LOTR review

[lupinesque]

John wrote:

> Despite Amy's 
concern about
> Frodo's age, Cass, Ashley and I were discussing it in the car last 
night and
> agree that it's showing Frodo's immaturity more than anything else.
> (However, neither Ash nor I, who aren't book fans, realised that 
there was a
> 40-year gap between the Ring being left with Frodo and Gandalf's 
return.)

There is a long gap in the book (about 20 years), but not in the 
movie.  I don't think Frodo *is* immature.  Naive, a bit, but less 
so than most hobbits.  You know how old Bilbo is in that quick shot in 
the preface where he finds the ring?  That's how old Frodo is when he 
sets off to Bree--possibly looking younger because he's had the ring 
for 20 years and it stretches out one's life, as Bilbo illustrates.  
Oh well, I'm a purist and have therefore condemned myself to 
grumbling.

> As someone none too keen on JRRT's dialogue and characterisations in 
the
> first place (I found most of the characters much more multifaceted 
in the
> movie

Now this is what interests me.  Who seems multifaceted to you?  I 
wanted to know so much more about all of them.  I didn't know much 
about Legolas *except* the way he looked, which is very nice if it 
floats your boat (he's not my type, I guess) but doesn't tell us 
anything else.  We don't even get the rivalry between Legolas and 
Gimli.  Maybe we'll get it later, in Helms Deep.

> I agree with you, that aspect *is* missing and would have been easy 
enought
> to insert in the Council scene...

Yeah, I appreciate that committee meetings don't make great cinema, 
but they supposedly don't make great literature either and yet JRRT 
pulls it off.

I wrote:
 
> > Another thing missing from the decision is all the tension about
> > leaving the Shire.  Aside from telling us about Sam, the scene 
where
> > he looks into the Mirror of Galadriel is important because it 
shows
> > that they might be sacrificing the Shire by going to Mt. Doom. 

John wrote:

> I think this *is* a necessary cut. Sam will get much more character
> development in the next two books. 

I know, I know, they have to cut something.  I just don't agree with a 
lot of their choices.  This is a place where I think Kloves did a 
better job than Jackson; Kloves cut out lots of lovely things I hated 
to see disappear, but just the same, when I saw HP I was nodding and 
saying, "yep, if I had to cut something, that's what I'd cut."

> Cass and I were discussing how great it was that they pumped up the 
women's
> roles in the movie -- both Arwen and Galadriel are actually 
*characters*
> now.

Yeah, I like that too.  JRRT seemed to not have women on his radar 
screen most of the time at all.  (In his writing, that is, not in real 
life; his relationship with his wife seems to have been very nice.)

> I felt that, for the orcs to have 
deforested
> Isengard, it must have taken longer and that everything else must 
therefore
> have taken longer too.

Right, me too--but then are we supposed to think that the whole trip 
from Bree to Rivendell took all that time?  It's possible, but it 
really seemed like just a few days.

I wrote:

>  I 
suspect
> > they were going for teen girl appeal.

John
 
> *coughs, says nothing, looks at Al and munches on humble pie*

Sorry, no heterosexism intended.  Of course they could've been going 
for teen boy appeal too, but somehow I doubt that's foremost in most 
big-budget moviemakers' minds.  A shame, but there you have it.

Amy