche, wasn't.
Marcus L. Rowland
Magician" O'Shea <ra...@nospamCON.ORG> writes
>
>Though I notice that the US version is 13 discs and the UK version is 14
>discs (includes "an extra CD of the music from the soundtrack") but of
>course it is much more expensive :-( (75 pounds against 65 dollars,
>bbcshop.com (UK) and bbcproducts.com (USA) ... or Amazon prices
>Amazon.co.uk 85 pounds, Amazon.com $48.96 ) and since CDs aren't region
>coded, even adding the 23% tax and duty plus international postage still
>means ordering from the US is *much* cheaper ...
I was somewhat bemused to discover that the cheapest way to get Buffy
Season 1 on DVD is to order it from _Australia_ with a couple of budget
titles to bring down the postal cost per disk. Australia is region 4,
but that's PAL so no problems in the UK.
--
Marcus L. Rowland
Forgotten Futures - The Scientific Romance Role Playing Game
http://www.ffutures.demon.co.uk/ http://www.forgottenfutures.com/
"We are all victims of this slime. They... ...fill our mailboxes with gibberish
that would get them indicted if people had time to press charges"
[Hunter S. Thompson predicts junk e-mail, 1985 (from Generation of Swine)]
Trinker
Graydon Saunders wrote:
>
> On 22 Dec 2001 15:13:21 GMT,
> Mike Kozlowski <m...@klio.org> scripsit:
> [wizard-fu]
> > I'm mildly dissatisfied with what was there, but I have no better
> > suggestions.
>
> They stare at each other, and start to sweat, and their facial
> expressions change, and fragile things in the periphery get damaged --
> papers move, glass in lamps breaks -- as the air between them starts to
> distort the light that passes through it.
>
> It looks even for a little while, and the view pulls in, untill you can
> just see Sauruman and Gandalf, staves in hands, and little else -- lucky
> thing Sauruman's throne room has black walls. Small tension heightening
> noises and shifts of light and facial expression occur.
>
> Then Sauruman makes a _small_ dramatic guesture that points out he's
> wearing some sort of ring with a stone in it, which becomes active --
> I'd prefer that hand starting to distort, going Evil (long nails, orcish
> skin, dead fish pale, etc., to go with 'White Hand' motif) to any
> light-emitting behaviour -- and we see that the bent air is moving
> towards Gandalf. Just turning that hand off his staff and holding it
> apaumy towards Gandalf would to marvelously
>
> Gandalf looks surprised and concerned and gets knocked out, crumpling to
> the floor, in about that much time. Done.
>
> Shot pulls back; Saruman's throne room is trashed. Bits of the walls are
> melted, the throne cushion is burnt to ash, visible hot spots on the
> metal doors, bent or crushed into the walls metal objects like the lamp
> standards, anything flamable is stuff into corners and smouldering, and
> Saruman gets to look really angry and say his lines about Gandalf having
> chosen the way of pain.
>
> I think this would have been vastly more effective than the
> wizard-fu.
To you. I think it would have been really turgid and terrible
cinema.
--Trinker
Trinker
In a *movie* ? In case you hadn't noticed, moving pictures
*move*. All these "non-wizard-fu" descriptions remind me
of Andy Warhol films.
--Trinker
Trinker
Cast metal has different qualities from worked (rolled and
soldered) metal, especially if it's quenched/cooled just right.
I can believe that the electroplated leaves are relatively
sturdy. But I wouldn't use them as the main strength of
a cloak clasp. And they'd be absolute *hell* to film.
--Trinker, GJG.
(Graduate Jeweler Gemologist)
gfa...@savvy.com
Trinker <trinke...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Mark Jones wrote:
[. . .]
>> staring at one another, staves gripped tightly in their hands as a
>> CGI "heatwave" shimmer slowly builds between them. Cut to close-ups
>> of each man occasionally, showing them in increasing distress--white
>> knuckles, sweat, deep breathing--as well as possbly having various
>> items in the room suddenly implode or fly to smash into a wall.
>>
>> Eventually the shimmer of power reaches a climax, and Gandalf is
>> thrown backward--just once--to smash into the wall and slide down in
>> an unconscious heap. Saruman triumphant!
>>
>> Same end result, but a lot less wizard fu.
> In a *movie* ? In case you hadn't noticed, moving pictures
> *move*. All these "non-wizard-fu" descriptions remind me
> of Andy Warhol films.
Let's go the other way: Mike Jittlov is hired to direct the scene.
