Lord of the Rings Exhibition in Berlin.
Yesterday I made a trip to Berlin to see the exhibition of film props done for the LotR movies. Again I was overwhelmed by the endless devotion of all those artists, conceptual designers and craftspeople to get everything not just right, but perfect. I have several book about the making of LotR, but it's different to see the things in original.
( Read more... )
( Read more... )
Comments 24
Reply
Reply
I have been making miniature dolls and animals for many years, first for myself when I was a kid, but later also for sale. In fact some of my earliest figurines back from the seventies were Aragorn and an elf with his horse. They both have hands like frying pans and I didn't like how Aragorn's face came out. But I learned better since then and now I can do relly good miniatures.
Sad thing is, the working hours/selling prize relation for hand made miniatures is so low that working at MacDonald looks really attractive in comparison. Besides, the hobby scene is pretty dead here.
Reply
...because it is all so damn convincing.
Is it? While some things about the films were good, the overall look of the "cultural" things (as opposed to the landscapes, etc.) did not quite convince me. So much of it looked a bit too much like Viollet-le-Duc and Walt Disney teaming up to do the Dark Ages... Overall, there was a certain lack of authenticity (don't get me started on Grond! ;))... But then, people would probably say the same about my vision of ME if I had the means to make it "real", so it is purely a matter of taste. ;)
Reply
There were of course some things that didn't feel quite as convincing to me as the rest, mainly the strangely isolated city of Minas Tirith, which looked not quite alive and inhabited. But I like the style and architecture of M T in general, it was only some more detail that I missed. (fields, farms and gardens outside; signs of dayly life inside).
Reply
But then, I am an absolute spoilsport when it comes to films, and twice as bad when it comes to films based on books. ;)
Reply
Reply
I understand what you mean about the art leaving no room for others' imaginations in many cases. E.g, I really like the Rohirrim. I am not so sure about the Elves, however: I agree with Sirielle about their hair, and I think they might have had more variety in styles, and development of styles, across the ages.
I would like to use this opportunity to bring back the discussion of whether Elves had historical museums and what such museums might contain. (I think mine do have some rooms displaying items carried over the Helcaraxe, and The Story In My Head also has G discovering his favourite hairbrush in a Museum of Gondolin after his return.)
Reply
Reply
I think Elves would tend to be conservative, but now and then some influential, innovative sort (like Feanor or Maeglin) would get a chance to revolutionarize armour design. Especially in the First Age, when they were figuring out what armour should be like.
Reply
Yes, elves surely had inventive minds. I only can't see them change fashion styles every year and have a revolution in music taste every twenty years or so. They would keep what they like for long periods of time and make changes only slowly, unless there is a new situation that calls for speedy development, like weapons and armour for the needs of M-E.
Reply
All the visuals are so stunningly perfect. If only I could say the same about the script.
A absolutely agree with you on this account. In fact, I feel somewhat sad for the artists and specialists, who were working on the creating such a perfect scenery/costumes/everything visuals of the movie, that happened to be so... so empty of ideas of the books. (In fact, it bothers me so much, that I still can not bring myself to buying the movies.)
However, it seems that the exhibition itself was great, and that you enjoyed it. Heh, I love your impression of those "museum exhibits": "#1:Elven dagger from the First Age..." he-he, it must be extremely cool to see such explanatory text:))
Reply
I wouldn't say the movie was empty of Tolkien's ideas. Also I'm not such a canon freak to condemn every alteration from the book, like removing Glorfindel or Tom Bombadil or the purge of the Shire. A book is not a film. But it's undeniable that every weakness, plot hole, illogical moment or whacky character portrayal is due to a stray of the script from Tolkien's text. And it's sad to realize the same incredible anmount of work on the project as a whole could have resulted in a better story so easily. So I will love the films forever for the many good things in them, and feel a bit sad for what they fell short of.
Reply
It's more about Arwen (and her role), and Elrond, if speaking about the portraying of the characters; and about the difference between the atmosphere of the book, and that of the movies, in general. I m sure that you understand what I mean, for your own LOTR artworks have a great book-like atmosphere.
On the other hand, there were some nice surprises in the movies, besides the wonderfully done visuals: Legolas, for example. I had really hated the movie version of him, when I first had seen the preview, but when I was watching the movie, I found him to look and (more important!) to move elf-like, and I appreciated that. Too bad that Legolas relationship with Gimli are not shown at all, but as you have said, a book is not a movie...
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment