h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I'd love to, Sho...
I am really looking forward to seeing RotK. I am glad Bistroist clarified the father/son thing, I agree it's appropriate with Denethor/Faramir.
It would appear we've heard an awful lot of rubbish about what's in it...

Hmm... Well, I thought we were just talking about what we would have cut from RotK, but if I am to include TTT as well:

-no more than one elf per Helms Deep, and that's the absolute max

-no stupid varg attack, with all that it triggers (Aragorn going missing, Brego and all that)

-In two minds about the Ents. Fangorn is one of my favourite parts of the book, but it doesn't work terribly well on screen. It's not bad at all, but it's not wonderously well either.

-absolutely no Hobbits at Osgiliath (and no daft ringbearer showing his jewellery to the Nazgûl, I'd might add...)

Cutting that might leave time for the Palantir, the defeated Saruman, Gimli in the Glittering Caves and possibly a bit more of Eowyn... Who knows, maybe even a better (ie. anything other than the current) portrait of Faramir?
I must have ranted about this before, but to me the way the film gives Pippin and Merry credit for the destruction of Isengard is utterly wrong.

I may have some issues with RotK, but they are nothing compared to what I have with TTT...

On an altogher more positive note, I'm afraid I've completely neglected to mention him so far, but I was positively amazed by Brad Dourifs performance as Grima. Wonderful acting, that man.




cheers
~Bistro


PS: If rumours are to be believed, we'll get somewhere around 40 mins extra in the Extended Edition. I'm confident that a lot of the shortcomings of the current movie will be rectified then.

Della

Yes, Brad Dourif is wonderful! (Last seen (by me) as Lon Suder in Star Trek Voyager. Awesome!

Bistro:

"no more than one elf per Helms Deep, and that's the absolute max"
Orlando Bloom, surfer elf, shouldnt have been in the film at all. He has one or two moments that i actually like him, but apart from that, no way. As for the elves at helms deep, i havent read that far, but looking at it it works well, especially when Haldir gets killed and you get the shots of all the dead 'immortals'

"no stupid varg attack, with all that it triggers (Aragorn going missing, Brego and all that)"
I liked it in the extended, because it was explained more (brego turns out to be theodreds horse, who aragorn calms down in the stables, which gets eowyn interested). It does show however that the evil side does use tactics and is smart in warfare. Look at helms deep, it was a case of throw enough uruk's at it and win, even the little suicide bomber thing wasnt that smart (why not just lay seige)

"In two minds about the Ents."
I liked the ent sequences a lot. The DVD commentary sums it up as nature fighting back, which is an image i like, especially against the back drop of warefare and the earlier sequence of the forets being pulled down.

"absolutely no Hobbits at Osgiliath"
I reserve my judgement till ive read the book.

"and no daft ringbearer showing his jewellery to the Nazgûl, I'd might add..."
Again sean austin (hes a clever chappie) sums this up. Its religious imagry at its finest, with frodo (using christanity as a base for this) looking up to heaven with hell straight in front of him. Also, when sam saves him frodo tries to kill him, showing the extent to which the ring is controlling frodo.

"Cutting that might leave time for the Palantir...the defeated Saruman"
Its been confirmed as being in the extended ROTK, which will also included the scouring of the shire.

"Gimli in the Glittering Caves"
Possibly, but more dwarfs overall would have been better. Theres eight dwarfs in the entire film, seven in the prologue and gimli. In the book theres a few with gandalf and a few with bilbo and thats before getting near frodo leaving the shire. Dwarfs at helms deep would have been interesting, but wouldnt have shown how powerful gimli is in combat.

"a bit more of Eowyn..."
Shes in plenty of the extended, and in rotk, more Arwen would be better.

"better portrait of Faramir?"
Again ill withhold judgement, but i think they tried to portray him as looking up to his older brother, and always living in his shadow (boromir being the first born, with all its responsabilities)
I must have ranted about this before, but to me the way the film gives Pippin and Merry credit for the destruction of Isengard is utterly wrong.

"Brad Dourifs performance as Grima. Wonderful acting, that man."
I was shocked to find that hes american, his accent is just so perfect.

Okay, so maybe you have to be female to appreciate boy. But what you have to admit, is that he looked like an . Tall, slender... Not like Craig Parker who did not look the part because blond just isn't his coulour. It made him look a little too chubby.

Well, Aragorn had to go missing so that Arwen can appear... AGAIN. I've got nothing against the actress or the character but she just isn't there. And I can't shake the feeling that she was only included in TTT because they thought they needed a love story for Aragorn so that not everybody begins to think about him and Legolas or something. I don't understand it (not the part about him and Legolas - that I do understand). Eowyn is there after all.

It was so wrong to vut the scenes with Saruman in RotK. It may have worked if they hadn't mentioned him at all - at least for those that have only seen the movies. But to have Gandalf and Co. stand in front of Saruman's tower and talk about him - and then we don't get to see him. Not really working well.

Brad Dourif was great - yes!

Methos

What swearing? What sequence?
have I missed something?

Methos: as you have already seen elsewhere, I'd prefer to have 3 lots of 3 hour films featuring boy and Aragorn and little else (except maybe the odd appearance or two of some of the Rohirrim) but what I meant was I'd prefer less California-surfer-elf and more serious-book-type-Legolas-elf. Actually now I'm thinking of ol' boy, I think they could have had him a tad more petrified when the Balrog showed up.

I've been pondering the Gollum question. I think they did a pretty good job of making the Slinker/Stinker distinctions, but I did think he was a lot less sly and calculating in the film, and a tad too creeping-crawling-sliming up to Frodo.

But I loved the way he spoke about Sam. And I was sooooo glad they left the Po-ta-toes part in. That really made me smile in the middle of some pretty dire (as in the story, not the quality of the film) stuff.

OK, I'm just reading the Frodo/Faramir stuff. Faramir really has some strange things to say about Boromir. Do you think he's realy jealous? He mentions that Boromir's overriding wish is to defend Minas Tirith, and get glory for himself. He also mentions that Boromir is older and more acccomplished and that is why he went on the trip.

Jealous or just realistic?

I think Orlando Bloom was an excellent Legolas. He did what he could with what he was given, and I think he looked perfect for the part. Craig Parker is soooo much more lovely in RL, blonde really isn't his colour.

As for elves at Helm's Deep - I can't even begin to explain why I loved it in the film - but it is sooooo wrong I have to keep the film and the book very separate in my head or my brain would explode.

The Brego/Aragorn/Warg attack thing... at least the extended edition explains how the horse just showed up, but he should have been without tack - that really annoys me. As for the extra Arwen, well, I just ignore it. It's obvious to anyone with eyes that Legolas and Aragorn make a much better pair.

er...

where was I?

Brad Thingy was fantastic. Wormtongue is one of the best characters and characterisations in the three films. He was absolutely perfect.

Sho: "I think they could have had [Legolas] a tad more petrified when the Balrog showed up."

Yes -- wasn't he supposed to go "Aiiieee, a Balrog is come"?

From memory of having read the books thirty-odd years ago, I was looking forward to this line. Cheated I felt, hm, yes.

Asmodai
>>As for the elves at helms deep, i havent read that far, but looking at it it works well, especially when Haldir gets killed and you get the shots of all the dead 'immortals'

Moving, yes. However, I just skimmed through some of the DVD appendices the other night, and Philippa Boyens says something along the lines of: "They're still horribly outnumbered, but at least now they have a fighting chance." - Well, they shouldn't have. They're all doomed, and know it. It's only Erkenbrands showing up that saves their lives.
Apart from that, I disagree with the Elves being there for more ish reasons, but we'll save that.


>>I liked it [Varg attack, Aragorn going missing] in the extended, because it was explained more (brego turns out to be theodreds horse, who aragorn calms down in the stables, which gets eowyn interested). It does show however that the evil side does use tactics and is smart in warfare. Look at helms deep, it was a case of throw enough uruk's at it and win, even the little suicide bomber thing wasnt that smart (why not just lay seige)

Good point, but is it true? Does Saruman really make use of any sophisticated tactics? A healthy amount of cunning, no doubt. And his talent as a demagogue (the scenes with the mountain people works really well... And they all look like Peter Jackson), of course, that is vital.
Apart from that, I think the vargs, along with the Witch Kings fellbeast, were probably the least fortunate piece of CG in the entire movies...


>>I liked the ent sequences a lot. The DVD commentary sums it up as nature fighting back, which is an image i like, especially against the back drop of warefare and the earlier sequence of the forets being pulled down.

No doubt, and I was very excited when I first heard about the extra Ent bits on the Extended Edition. But on reflection, it was one of the things that *could* be cut down a bit if you were short of time.


>>Again sean austin (hes a clever chappie) sums this [Frodo and the Nazgûl at Osgiliath] up. Its religious imagry at its finest, with frodo (using christanity as a base for this) looking up to heaven with hell straight in front of him. Also, when sam saves him frodo tries to kill him, showing the extent to which the ring is controlling frodo.

All true, but it doesn't change the fact that Frodo has just shown the ring to a Nazgûl... Rather throws the idea that Sauron doesn't know where it is out the window, doesn't it?


>>"Gimli in the Glittering Caves"
Possibly, but more dwarfs overall would have been better. Theres eight dwarfs in the entire film, seven in the prologue and gimli. In the book theres a few with gandalf and a few with bilbo and thats before getting near frodo leaving the shire. Dwarfs at helms deep would have been interesting, but wouldnt have shown how powerful gimli is in combat.

As if the extra Elves weren't enough, now you'll start adding Dwarves as well? No my friend, apart from Gimli, Dwarves don't play an important role in RotK (they're busy defending themselves, as are the Elves). If New Line hooks up with MGM and they get round to filming The Hobbit, you'll get all that your heart desires.
I'd like the Glittering Caves scene, because it's a nice way to add a bit of depth to Gimlis character. He has one "soft" scene per book (Galadriel, Glittering Caves and Paths of the Dead), and they are interesting because apart from them, he's just this gruff, singleminded killing machine, the archetypal Dwarf, really. I know it's against the rules to read ahead, but then hurry up to Helms Deep and read the bit where he describes the Glittering Caves... Marvelous writing.


Asmodai
>>[Eowyn is] in plenty of the extended, and in rotk, more Arwen would be better.
Methos
>>And I can't shake the feeling that [Arwen] was only included in TTT because they thought they needed a love story for Aragorn

Well, that *is* the reason, they've freely admitted that on numerous occasions. That was also the reason they wanted her to go Xena (as she's about to in Fellowship), thank Bob they were convinced otherwise.
Arwen doesn't play a very active role in the book, Eowyn does, and I think there's a point to that. It shows that Arwen doesn't belong in this world, there love is (please don't kill me) unnatural, and is destined to end tragically. Eowyn on the other hand is very real, her physical presence is almost overwhelming, Aragorn could easily have abandoned the dream and married her, yet he chooses not to. Eowyn is, IMO, a terribly interesting character, and I very much hope to see more of her in the Extended RotK.


Asmodai
>>Again ill withhold judgement, but i think they tried to portray him [Faramir]as looking up to his older brother, and always living in his shadow (boromir being the first born, with all its responsabilities)
Sho
>>OK, I'm just reading the Frodo/Faramir stuff. Faramir really has some strange things to say about Boromir. Do you think he's realy jealous?

I think there has been a fair amount of sibling rivalry going on. Only natural really. Is a bit of a dysfunctional family, overall, isn't it?


Methos
>>It was so wrong to vut the scenes with Saruman in RotK. It may have worked if they hadn't mentioned him at all - at least for those that have only seen the movies. But to have Gandalf and Co. stand in front of Saruman's tower and talk about him - and then we don't get to see him. Not really working well.

No, it doesn't work very well at all. But they had to join up with Merry and Pippin at some point, and if you listen to the commentary on TTT, it's clear that they, at that point, planned to have a showdown with Saruman in RotK. Guess it just had to go for time purposes.


Sho
>>And I was sooooo glad they left the Po-ta-toes part in.
Yes, the times I've seen it, you've been able to tell your fellow s by the appreciative mumbling occuring in the theatre at that stage. I was very pleased to have it, too.


Concerning Legolas, I'll admit that he looks the part very well, too bad he doesn't act it that way... The Legolas and the Balrog bit is important, because it's the only time you see him being genuinely afraid. Would have liked that a bit more obvious, but maybe it would be confusing to those unfamiliar with the books



cheers
~Bistro

"You really love this film, don't you!" -- The Purple Rose of Cairo

>>Apart from that, I disagree with the Elves being there for more ish reasons, but we'll save that.<<

Out with those reasons, then, young fellow-me-lad. For my part firstly I hate the idea that those elves are supposed to be sailing off into the sunset and instead they're lying in a bloody heep leaving the fic writers to work out how to bury them.

>>Rather throws the idea that Sauron doesn't know where it is out the window, doesn't it?<<

Not only that, there is far too much mention of the ring all the way through the films. It's supposed to be a secret, for crying out loud!

The passage where Legolas hears what Gimli thinks of the Glittering Caves is one of the best pieces of writing in the whole book. It is fantastic to see who the battle weary Dwarf comes alive describing it. And now you mention the 3 soft parts of Gimli it's a shame that all three were underplayed in the films. In FOTR they didn't really show him falling totally head over heels with Galadriel (although they didn't make enough of the elf/dwarf thing for me anyway) and in ROTK it wasn't really his fear that he conquered to go into the paths of the dead but that rivalry with Legolas.

Although, again, the dead-orc-score-keeping thing was another thing I loved, even though it was slightly annoying in ROTK - I did have to raise a smile when Legolas killed the Mumak and Gimli's comment about that.

I've just realised that I'll be reading Shelob tonight... that gives me nightmares, and it's going to be worse now I've seen the film.

eek!

The thing for me with the CG ents is that they really don't give the impression of slow, powerful inevitability that I think they should have. Sounds and movement is where it went wrong for me.

Imagine something covered with bark walking, imagine the sound that must make. And the sounds when they're hitting things .

Also, one of my favourite bits of Tolkein's writing is when he describes the ents as "freezing" onto the rock and tearing it apart. Not done justice to.

They looked good though I thought.

>>Out with those reasons, then, young fellow-me-lad.

Will think it through, haven't got time right now as I'm off to see RotK. Will try and get back in later tonight...

>>Although, again, the dead-orc-score-keeping thing was another thing I loved, even though it was slightly annoying in ROTK - I did have to raise a smile when Legolas killed the Mumak and Gimli's comment about that.

Absolutely. Even if I think some of the puns are rather misplaced, and reducing Gimli to comic relief is a sad loss, I must admit they've done it very well. Whether they should have done it in the first place is another matter...

>>Also, one of my favourite bits of Tolkein's writing is when he describes the ents as "freezing" onto the rock and tearing it apart.

Agreed, it's excellent. They destroy Isengard the "natural" way, the way nature would eventually decomposite and reclaim the area, only in much shorter time. "Slow, powerful inevitability" is exactly the right phrase to describe it. Always reminded me of a passage from one of Kiplings Jungle Books, of all things, where the jungle creatures scare off the inhabitans of a village and the Jungle, as a living organism, takes it back.



cheers
~Bistro

There *may* be an extra disc with deleted scenes included in the box set released next year, maybe the Xena-scenes will be included there...

I am NEVER going to convince my hubs to let me get a boxed set.



The ents destroying Isengard is a really really powerful image in the novel. Like one of those stop-frame films of a flower opening for me. I never thought of comparing it to the Jungle Books before, but that's a good one. I usually compare it to the end of War of the Worlds where the machine wielding Martians get their come uppeance due to the smallest of organisms as the bacteria get them (also pretty quickly - I can't remember the time frame though, I haven't read that book since I was at school)

I always have a problem visualising the ents though. So Jackson's images to me are as good as any. The one thing that strikes me reading the description of Treebeard walking, though, is the fact that his toes touch the ground first. A most peculiar way to walk. I would also have loved to have seen him lie down, the description of that is fantastic. Also I'd like to have seen Merry and Pippin grow a bit...

none of that is possible I reckon though. Maybe in 30 years when some upstart type programmer works out how to do it.

Oh, but in the extended version of TTT there is the scene with Merry and Pippin growing. Although, therough out the rest of the movie they often f***ked up their height in relation to other people.

And I think having Legolas show real fear in the balrog scene would have worked really great in the movie, too. And it would have given the character a bit more depth, making him appear a little less distant.

Methos

I don't remember a growing scene... oh, wait, possibly I do
I'll have to watch it again

shame!

It's after they have been trapped by that tree, when they wake up. Pippin is drinking that water first and then grows. Of course, Merry has to drink it, too.

Methos

I have a massive pile of ironing to do tomorrow. Then I have all of Rosenmontag off, so I think I might be able to squeeze TTT in while I do that.

Ha, I have to do ironing, too. Tomorrow - great, now I've misspelled that word so often, that it's no longer tomorrow but today.

Anyways, I could just watch TTT with that, too. Or maybe FotR?

Methos