Trinker
<shrug> Peter Jackson drew quite a bit from Tolkien sources
outside LOTR. I think it's a better movie because he did so,
for most of the additions.
Recent reading of "The Official Movie Guide" tells me that
Peter Jackson had the books in hand throughout the conception
and filming, and consulted the relevant portions of text
immediately prior to shooting each scene. I think it shows.
--Trinker
Mark Jones
<trinke...@yahoo.com> did utter the following:
>Mark Jones wrote:
>> It occurred to me that I might have liked seeing this:
>>
>> Gandalf and Saruman standing at the extreme edges of the screen
>> staring at one another, staves gripped tightly in their hands as a
>> CGI "heatwave" shimmer slowly builds between them. Cut to close-ups
>> of each man occasionally, showing them in increasing distress--white
>> knuckles, sweat, deep breathing--as well as possbly having various
>> items in the room suddenly implode or fly to smash into a wall.
>>
>> Eventually the shimmer of power reaches a climax, and Gandalf is
>> thrown backward--just once--to smash into the wall and slide down in
>> an unconscious heap. Saruman triumphant!
>>
>> Same end result, but a lot less wizard fu.
>
>
>In a *movie* ? In case you hadn't noticed, moving pictures
>*move*. All these "non-wizard-fu" descriptions remind me
>of Andy Warhol films.
Apparently you've never watched, say, any number of westerns in
which there's a great deal of "motionless" confrontation (albeit
with lots of close-ups of faces displaying concern or icy calm
depending on the character) and an utter lack of dialogue prior to
the quick-draw showdown. Ditto for kung fu flicks. These westerns
(and easterns) may not be Great Cinema (tm), but there's a precedent
for that kind of thing.
As it stands, the wizard fu duel is just silly looking.
Mark Jones
utter the following:
>7) Most cover-your-eyes-and-ears-while-you-watch-so-none-gets-in-your-head
>horrifically unwatchable awful Bond film ever, without a doubt. Wot a piece
>of utter and complete crap.
>
>Scaramanga is Bond: super-competent. Bond is comic relief: incompetent.
>The film was made intentionally more of a "comedy" than _Casino Royale_.
>Then Bond shoots Scaramanga at the end; the end.
>
>It's an insult to the word "travesty" to call this film a travesty.
Amen! And amen and amen.
But then, _most_ of the Roger Moore Bond films were like that.
There are only a couple that I enjoyed. _For Your Eyes Only_ is
one, and mostly _despite_ Moore, not because of him. I liked the
greek woman who kept interfering in his mission because she was on
her own mission of revenge. The other good bit was Bond trying to
climb up to the monastery on the pillar of stone; a guard discovers
the pitons and rope and starts hammering them out, so that Bond is
losing ground (as the rope drops as each piton is knocked loose)
faster than he can recover by climbing. It's one of the few times
in a Bond film I really wondered how he'd get out of the situation.
I was terribly afraid they'd do something REALLY stupid like a
concealed jetpack or a parachute under his jacket.
Fortunately, they didn't.
The only other time I've really worried about Bond was another RM
film, the title of which I don't even recall. It begins with Bond
being pitched out of an airplane in flight sans parachute. I
remember thinking, "Bond's good, but he can't fly." And again I was
afraid they'd do something stupid (see above re parachute).
But no--Bond arrows downward to catch up to a bad guy who is
freefalling in standard spread-eagle posture, beats him up and takes
HIS parachute. Which has been done a number of times since, but
that wsa the first time _I_ saw that gag, and it worked.
Generally, though, Roger Moore + Bond = Travesty.
Trinker
And in both cases, it involves a "playing chicken" wait-it-out
until the impasse is broken by one side. It basically only
proves reaction time. Not the same as "battle of wills".
> As it stands, the wizard fu duel is just silly looking.
It could have been a lot worse.
--Trinker
Alison Hopkins
Chris "The Magician" O'Shea wrote in message ...
>In article <3c24e3d1$0$8506$cc9e...@news.dial.pipex.com>,
>fn...@dial.pipex.com (Alison Hopkins) wrote:
>
>
>> The Beeb has just shown a rather nice programme about JRRT, which
>> juxtaposed
>> the Vaughan Williams Tallis Fantasia with the Professor. Something I've
>> always felt went together, and deeply pleasing.
