board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

We're writing the LOTR miniseries! (was Why an Eye?)

Post Reply   Page 1 of 16  [ 318 posts ]
Jump to page 1 2 3 4 516 »
Author Message
Eltirwen
Post subject: We're writing the LOTR miniseries! (was Why an Eye?)
Posted: Wed 22 Jun , 2005 10:46 pm
Bored Silly
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 548
Joined: Thu 10 Mar , 2005 10:28 pm
Location: Fidgeting
 
Disclaimer: I don't care if this has been discussed before. I didn't get to. So, anyone else wanna play?

Quite often in film, the portrayal of the villain can make or break a movie. This is true most often in Hollywood blockbusters. For example, in Star Wars' original trilogy, Darth Vader forms a properly menacing villain until the Emperor comes on the scene. The true villain of the piece, Palpatine, isn't revealed until the third movie, except in a tiny holo-figure. The suspense and wonder about his character helps the characterization of the man. Even in the new trilogy, his hidden identity remains a secret until the third film.
Another cheesy blockbuster is Independence Day. The mother ship spawning the other ships isn't even seen until the last thirty minutes of the movie.
Of course, the ultimate example is Jaws. By happy accident, you don't see the shark until the end.

The point? Villains are much more frightening when hidden, whether behind a black mask, or deep water.

So, we come to LOTR. In FOTR, Sauron is characterized much like the book. He is only seen in flashes of the shadow-world, as the Eye. This worked for me. However, when it came to TTT and ROTK, I was utterly disgusted by the portrayal of Sauron. Where in the book does it say Sauron was literally an eye tethered to the top of his tower? Peter Jackson made horror films, for heaven's sake. I would think he'd know better than to reveal the villain in such a pathetic way.
The physical descriptions of Sauron and his tower in the book are much creepier, to me. He was unable to take physical form, and brooded in a chamber of his tower, creating magic. Every time one of the hobbits looks at the tower, it is shrouded in darkness, of Sauron's making. No lighthouse-ish eyes here. And the occasions when he almost catches Frodo would be creepier without the light, too. Imagine the scene from the movie, except Sam can't see what is going on, only Frodo. Much more scary, IMHO.
Sauron's demise, even, stunk. A big panicky eye jerking around and exploding. The tower exploding might have been cool, but Sauron was once a Maia. Please, respect that enough to not ridicule him. (Not that PJ shows much respect to other maiar)
Imagine this, instead, with the special effects:
Quote:
And as the Captains gazed south to the Land of Mordor, it seemed to them that, black against the pall of cloud, there rose a huge shape of shadow, impenetrable, lightning-crowned, filling all the sky. Enourmous it reared above the world, and stretched out towards them a vast threatening hand, terrible but impotent: for even as it leaned over them, a great wind took it, and it was all blown away, and passed; and then a hush fell.
I think PJ missed a really big opportunity, to have one of the creepiest, scariest villains of all time. Instead, he got a giant eyeball. Woopty-doo.

Last edited by Eltirwen on Sat 25 Jun , 2005 8:32 pm, edited 2 times in total.

_________________

Searching for my sanity...

"A life lived in fear is a life half lived" - Strictly Ballroom


Top
Profile Quote
MaidenOfTheShieldarm
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 22 Jun , 2005 11:26 pm
Another bright red day
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2402
Joined: Sat 12 Mar , 2005 10:35 pm
Location: Far from the coast of Utopia
 
I'll play! :D

And I agree. :)

Instead of having a scary über-villian, he ended up with the Lighthouse of DOOM!!1! I ended up laughing at most of the scenes with Sauron. The Eyeball was amusing, not in the least scary. The unknown and shadowy is far more terrifying than that which can be easily seen and is illuminated. Talk about a lost oppurtunity, especially for the ending. :neutral:
Quote:
And as the Captains gazed south to the Land of Mordor, it seemed to them that, black against the pall of cloud, there rose a huge shape of shadow, impenetrable, lightning-crowned, filling all the sky. Enourmous it reared above the world, and stretched out towards them a vast threatening hand, terrible but impotent: for even as it leaned over them, a great wind took it, and it was all blown away, and passed; and then a hush fell.
That had the potential to be a mindblowingly cool and iconic image in the movie, up there with the Nazgul at Osgiliath. I was really, really dissapointed with how it was done.

