Re: LOTR - Fellowship of the Ring - Screencap Thingie

by Mrs Figg Sat Jan 16, 2016 3:13 pm

halfwise wrote:I think he answered it - saying it would not have made a difference.

I know. I was just getting his goat. Surprised

by Pettytyrant101 Sat Jan 16, 2016 3:15 pm

I thought this conversation had been moved to the book Frood v film Frodo thread so we can get back to screencaps? Mad

So go there Figg to my response to your above about males and feeling fear.

by Mrs Figg Sat Jan 16, 2016 3:16 pm

halfwise wrote:I think the Frodo-as-child is a better comparison than Frodo-as-girl. It explains more of the screenwriter's decisions and the acting choices.

yes it explains my reaction to Elijah Wood in the role. I know he isn't supposed to be a child but he is very childlike in appearance which appeals to a maternal instinct. Women ( in general) cant resist helpless creatures with big eyes. He doesn't seem to bring out any paternal feelings in men though, probably because of dislike for PJ which could cloud the issue further.

by Pettytyrant101 Sat Jan 16, 2016 3:24 pm

Its not dislike of Pj, when it comes to characterisation and script I blame Boyens and Walsh far more- and they are both women- and I don't dislike them for being women, I dislike them for producing a character that bears little resemblance, and has few of the arcs that the character they are supposed to be adapting has. I dislike it because it seems a dilution and at times outright betrayal of the character on the page, because its a gross over-simplification of him and because its not even well written or well thought out and Frodo's bravery or not comes and goes purely at the need to get the story back on track from their deviations. My complaints are because its all so badly done, not because of who did it.

by halfwise Sat Jan 16, 2016 3:42 pm

Mrs Figg wrote:I know he isn't supposed to be a child but he is very childlike in appearance which appeals to a maternal instinct. Women ( in general) cant resist helpless creatures with big eyes. He doesn't seem to bring out any paternal feelings in men though, probably because of dislike for PJ which could cloud the issue further.

Men don't mind men being childish in multiple ways (women can list the attributes ad naseum), but I think you are right that Wood's appearance and specific performance to a large part zeroed in on exactly the subset that men don't respect in other men.

by Mrs Figg Sat Jan 16, 2016 3:51 pm

David H wrote:
Mrs Figg wrote:
halfwise wrote:
I have a question though. If Frodo had been a girl would you have called her a coward or a sissy?

I think this is a good point. But I still think we would have wanted girl-Frodo to show a little more pluck.

Its funny how the others have skipped over this question.

If Frodo had been a girl, who would you have cast for the movie?

That's an interesting question. Perhaps someone a bit like Ruth Wilson.

by David H Sat Jan 16, 2016 3:53 pm

I think trying to make Frodo younger than the 50 years old he is when he sets off to Rivendell was very important to Jackson's team from the beginning. Removing the 17 years between Bilbo's party and the setting off would have been part of that too.

Imagine Frodo as played by an older actor like William Hurt who would have been about the right age (or Michael Keaton Suspect

). It could have arguably been a better movie, but I doubt it would have been the boxoffice blockbuster it was. Those are the kinds of choices that come with adaptation.

by David H Sat Jan 16, 2016 3:59 pm

Mrs Figg wrote:

That's an interesting question. Perhaps someone a bit like Ruth Wilson.

I'm afraid I had to google her. I haven't seen her in anything but Saving Mr Banks. Do you have other recommendations?

by Pettytyrant101 Sat Jan 16, 2016 4:43 pm

Interestingly Sir Ian Holm was exactly 50 when he played his far superior version of Frodo in the BBC radio version in 1981

Personal selection of clips from FotR BBC radio-

by Forest Shepherd Sat Jan 16, 2016 4:47 pm

Bugger on off to the Frodo thread and let's get back to screencaps damnit!

by Pettytyrant101 Sat Jan 16, 2016 4:48 pm

Ive been trying to!! Mad

But crabbit without action Forest is merely noise! So get a bloody screen cap up for us to discuss and dont just complain about it Mad

by azriel Sat Jan 16, 2016 5:23 pm

by Mrs Figg Sat Jan 16, 2016 5:27 pm

David H wrote:
Mrs Figg wrote:

That's an interesting question. Perhaps someone a bit like Ruth Wilson.

I'm afraid I had to google her. I haven't seen her in anything but Saving Mr Banks. Do you have other recommendations?

She was in an adaptation of Jane Eyre, and she is also in the tv show Luther, where she plays a charismatic psychokiller. She has a unusual pixie face and has a great range.

by Mrs Figg Sat Jan 16, 2016 5:31 pm

next screencap somebody please. bounce

by Pettytyrant101 Sat Jan 16, 2016 6:06 pm

LOTR - Fellowship of the Ring - Screencap Thingie - Page 11 Vlcsnap-2016-01-16-17h57m41s199_zpscl2njv7v

1. How do you feel about how they handled the portrayal of Isildur?

2. This is the first example of many in PJ's Tolkien adaptations where characters are both in the midst of a ferocious fight and also in their own little bubble ignored by the fight. How do you feel about this technique?

3. This is the first time we see someone put on the Ring and disappear, and the effect for conveying them invisible is very old school- the manipulation of physical props. Did it sell the idea he was really there? And does seeing someone disappear when putting on the Ring before we see Bilbo do it at his party reduce the drama of Bilbo doing it being the first time we see it? (This is a difference between EE and theatrical- as we don't see Isildur's ambush in the theatrical so Bilbo using the Ring is the first time we see someone become invisible in that version).

by Forest Shepherd Sat Jan 16, 2016 8:52 pm

1. We don't really see Isildur before he is "corrupted" by the ring, and any scenes of him are related to the ring. So I feel like it is the negatives of his personality that are first and foremost in the film. It is not until Gandalf reads the passage written by Isildur that we really hear his character's voice.

2. Well for whatever reason this shot appears to be composited. Isildur is literally distinct from the battle around him therefore because nothing going on in the background can interact with him. I don't mind the technique; I just don't like the compositing done here.

3. I liked the old-school method. A partially-visible "Predator"-type outline would be reeeal cheesy. I don't remember the scene too well surrounding this image though, so I can't answer that question just from looking at the screencap.

by halfwise Sat Jan 16, 2016 9:07 pm

I would have picked this scene myself. Though I didn't like the bubble/battle feeling, they probably didn't have much choice: how do you focus on one character having internal conflict as orcses and corpses are flying about?

Old school invisibility was the only way to go.

My only real complaint is that it's not clear that he is putting on the ring and high-tailing it in order to save it from falling into the wrong hands, rather than to save his own bacon. Not sure how to get this across in an action shot, though.

by Radaghast Sun Jan 17, 2016 5:58 pm

Pettytyrant101 wrote:

1. How do you feel about how they handled the portrayal of Isildur?

The actor doesn't strike me as very kingly, but he doesn't have a large role. So, indifferent, mostly.

2. This is the first example of many in PJ's Tolkien adaptations where characters are both in the midst of a ferocious fight and also in their own little bubble ignored by the fight. How do you feel about this technique?

I think it's silly. It also doesn't look good here.

3. This is the first time we see someone put on the Ring and disappear, and the effect for conveying them invisible is very old school- the manipulation of physical props. Did it sell the idea he was really there? And does seeing someone disappear when putting on the Ring before we see Bilbo do it at his party reduce the drama of Bilbo doing it being the first time we see it? (This is a difference between EE and theatrical- as we don't see Isildur's ambush in the theatrical so Bilbo using the Ring is the first time we see someone become invisible in that version).

Don't remember the scene very well. His using the Ring does spoil Bilbo's using it, but filming TLotR before TH would have done that anyway.

by Mrs Figg Sun Jan 17, 2016 8:44 pm

I think the scene is so quick it doesn't really affect anything negatively. I really like the whole atmosphere and colour of the piece, I think it quickly sums up what had happened thousands of years previously. Its suitably dark and shadowy, the music probably adds to the lost in the mists of time atmosphere. But then I always respond more to atmosphere and tone rather than focusing on details and small inconsistencies that you only notice if you do a forensic analysis. If it feels right its good enough for me.

by Forest Shepherd Tue Jan 19, 2016 4:38 am

Mrs Figg wrote:...But then I always respond more to atmosphere and tone rather than focusing on details and small inconsistencies that you only notice if you do a forensic analysis.

by Mrs Figg Mon Jan 25, 2016 6:57 pm

are we not screencapping any more?

by azriel Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:39 pm

LOTR - Fellowship of the Ring - Screencap Thingie - Page 11 Lotr1-movie-screencaps.com-638_zpsig7dvxf0

What bugged me about this scene was, Bilbo's hands look old & very puffy. Now, If Bilbo was meant to be the same age as Frodo when he had his adventure then why isnt his hands slimmer, sleeker & definitely younger as Frodo's are ? Frodo has hands like a girl apart from the chewed nails.

by Radaghast Mon Jan 25, 2016 7:42 pm

Yeah, they could have used a hand double there.

by malickfan Mon Jan 25, 2016 8:51 pm

azriel wrote:

What bugged me about this scene was, Bilbo's hands look old & very puffy. Now, If Bilbo was meant to be the same age as Frodo when he had his adventure then why isnt his hands slimmer, sleeker & definitely younger as Frodo's are ? Frodo has hands like a girl apart from the chewed nails.

I get your point (Ian Holm's younger age makeup in FOTR was actually really good, but this close up of his hands does clash quite a bit...) Bilbo's a upper class Hobbit so presumably would have had better health and less worn skin etc. Frodo was conscientiously written as a teenager in the films, whereas Bilbo at his youngest seems to be in his mid 30s in T.H films (though I think Holm's younger Bilbo in this sequence looks closer to an actual 50 rather than a 'hobbit' 50) so it does make sense his hands would look older (if not that old and wrinkled) but yeah they probably should have used a hand double or something...on the other hand this seems a bit nitpicky, PJ had so much footage to shoot (and according to the commentary the prologue went though many different versions) that this scene probably wasn't a big priority for him, and the hands may have just passed him/the continuity people* by as something not big enough to worry about.

It's been a little surprising doing these screencaps...I haven't watched the films properly for years, and now as we sit down and really examine them scene by scene...it's becoming more and more easier to see where Petty is coming from with some of his arguments.

*I just thought what a horrible job the continuity editors/assistants etc would have had on LOTR, trying to keep track of, and match together hours and hours of footage each day across four years...

(Though I still think the grass debate is a bit silly Sofa

)

by Pettytyrant101 Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:20 pm

Tis an odd one that they didn't use a hand double here, but on the plus side its closer to how Bilbo actually finds the Ring in The Hobbit than what actually happens in PJ's Hobbit Mad

Malick- when the proper times comes the grass debate shall be heard! I might even change your mind thats its silly or trivial.