>
>Ah, that was what the music that wasn't Koyahnisqatsi (Philip Glass) was
>... knew it was familiar, I heard it at the proms years ago and bought
>the CD afterwards but haven't played it in far too long ... I must admit I
>thought the Glass was also very appropriate since it went with the idyllic
>rural vs industrialised evil plot (life out of balance)
>
You and me both - someone obviously thought very carefully about what to use
as the soundtrack. I love the Tallis, and own, iirc, five recordings of it!
The one they used last night sounded like the Barbirolli version. The only
recording I hate is Andre Previn, who mangles it, damn him. The Glass is one
I wish very much would come out on DVD. Elgar, of course, also mixes
wonderfully with Tolkien.
(Oh, and Maureen, I just bought some Finzi!)
Ali
Alison Hopkins
Graydon Saunders wrote in message ...
>On Sun, 23 Dec 2001 00:58:36 GMT,
>Mark Jones <sin...@pacifier.com> scripsit:
>> And yea, verily, on Sat, 22 Dec 2001 18:16:29 -0500 Graydon Saunders
>><gra...@dsl.ca> did utter the following:
>>>silver; sometimes he pre-treats the leaves so only the vein pattern
>>>remains before he does this.
>>>
>>>The result comes, for me, very close to my notion of Elvish jewelry.
>>>(the ones in the movie don't, at all, but I didn't expect them to.)
>>
>> Are these just pieces of art, or are they actual jewelry to wear?
>> That sounds awfully fragile to me.
>
>upon, but they're not fragile; the fellow uses copper -- one can
>apparently electroplate copper on to _anything_ -- and then nickel, and
>then either gold or silver as the top layer. They're quite sturdy as a
>result. I wore a small oak leaf as an earing for years, and it would
>occasionally dent me, but didn't itself bend. I know other people who
>have had willow leaf necklaces for years, and those have held up fine,
>too.
URL? Shop?
Ali
Alison Hopkins
Mark Jones wrote in message <3c262c1b....@news.newsguy.com>...
I owned something very like that, and the whole damned thing fell apart, to
my chagrin.
Ali
Chris The Magician O'Shea
wrote:
> Scaramanga is Bond: super-competent. Bond is comic relief:
> incompetent. The film was made intentionally more of a "comedy" than
> _Casino Royale_. Then Bond shoots Scaramanga at the end; the end.
Good summary, but then you didn't call "spoiler" and have given away that
Bond survives! <grin!>
I felt that some of the Timothy Dalton were worse (at least a lot more
forgettable, c.f. "The Living Daylights" which I only recall from the bad
Aha song and (I think) Grace Jones jumping off the Eiffel Tower ...
... and I'm not *that* impressed by TWINE ... at least the Moore ones
fitted their time and were the "Batman TV Series" version of the Bond
canon ...
... I *think* I could watch TMWTGG again as a Christmas film (if I lost
the remote control) but there is at least one other Bond film that would
cause me to fire the mini-missle from my cufflinks and blow up the TV, the
satellite that transmitted the TV picture, the earth station that uplinked
the picture and the ear hair of the owner of the TV network that dared
show it ... :-)
--
Chris "The Magician" O'Shea
Richard Kennaway
[spoiler gap]
> Ooo! That reminds me. My favorite scene is on Amon Hen, where Frodo
> has just left and Aragorn turns to confront the horde of orcs. That's
> how a king looks.
Isn't that how a king looks just before being chopped into many small
pieces?
Wonderful movie, but just to pick this nit, all of the big fight scenes
around the fellowship really strained my credulity by the way that the
good guys repeatedly get into battles against massive odds, and (mostly)
survive. It's like Stallone against a Russian tank division.
-- Richard Kennaway
Chris The Magician O'Shea
fn...@dial.pipex.com (Alison Hopkins) wrote:
> The Glass is one I wish very much would come out on DVD.
You and me both ... just visited www.koyaanisqatsi.org which has both the
reason for the lack of DVD (contractural disputes of course) and a plea
for money to produce the third in the series ... I'd always thought that
Baraka was part of the trilogy but I've been corrected now (however Baraka
is available on DVD in the UK so I may well end up buying that and the DVD
of Satyagraha which is also available).
Of course you CAN buy the Director's Premium Edition of Koyaanisqatsi on
DVD (signed by the Director Godfrey Reggio), but it's a special limited
edition to help pay the legal costs to get the rights to Koyaanisqatsi
back ... and it's 180 dollars (or
more), go to http://www.koyaanisqatsi.org/howyoucanhelp/help_IRE.php if
you're feeling rich ...
--
Chris "The Magician" O'Shea