Actually, I think the Nazgul are scarier than Sauron anyway. I was terrified of them when I was little, but Sauron was just kind of. . . there.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 22 Jun , 2005 11:28 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 5171
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Elti, thanks for raising this topic. It gives me a chance to say something that I have been thinking recently. I have decided that PJ and friends made a mistake in not following their original plan of having Sauron appear at the battle at the Black Gate as Annatar, Lord of Gifts. To have the most evil character appear to be the most beautiful would have both been utterly Tolkienesque and a wonderful anti-Hollywood twist. When I first heard that that had been considered (and saw the pictures) I was impressed but generally glad that they decided to back off this idea. However, in retrospect I think they should have gone with their instincts and stayed with it, despite the howls of protest that it would have causes in certain quarters.


Top
Profile Quote
Sassafras
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 23 Jun , 2005 12:03 am
through the looking glass
Offline
 
Posts: 2241
Joined: Wed 02 Feb , 2005 2:40 am
 
We discussed this on TORC and I made the very same point, Elti. :)
I completely agree that there must have been a better way to show the malice emanating from Mordor than the flaming eyeball afixed between the spires of Barad Dur.

IIRC from the commentaries PJ discussed the difficulties in showing the general, non-book reading, audience a disembodied villain. But Gollum does refer to Sauron's fingers? hand? doesn't he? (I can't remember where this is in the book :( )

Also, Tolkien himself writes of Sauron's physical incarnation ... After the battle with Gilgalad and Elendil, Sauron took a long time to rebuild, longer than he had done after the Downfall of Numenor (I suppose because each building-up used some of the inherent energy of the spirit, which might be called the 'will' or the effective link between the indestructible mind and the realization of its imagaination).

So there is some documentation for Sauron's physicality and besides,
in the Palantir scene with Aragorn there is a very brief, threatening glimpse of Sauron in his armor, so it's obvious that PJ was willing to show at least one suggestion of the physical Sauron during the third age.
Supposing we'd been shown an ominous shadow, a blurred man-shape cloaked in black wavering between the substantial and the insubstantial.
The problem with the giant electric eyball is that it quickly became cartoonish and really rather ludicrous. And the searchlight ... :Q the less said, the better!

Got to sympathise with PJ on this one though. It was a tough call. I just wish he'd shown a little more subltety.

:devil:

.
.
.

ETA: Voronwe! I actually agree with you. I even said so in another thread.
I know it would have caused much hand-wringing and mud-slinging, but WETA's Annatar was truly beautiful and the scene at the Black Gate (as filmed) would have made much more sense.

That stupid troll just doesn't fit.


Top
Profile Quote
halplm
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 23 Jun , 2005 12:28 am
b77 whipping boy
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 9079
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 4:40 pm
 
No to Sauron the big eye.

No to Sauron at the Black Gates.

The only Sauron we should ever see is the villian in the X-Men comic books...

_________________

I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.


Top
Profile Quote
laureanna
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 23 Jun , 2005 3:10 am
Triathlete
Offline
 
Posts: 2711
Joined: Wed 26 Jan , 2005 2:08 am
Location: beachcombing
 
I certainly found the piccy of Annatar compelling (that's why it's my avatar right now), but the whole idea of Aragorn killing Sauron/Annatar with a blade, rather than Frodo killing him by destroying the Ring, kinda goes against the whole plot of the book.

What I liked about FOTR is the subtlety with which PJ introduces every character as a potential villian. In some cases it only lasts a moment, but as each new character enters, the viewer, and the protagonist, have to wait to see if the person is fair or foul, or maybe a little of both. This happens especially with the introduction of Gandalf and Strider, and to a lesser extent with Bilbo, Arwen, and Galadriel.

Personally, I like the over the top flaming eyeball. I know the balrog and the wizards are maiar, but they just don't seem god-like. They seem like formidable foes, but not absolutely undefeatable. I'm not sure how I would portray a god-like being effectively. Clouds don't do it for me.

EDIT: in case anyone was watching, I just accidently edited out halplm's post, then found an old copy and reinserted it. So it should be back to what it was. Confound these superpowers.

_________________

Well, I'm back.


Top
Profile Quote
MaidenOfTheShieldarm
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 23 Jun , 2005 3:31 am
Another bright red day
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2402
Joined: Sat 12 Mar , 2005 10:35 pm
Location: Far from the coast of Utopia
 
I'm still really mixed on Annatar. The revisionist side of me says "Kewl!!" I loved the way they did Annatar. He was just perfect, and I agree that the idea of evil beauty is rather Tolkienian. However, Aragorn battling Sauron just seems so. . . wrong. I can't put my finger on why, I just don't like it.
Quote:
Personally, I like the over the top flaming eyeball. I know the balrog and the wizards are maiar, but they just don't seem god-like. They seem like formidable foes, but not absolutely undefeatable. I'm not sure how I would portray a god-like being effectively. Clouds don't do it for me.
Interesting take on it, Laureanna. So you think the flaming eyeball is more godlike than the Balrog, etc.? Hmm. . . I've always pictured him as this super tall guy completely shrouded in shadow, which I find to be just creepy. I think its the shadow that makes him so creepy. The eyeball was so CG, so cartoonish and OTT. . . it just ruined any "supervillian" fear. Besides, you have to wonder how he was actually going to wear the Ring once he got it back. :scratch

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Voronwë_the_Faithful
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 23 Jun , 2005 5:00 am
Offline
 
Posts: 5171
Joined: Thu 10 Feb , 2005 6:53 pm
Contact: Website
 
Quote:
I certainly found the piccy of Annatar compelling (that's why it's my avatar right now), but the whole idea of Aragorn killing Sauron/Annatar with a blade, rather than Frodo killing him by destroying the Ring, kinda goes against the whole plot of the book.
I don't believe that was ever the plan. I'm pretty sure the plan was to have Sauron be about to kill Aragorn when Frodo destroys the Ring.

I was always violently against the idea of any kind of Aragorn/Sauron confrontation (other then in the palantir). But in restrospect I have come to believe that it might have worked.

But we'll never know, unless the 25th Anniversary Edition is changed quite a bit more then expected. :P


Top
Profile Quote
Alatar
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 23 Jun , 2005 9:10 am
of Vinyamar
Offline
 
Posts: 8274
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 4:39 pm
Location: Ireland
Contact: ICQ
 
Actually Voronwe, from memory, what was to happen was that Aragorn would plunge Anduril into Sauron, who would basically laugh and ignore it. Only when Frodo destroyed the ring would he succumb to the wound. As such it gives both Aragorn and Frodo credit for destroying Sauron.

I like the idea of Annatar, but I would have preferred it to be simply a vision for Aragorn alone, not followed by 8ft Tall Sauron in Armour.

Alatar

_________________

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


Top
Profile Quote
ToshoftheWuffingas
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 23 Jun , 2005 10:31 am
Filthy darwinian hobbit
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 6921
Joined: Fri 11 Mar , 2005 12:52 pm
Location: Silly Suffolk
 
Oh don't get me started. :roll:

Look I liked the films, I really did. I gritted my teeth through the clunky bits but was pathetically happy to get the good bits. It's just that PJ got this bit so wrong. Tolkien wrote once that the Nazgul looked on Sauron as a god that they served. He gave hints both in the book and in his other writings as to his physical nature. Good heavens, he even painted him. Not only that but Tolkien hands cinematic setpieces to PJ on a plate such as the fall of Barad-dur. PJ likes the horror genre as is evident from several of his choices. How could he make these mistakes? It all looks like a cinematic afterthought.
I think a valid film treatment of the story could include Sauron as a protagonist actively searching for his ring and moving to destroy Gondor and that showed his blindness to the West's strategy. It would raise the tension about discovery more. I have visualised the story starting with a palanquin entering the ruined gates of Mordor at dusk escaping from the fall of Dol Guldor and its hidden occupant receiving homage from the Nazgul who have acted as stewards for him.

_________________

[ img ]
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos

Norwich Beer Festival 2009


Top
Profile Quote
Lidless
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 23 Jun , 2005 11:48 am
Als u het leven te ernstig neemt, mist u de betekenis.
Offline
 
Posts: 8261
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 8:21 pm
Location: London
 
Back in 2002 I speculated and argued that Aragorn *should* fight Sauron in the movie version, and be on the point of losing his life when Frodo unmakes the ring.

http://forums.theonering.com/viewtopic.php?t=43800

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
yovargas
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 23 Jun , 2005 2:05 pm
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 14774
Joined: Thu 24 Feb , 2005 12:11 pm
 
Hm, I think Tosh is probably right. If the villain-as-an-eyeball thing was such a problem for PJ as he constantly complained about in the commentaries, then they should have dropped it and gone with a more physical incarnation of some sort. A shadowy or ghostly version of the Sauron we saw in the beginning strikes me as a natural choice.

That said, I didn't mind the eyeball that much. In some scenes it looks awful but in most I'd say it's just not that great.


Top
Profile Quote
Lidless
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 23 Jun , 2005 6:55 pm
Als u het leven te ernstig neemt, mist u de betekenis.
Offline
 
Posts: 8261
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 8:21 pm
Location: London
 
From a Q&A session Peter Jackson did with AICN, back in August 98...

Question

The character of Sauron's appearance is never described in any detail (except for his catlike, yellow eyes [windows into nothingness] and his burning hot, black skin - black as in not African-American black, but jet black). Also there is no direct dialogue with Sauron in the book, only flashbacks to historical events ie. his interrogation of Gollum, his fight with Isildur when the One Ring is taken along with his mind-communication through the Isenguard Palantir orb. So, my question is - how will Peter depict Sauron visually in the movie, and what will his voice sound like? I think part of the reason why Sauron was so intriguing and impressive as a character in the books, was very much because his presence was always felt, rather than personified as one being - the reader was left pretty much to imagine what he may have looked like. I can see that Peter will probably have to portray him in the movies, but I just hope he doesn't make him into a stereotypical cinematic villain.

Answer

This is a great question, and one that we have been grappling with for 18 months. We still don't have a definitive answer. The Sauron of the books is sketchy at best, which makes it hard to turn him into a screen villain to carry 3 movies. Imagine not really seeing Darth Vader for all 3 Star Wars films. You just can't do it.

We obviously have Sauron's various emissaries to represent him, but just how Sauron himself appears is still a puzzle we are trying to solve. I agree that you can't reduce him to being a big guy striding around in black armour - but he cannot be limited to a flaming eye either. It's tough. We'll keep working on it.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
MaidenOfTheShieldarm
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 23 Jun , 2005 7:15 pm
Another bright red day
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 2402
Joined: Sat 12 Mar , 2005 10:35 pm
Location: Far from the coast of Utopia
 
TheLidlessEyes wrote:
I agree that you can't reduce him to being a big guy striding around in black armour - but he cannot be limited to a flaming eye either. It's tough. We'll keep working on it.
How ironic.

I wonder why they went with exactly the two things that PJ said couldn't be done.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 24 Jun , 2005 5:43 pm
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
Quote:
I wonder why they went with exactly the two things that PJ said couldn't be done.
I would guess because a better solution never presented itself and they ran out of time to come up with ideas. Which is a shame, as they had a chance to come up with something really unique and powerful for a main villain. I think there needed to be more focus on who Sauron was, such as a flashback to his human appearance - perhaps when Aragorn tells the hobbits about "Sauron the Deceiver". As it is, he is a very one-dimensional villain in the films, who is there simply because the story needs a big bad guy.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
halplm
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 24 Jun , 2005 6:17 pm
b77 whipping boy
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 9079
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 4:40 pm
 
Yeah, I guess it never occured to them to do it AS IT SAID IN THE BOOK!

_________________

I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 24 Jun , 2005 6:30 pm
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
What did it say in the book hal? Which description of Sauron did PJ fail to use?

Tolkien gives a wonderful presence to Sauron through describing his intent, but he doesn't provide any ready-made visuals other than the Eye and the giant cloud.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
halplm
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 24 Jun , 2005 8:35 pm
b77 whipping boy
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 9079
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 4:40 pm
 
they eye is a symbol not a physical description, and the shadow is only at his demise.

By doing it like the book, you would have to not show him...

It takes a certain amount of creativity to pull off, though, so I'm sure PJ didn't feel he could do it.

_________________

I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 24 Jun , 2005 8:59 pm
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
Quote:
By doing it like the book, you would have to not show him...
But you have to show something.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
halplm
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 24 Jun , 2005 9:24 pm
b77 whipping boy
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 9079
Joined: Tue 04 Jan , 2005 4:40 pm
 
Iavas_Saar wrote:
Quote:
By doing it like the book, you would have to not show him...
But you have to show something.
No, you don't.

I think we've had this conversation before.

_________________

I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 1 of 16  [ 318 posts ]
Return to “Made in Dale: Hobbies and Entertainment” | Jump to page 1 2 3 4 516 »
Jump to: