SilkRoad
Lay the coin on my tongue
- Joined
- May 26, 2009
- Messages
- 3,932
- MBTI Type
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 6w5
- Instinctual Variant
- sp/sx
Nice points. I agree with much that was said. And I also think many of the changes that were made for the films were for the better (as much as I liked the books).
One thing I will say, I think the smartest thing the filmmakers did was hiring Alan Lee and John Howe as concept designers for the creatures and structures etc. It meant that the integrity and spirit of the book was honoured, which kept the fans happy and prevented any of that ridiculous Hollywood predilection for nonsensical and idiotic changes from seeping in.
Being a New Zealander, I'm curious about what you thought of the film's depiction of the landscapes. Were they what you imagined or not? If not, were the changes for the good or the better (I know some purists hated Pelennor Fields in the films, for example, but we're not up to that bit yet anyway ) ? And what did you think of the use of landscape in the films: the atmosphere they created; the prevalence of it in the storytelling? Also did you find it unusual or unexpected approach to the use of them? The reason I mention this, is that LOTR is such a NZ-esque approach to landscape: making it like a living breathing creature; like a character in the story. I sometimes wonder how much people register this. They certainly do unconsciously anyway because tourism practically doubled here after FOTR came out And I genuinely wonder whether the landscape element is what sold the films to people: it elevated the story and made it believable, tangible - a lack of which, one could argue, was the downfall of other films, such as the recent Star Wars trilogy.
I just wanted to say that I completely agree with your points about Alan Lee and John Howe - I was so excited when they were hired, as they are the finest Tolkien illustrators around. I thought the Shire was very John Howe, but the films overall were more Alan Lee. I did find all the elvish stuff a little too spooky and didn't like Lothlorien very much at all - I didn't feel it was much at all like the books and the Lothlorien sequence is one of my favourites in the books, so I was a little annoyed by it being so creepy and spacey. It was supposed to be green and gold and otherworldly but comforting - not bleached out, eerie and terrifying!
The LOTR films were one of the biggest reasons I decided to visit NZ as well (in 2004) when I went to Australia. I saw a lot of locations around Queenstown and Arrowtown, and had a wonderful time. I saw a bunch of places which basically looked just as they did in the films, because they hadn't been CGI-tinkered with much. I 100% agree that the landscapes and lands became like an essential "character" in the films. That's exactly how I thought of it, and it's a big reason why the films were so much more enthralling than the new Star Wars films, for instance, which were CGI to the max. Frequently, scenes and places looked just as I'd pictured them in the books, or if not, I also found the interpretations extremely valid. And the "realness" of the landscapes and scenes throughout the films made the whole thing feel more like history than fantasy, which is just what Tolkien was going for.