Faramir and other changes

 

Personally I think Faramir in the film is literally one of the worst representations of a character brought to the screen. It's up there with the greats like film Goku.

Pettytyrant101 wrote:Faramir- as he should be-

Excellent!

Recoveryanonymous wrote:Personally I think Faramir in the film is literally one of the worst representations of a character brought to the screen. It's up there with the greats like film Goku.

I think thats a slight eggzageration. David Wenham did an excellent job, he was believable and moving.

Nope.
Film Faramir was a psycho who was ok with torture.

For myself, I put both PJ's Faramir and PJ's Beorn on about the same level. Both are portrayed by fine actors, and they fill their necessary role in the film, but they don't have the depth of heart that those of us who read the books first might expect. And because of that they feel stunted to me in a way they probably wouldn't if I hadn't first loved original characters.

Pettytyrant101 wrote:Faramir- as he should be-

Not that I listen to a lot of radio dramas, so I don't really have any frame of reference for this, but that Faramir sounds incredibly flat and uninterested for most of the clip.

I agreee Figg. I always liked David Wenham performance.

What he was performing is perhaps another matter..

Recoveryanonymous wrote:Nope.
Film Faramir was a psycho who was ok with torture.

He also showed none of the traits of the book character.

And I didn't care for Wenham. After 300, I didn't care for him even more. Yuck.

its fake and cod theatrical with zero authenticity- Mrs Figg

that Faramir sounds incredibly flat and uninterested for most of the clip- Eldo

I thought he pitched it pretty well for that scene as it is in the book.
But even if you dont like the style of the production, or the performances (although I think Ian Holm is as good a Frodo as he was a Bilbo, and his interpretation of Bilbo is for me one of the few highlights of PJ's LotR's, and Bill Nighy is my ultimate Sam performance, even though I thought Sean Astin did a good job with what he is given its nothing to Nighy given the full rounded Sam to play) but I dont think it can be denied the script is much more Tolkien than anything PJ presents us with.

it might be more Tolkien but its stilted and unnatural sounding.

I liked Sean Astin playing Sam, if Im honest, For me, he was the best 'honest' character in it,   I liked his 'country ways' manner, & I did lose myself in him for a while, I dont think I ever thought, "No, this isnt 'Sam' for me". I also think Sir Ian played Gandalf with more confidence in LOTRs, he seemed to waver as Gandalf in TH, as though he'd lost his way or, he really had a  couldnt give a shit attitude ? I feel Viggo wanted to give it his 'all', but Billy Boyd & Dominic doo-dah, just jollied about, I also feel that Orlando Bloom had a touch of the "C-3PO's" & to be honest Marton Csokas is better suited playing a womanising cocaine snorter. I still stand by my first impression that Elijah Wood, good as he was for his age !, was NOT the right guy to portray Frodo. IMO  

yeah I agree about Marton Csokas aka Celeborn. His was the only truly cringeworthy performance imo.   .

Mrs Figg wrote:yeah I agree about Marton Csokas aka Celeborn. His was the only truly cringeworthy performance imo.   .

But, but "Long has he foreseen this doom."   

"Why doesn't that surprise me?"

I thought the radio-Frodo's performance was more nuanced than movie-Frodo's. The BBC version showed actual grief at the news of Boromir's death. Elijah Wood looked like, well, the way he looked for most of the time.

It's hard to compare when one has visuals and one does not. The radio version sounds more like stage actors proclaiming their lines (rather off-putting) rather than realistic acting, but knowing one was Ian Holme makes me feel it would feel more natural with visuals.

It honestly didn't feel stilted to me. I was expecting it, considering the format, but I was pleasantly surprised not to find it so.

Nah, Frodo trilled his r's at least once. Stage acting high falutin' crap. But seeing Ian Holm in person wipes it out.

Perhaps it's hifalutin, but it could be such affectations are necessary with offscreen performances.

Recoveryanonymous wrote:

Mrs Figg wrote:yeah I agree about Marton Csokas aka Celeborn. His was the only truly cringeworthy performance imo.   .

But, but "Long has he foreseen this doom."   

   yeah that extra was the apotheosis of cringe

I think Sean Astins acting was superb, probably my favorite, he was so natural and heartfelt his face spoke a thousand words.

Radaghast wrote:Perhaps it's hifalutin, but it could be such affectations are necessary with offscreen performances.

Such affectations are necessary for projection and clarity when trying to be heard without sounding like shouting in a large space. Techniques that need to be dropped for the intimate screen or radio. But then again it may be they are being used more than I noticed when a face goes with it.

Clarity is important on the radio- although not sure what you mean about the R's Halfy, maybe accent? The hobbits in it have a Shire accent- also the radio plays are from 1981- if you look at well regarded BBC tv drama from the period like I, Claudius you see a similar style of performance.

One Change I never got the complaints about was T Bomb.

I mean, I love the bloke...but what would he contribute to the angle PJ's films were taking? Not only would it drag down the pace, clutter the story and confuse/anger/scare most of the cinema going audience, does anyone really want to imagine how Jackson would justify his inclusion? or explain him?

Tolkien put him in as a loose metaphor/mystery for his own reasons, Jackson didn't always seem to grasp some of the other themes in the book, I love the mystery of the character, and I dread to see how they would explain who he is.

Thoughts?