Thread: 300

Originally Posted by gunnut

I can't stand Dune and the Foundation series for the same reason I can't stand Tolkien's work. They are just too long and boring. I'm trained as an engineer. We get to the point as quickly as possible. We are here to solve problems rather than participate in human drama.

I hate petty drama. I want to see things on a larger scale. Survival of the human race. Defeat the empire. Restore the Republic. Free the Jafas from the Gou'ld. Face the borg. Yada yada yada...

I'm confused: you want epics, but make 'em short? I mean, I'm sure one could make a short epic, but it kinda misses the point, doesn't it? And the classic surprise ending of Second Foundation makes it worthwhile, even if nothing else does.

Originally Posted by dalem

1) The basic nobility of Man.

PJs portrayal of Men is largely brutish and squalid and weak. In the Third Age there are still strains of Men who have blood lineages traceable to the Elder Days and the Valar. The vast majority are not of this strain, but many of the main characters are - Aragorn, Faramir, Denethor, Boromir, Theoden, Eomer - all should have been played with the nobility and gravitas turned up a notch.

Agree, for the most part, although I do think Boromir was done remarkably well. That was made up for by ruining Faramir, of course. And the whole absolutely ridiculous thing with Theoden changing from a sick white haired weenie to a middle aged warrior king- just way overdone, IMO.

2) Decisions.

Every single one of JRRT's major characters chooses which side to be on, but PJ has some few of them being tricked or cornered or otherwise avoiding the choice to fight Sauron or not.

The above two points combine to lead me to believe that PJ can't conceive of a truly noble and great man, either in fiction or real life. In the commentary he explains why he changes Faramir's rejection of the Ring into a seedy and whiney Daddy issue. He says that the idea of the Ring being so evil is unsustainable if someone can just leave it, but the real point is that Faramir CAN reject it, and does, and THAT'S how strong and wise he is. The act of rejection doesn't diminish the Ring, it elevates Faramir.

Interesting. I'm not sure about this- Jackson has a point here. I really need to read the books again to see how Tolkien really portrays this. Jackson really missed the boat on the Ents, though. If anyone is wise enough to resist Sauron and the Ring, it's the Ents. And they certainly would never be tricked by the two silliest hobbits in the Shire.

3) The ethereality of the Elves.

PJ brought the Elves to Helm's Deep in part because he wanted the Elves to be perceived as "doing something". Well, the "reality" is that the Elves were DONE doing things and that was part of the point. The abandonment of action in the physical world by the Elves makes the plight of Middle Earth that much more stark - if Men don't act there is no one left.

The funny thing is that I agree with you, but at the same time he made the Elves too ethereal in some ways, such as screwing up Lothlorien and Galadriel, and making Legolas certifiably gay. The Elves don't do too much, but they are real people, and somehow I think Jackson failed to show that.

But after all that I still think he did a great job - considering how weird and huge LOTR is as a book - of translating it to the screen at all. And here I disagree with you greatly - I think the visuals were superb and I feel totally immersed in Middle Earth when I watch it - it just feels right.

-dale

Visuals, yes. Unfortunately, he does visuals too well- and visuals can't carry a movie, especially if it's so crammed with grand vistas and CGI battles that you barely get to know the characters. Tolkien's genius was in creating a world that you can get lost in, and a large part of that is due to the characters, and, understandably I think, Jackson didn't quite get them right. I think if he had been in charge of the cinematography and special effects alone, and a director with better empathy for the characters and the story were brought in, it could have been quite good. As it was, I dunno, they just pissed me off a little. When I'm a billionaire, maybe I'll finance a remake, done RIGHT.

Originally Posted by Wraith601

I consider Babylon 5 one of the finest sci-fi TV shows EVER, and if you're not a fan of it, then in my view you wouldn't know real sci-fi if it bit you on the ass.

Dude, dont get mad at me I agree with you that Babylon 5 was a perhapes the pinaccle of TV Sci-fi greatness. Execution-wise of the show, that is another thing.

It is just the way you formed your phrase, that I did not understood,

"You're not a hard core sci-fi fan if you're not IMHO."

@ Dalem and armchair

I believe PJ choice to diminish Faramir's nobility might have something to do with the movie being around one central human noble character. I know that in TTT EE documantry PJ and co. bring up the issue that Ring was so powerfull that it would unbelievble that Faramir wont go for it, but I think inheart the major reason was to keep the nobility of the human characters only around Aragon. Because, Aragon did the exact samething in Jackson's FOTR movie (not the book) where the gives up the Ring at the end and let Frodo goes (which it wasnt in the book). So I believe deep down, PJ didnot want a repeat of that scene, infact it is quite plausible that he gave that scene (Faramir letting Frodo go) to Aragon for FOTR'e ending.

Originally Posted by Wraith601

I consider Babylon 5 one of the finest sci-fi TV shows EVER, and if you're not a fan of it, then in my view you wouldn't know real sci-fi if it bit you on the ass.

That's ridiculous. Some people don't like the (at times) bad CGI of the first couple of seasons, or some of the dialogue. Some just plain don't like it. That doesn't mean they're not aware of sci fi.

I myself hate two of the staples - the book Dune and the movie Blade Runner. Gonna run me out on a rail for that?

-dale

Originally Posted by Wraith601

Except that the plots of virtually every show so far has centered somehow on keeping humanity alive. If not battling Cylons, they're looking for supplies, trying to find Earth, or trying to keep the Fleet together.

Some people actually enjoy character development and prefer shows with actual people and not lame caricatures a la Star Trek.

Please. The shows are centered on whiney Mommy Daddy issues and how awful people can be to each other.

Besides, haven't you figured out by now that there are no "humans" - they're ALL Cylons, just different kinds.

-dale

Originally Posted by ArmchairGeneral

Very interesting post, dalem. You've got a remarkable grasp of Middle Earth theology.

I am a geek of truly immeasurable proportions.

-dale

Originally Posted by xerxes

@ Dalem and armchair

I believe PJ choice to diminish Faramir's nobility might have something to do with the movie being around one central human noble character. I know that in TTT EE documantry PJ and co. bring up the issue that Ring was so powerfull that it would unbelievble that Faramir wont go for it, but I think inheart the major reason was to keep the nobility of the human characters only around Aragon. Because, Aragon did the exact samething in Jackson's FOTR movie (not the book) where the gives up the Ring at the end and let Frodo goes (which it wasnt in the book). So I believe deep down, PJ didnot want a repeat of that scene, infact it is quite plausible that he gave that scene (Faramir letting Frodo go) to Aragon for FOTR'e ending.

That's a good point, and certainly plausible, but in my opinion the only purpose of Faramir's character is to show that there IS still a strain of greatness in Man other than Aragorn (I miss the clear bond of friendship between Eomer and Aragorn for mostly the same reason). I'd almost rather have seen him cut from the story than diminished as he was.

-dale

Dont forget that some of Eomer's greatest quotes were given to Theodon, King of Mark, in the movie.

@Wraith

Babylon 5 was great. It had the great continous arc. However, the show several flaws:

1) extremely bad CGI. If they ever redo it, i will surely buy the DVDs.
2) very very bad acting. Except for Garibaldi, Mollari and G'kar character, other character were not well acted.
3) The Ivanov chracter totally and I mean totally sucked. It was always boring dry-humor with her.
4) The entire show had a very good arc, but then after so much building up (three seasons), the Shadow War ends in just six episodes. I guess it is always easier to tease and buildup, then do an actual release. It is like the TNG episode Best of the Both Worlds: an all time classic. Part 1 was great, awesome, classic, the feel of impending doom, but part 2 failed to deliver on that. It is always like that. Now I also know that in case of Babylon 5, the show was earmaked to be cancelled by the end of season 4, therefore seaons 5 material was actually bonus stuff that we got, and had the show originally went the way it went (full 5 seasons), then the Shadow War would have been better ended.

comments?

Originally Posted by dalem

That's ridiculous. Some people don't like the (at times) bad CGI of the first couple of seasons, or some of the dialogue. Some just plain don't like it. That doesn't mean they're not aware of sci fi.

I myself hate two of the staples - the book Dune and the movie Blade Runner. Gonna run me out on a rail for that?

-dale

I never read Dune and I fell asleep during Blade Runner (which is more a drama/thriller with sci-fi trappings anyway).

Originally Posted by xerxes

@Wraith

Babylon 5 was great. It had the great continous arc. However, the show several flaws:

1) extremely bad CGI. If they ever redo it, i will surely buy the DVDs.
2) very very bad acting. Except for Garibaldi, Mollari and G'kar character, other character were not well acted.
3) The Ivanov chracter totally and I mean totally sucked. It was always boring dry-humor with her.
4) The entire show had a very good arc, but then after so much building up (three seasons), the Shadow War ends in just six episodes. I guess it is always easier to tease and buildup, then do an actual release. It is like the TNG episode Best of the Both Worlds: an all time classic. Part 1 was great, awesome, classic, the feel of impending doom, but part 2 failed to deliver on that. It is always like that. Now I also know that in case of Babylon 5, the show was earmaked to be cancelled by the end of season 4, therefore seaons 5 material was actually bonus stuff that we got, and had the show originally went the way it went (full 5 seasons), then the Shadow War would have been better ended.

comments?

1. Only when compared to today's. The original Star Wars had terrible effects by modern standards, does that mean they sucked? Besides the CGI imporved markedly as the show progressed and I can forgive them for actually showing rotating sections and Newtonian physics.

2. Boxleitner was excellent as Sheridan. It's true Delenn was acting well all the time, but the character was well written enough to still make her compelling.

3. I didn't think she was too bad.

4. The show was orignally slated for five seasons, adn the narrative was preplanned. When the show was cancelled, they had to wrap up the Shadow War quicker than expected. When TNT picked up Season Five they had to pull together stuff on short notice, hence the noticeably poorer quality (though there were some great episodes like The Long Night of Londo Mollari, The Fall of Centauri Prime, and Sleeping in the Light).

Originally Posted by dalem

Please. The shows are centered on whiney Mommy Daddy issues and how awful people can be to each other.

Besides, haven't you figured out by now that there are no "humans" - they're ALL Cylons, just different kinds.

-dale

It's called a subplot.

Most episodes have a major plot (typically fitting into one of the overall arcs) and a couple subplots, which may or not be related to the arcs. With the exception of a few stand alone episodes, used for character development and to provide breaks between major arc episodes, most follow this formula.

Originally Posted by Wraith601

It's called a subplot.

Most episodes have a major plot (typically fitting into one of the overall arcs) and a couple subplots, which may or not be related to the arcs. With the exception of a few stand alone episodes, used for character development and to provide breaks between major arc episodes, most follow this formula.

But that doesn't change the fact that they're all whiney little cretins. You like 'em, you watch 'em.

-dale