One of the most enduring debates within The Lord of the Rings fandom is the question of whether Jackson’s version of the story in any way managed to exceed Tolkien’s original. While there are many who continue to believe that Jackson got it all wrong and that Tolkien’s was far superior, there are also those who are willing to say that Jackson actually improved some elements.
In particular, the users at Reddit have pointed out that there are elements of Tolkien’s story that were in need of the update that Jackson provided.
One of the most notable changes to the LOTR books was the decision to have Faramir nearly seduced by the power of the Ring. AdmiralStark believes that this is a great change from the movie, as it creates “an interesting dark echo of Boromir's corruption by the ring.” In Tolkien’s original story, Faramir is ultimately one of the very few characters to have almost no temptation to take it, which can read to some as unbelievable, given the extent to which the Ring has been shown to be so powerful.
Aragorn is one of the most powerful characters in the books and the movies, but he is in some ways a plot device in the former. FaerieStories noted that the movie Aragorn may be a bit mopey, but he is more of a fully-fledged character. The book version, they assert, “exists for reasons that are useful to the narrative, but there's nothing interesting about him other than that.” Given that the books mostly focus on the actions of the hobbits–with some notable exceptions–there is something to this line of argument.
There’s no question that Tolkien’s original novel is epic in every sense of the word, including its simple length. It’s a sprawling story that takes account of many different areas of Middle-earth.
Some Redditors, including FroodLoops, note that one of the great strengths of the movies is that they excel at “streamlining the storyline to cut out the unnecessary/tangential plot lines and fleshing out others where appropriate. It made for a crisp but reasonably through and entertaining telling if the story.” While some beloved characters didn’t appear, this contributed to the movie’s superiority.
Even though there are relatively few romances in the original novel, one of the most notable is that between Aragorn and Arwen. Elphie93 recalls “feeling a little disappointed that Aragorn and Arwen's ties weren't developed further in the books.” Fortunately for this user, the movies take a great deal of time to show just how much Aragorn and Arwen mean to one another, to such an extent that they can be seen as one of the best relationships in the LOTR movies.
Even the most devoted Tolkien readers will sometimes acknowledge that The Two Towers is the weakest part of the book, mostly because the action begins to flag. Rudy_13, for example, notes that “theres something about TTT film script” that sets it apart from the book upon which it’s based. In part, this user is no doubt responding to the fact that the movie version includes a titanic battle scene as well as a notable confrontation between Frodo and one of the Ringwraiths, as well as Gollum.
In the books, the battle scenes, particularly those at Helm’s Deep and at the Pelennor Fields, are vital parts of the story. However, they are described for the most part without the kind of detail that they would need to make a big impact on screen. Ramoncg_ remarks that they “always recommend the movies to people who have read the books and want to see all those major events play out in an epic form.” There’s no question that the battles in Jackson’s trilogy are some of the most awe-inspiring to grace the big screen.
Sauron is one of the most powerful creatures in Middle-earth, and his influence can be felt almost anywhere. In particular, it is often conceptualized as a great eye, though the book is vague about what this actually entails. Jackos1221 remarks that “the interpretation of Sauron being a flaming eye was amazing.” It is certainly a striking visual, and it shows just how capable this being is of seeing almost anything that happens on the broad face of Middle-earth.
Though there are many things to enjoy about Tolkien’s masterwork, there are some things that it is lacking, most notably a great deal of character interiority. The movie, however, gives these individuals a vibrancy that they can sometimes lack on the page.
This is what makes it appealing to many Reddit users. TannenFalconwing, for example, notes that “By the time we got to the Return of the King we had probably the best portrayals of every main character you could ask for.”
There’s no doubt that Jackson’s trilogy are some of the best fantasy movies ever made. However, they differ from the novels in terms of genre, for though they are an epic, they also have a lot in common with the adventure movie. As The_Commandant points out, “the films operate as a fantasy adventure. The books, in contrast, are an epic, and resemble (to me) an Anglo-Saxon version of the Odyssey.” Though the movies might sacrifice some of the richness and complexity of the books, they do nevertheless manage to sweep the viewer up in a grand conflict.
Denethor is one of the most complicated characters in both the movies and the books, and he is deeply tragic in both. Though each interpretation has much to recommend it, The_Commandant argues that “I think the movie version feels more real; the way he's driven into depression by Boromir's death feels more tragic to me.” Even Denethor’s fiery plunge off of the top of the White Tower can be seen as a truly terrible end for a man driven to madness and despair by his grief.
source https://screenrant.com/lord-of-the-rings-movies-did-better-reddit/
0 comments: