The Return of the King & Harry Potter
Well, this is both good and bad news. The good news is easier, so I'll start with that. The first teaser trailer for Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban is out. There's also some teaser pictures, and a cast list, including the new actor for Dumbledore. Here.
I'm pretty happy with the Trailer and the direction of the film so far. The director has changed, and apparently the film has taken on a slightly darker approach, which is a wise choice in my opinion. Most children that see these movies have already read the books and since they're most likely to be the sort with good imaginations, they've already experienced some of the scarier parts on their own. Besides, this is a dark story. Think about it. The hero is an orphan, living with a horrible family. Their treatment of him borders on sub-human. So when he finds out that there's this other world out there that's been hidden from him for reasons he doesn't quite understand yet, he also discovers that its not all sunshine and that it's just as dangerous as the world he grew up in. Maybe even more so, actually.
I enjoy the story and I enjoyed the books even more so. In my opinion, Rowling did a good job of adding little shades of darkness here and there. And the trailer makes the movie look promising. That peek of a dementor at the end was nice. I'm also pleased because it didn't look like a ringwraith, which I was afraid of.
Now, on to the bad news. It seems that Peter Jackson is cutting out all the scenes including Christopher Lee, the actor in the role of Saruman. I had kinda resolved myself to loosing the "Scouring of the Shire" scene, so I was dealing with that and being quite docile about it. Still upset about it, but although I enjoy Peter Jackson's version of J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings" Trilogy, it is not the end all and be all for me. It is almost like a sort of fanfiction. So this is what I tell myself when I am mourning certain parts where I find the movies lacking.
I will put my foot down on this Palantir business, however. In fact, the whole scene at Isengard between Saruman and Gandalf is extremely important. For one, it shows Saruman's temperment, and how twisted and poppet-like he has become. It contrasts Gandalf to him, plus it shows just how much Wormtoungue has grown to hate Saruman in the end. It gives Wormtoungue's character a chance for redemption, for he is as much a tool as Saruman is himself. Then there's the whole business with the Palantir and how Pippin looks into it, and Sauron thinks that Pippin has the ring, because he's a halfling, so Gandalf takes him to Gondor for safekeeping. This is part of the reason Frodo and Sam are able to slip by, because Sauron is not watching them for a time.
You can't just tell one part of the story and expect everyone else to just follow along. At the very least, cutting out those scenes diminishes the inherent symbolism that Tolkien was writing out for his audience. It's like taking part of the color out of a sunrise and expecting it to be just as beautiful. It just doesn't work. Jackson won't be getting the effect he wants on the fans that have read the book, and they're part of his biggest and most faithful market. He's read the books himself, I"m surprised that he doesn't realize the damage he's doing.
The Scouring of the Shire is important as well. Truth, the Shire is a beautiful place, and has been portrayed as singular and safe. After all, its so far away from Mordor and Isengard, so what would the war-mongerers of men want with the Shire? Why show it? Because it shows that nowhere is safe and cements the message that the world is changing. If Sauron were only a threat to the world of men, then why does Gandalf enlist the help of his beloved Halflings? Why not keep them safe and unbesmirched and hidden? Why then does Elrond (in the book) encourage the marriage of Arwen and Aragorn? Why then does he offer shelter to Bilbo, support to Frodo, and allow the two Halflings to join the Elves in the Greyhavens? It diminishes the threat and evil presence of Sauron, which Jackson has been playing up. I was a little dissatisfied with the scenes with Galadriel in the first movie. First off, Sam also gets to look into the mirror, and he sees the Shire. The Lady gives him a box of earth and a seed, which he uses to replant the Shire. In a way, it keeps a piece of the Elves there in Middle Earth. Without that character building, Sam just looks two-dimensional, there to parallel Frodo's disintegration into madness and twisted subserviance to the Ring. He is no longer a simple, brave Hobbit, a gardener. There are reasons why his name is Samwise, and it is a shame that those only watching the movies and not reading the books will miss such a pertenant message. It is Sam, after all, that puts the Shire back together. His heart is the healing needed after the dark.
So I'm quite dissatisfied, and I think I have good reason. There are times that I am thoroughly entranced by Peter Jackson's work, and I will say that him and his team have been able to put together an astounding work. I enjoy watching it. I dedicate hard-drive space to it. I think about the movies quite often, and watch them intently when oppurtunity presents such. The Ents took my breath away, and the small moment where Sam said goodbye to Bill the Pony made me appreciate the movie even more, even if it was only 30 seconds of footage, it brought me back to every moment that I had my own movie of LOTR in my own head. It was familiar, and soft. I knew that I was going to find myself dissatisfied in some respect with these movies. After all, I fell in love with literature because of Tolkien. It is hard to live up to that, and I don't blame Peter Jackson for that amount of my displeasure. I am just disapointed that so much of the beauty I have found in these books has been ignored.
I'm pretty happy with the Trailer and the direction of the film so far. The director has changed, and apparently the film has taken on a slightly darker approach, which is a wise choice in my opinion. Most children that see these movies have already read the books and since they're most likely to be the sort with good imaginations, they've already experienced some of the scarier parts on their own. Besides, this is a dark story. Think about it. The hero is an orphan, living with a horrible family. Their treatment of him borders on sub-human. So when he finds out that there's this other world out there that's been hidden from him for reasons he doesn't quite understand yet, he also discovers that its not all sunshine and that it's just as dangerous as the world he grew up in. Maybe even more so, actually.
I enjoy the story and I enjoyed the books even more so. In my opinion, Rowling did a good job of adding little shades of darkness here and there. And the trailer makes the movie look promising. That peek of a dementor at the end was nice. I'm also pleased because it didn't look like a ringwraith, which I was afraid of.
Now, on to the bad news. It seems that Peter Jackson is cutting out all the scenes including Christopher Lee, the actor in the role of Saruman. I had kinda resolved myself to loosing the "Scouring of the Shire" scene, so I was dealing with that and being quite docile about it. Still upset about it, but although I enjoy Peter Jackson's version of J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings" Trilogy, it is not the end all and be all for me. It is almost like a sort of fanfiction. So this is what I tell myself when I am mourning certain parts where I find the movies lacking.
I will put my foot down on this Palantir business, however. In fact, the whole scene at Isengard between Saruman and Gandalf is extremely important. For one, it shows Saruman's temperment, and how twisted and poppet-like he has become. It contrasts Gandalf to him, plus it shows just how much Wormtoungue has grown to hate Saruman in the end. It gives Wormtoungue's character a chance for redemption, for he is as much a tool as Saruman is himself. Then there's the whole business with the Palantir and how Pippin looks into it, and Sauron thinks that Pippin has the ring, because he's a halfling, so Gandalf takes him to Gondor for safekeeping. This is part of the reason Frodo and Sam are able to slip by, because Sauron is not watching them for a time.
You can't just tell one part of the story and expect everyone else to just follow along. At the very least, cutting out those scenes diminishes the inherent symbolism that Tolkien was writing out for his audience. It's like taking part of the color out of a sunrise and expecting it to be just as beautiful. It just doesn't work. Jackson won't be getting the effect he wants on the fans that have read the book, and they're part of his biggest and most faithful market. He's read the books himself, I"m surprised that he doesn't realize the damage he's doing.
The Scouring of the Shire is important as well. Truth, the Shire is a beautiful place, and has been portrayed as singular and safe. After all, its so far away from Mordor and Isengard, so what would the war-mongerers of men want with the Shire? Why show it? Because it shows that nowhere is safe and cements the message that the world is changing. If Sauron were only a threat to the world of men, then why does Gandalf enlist the help of his beloved Halflings? Why not keep them safe and unbesmirched and hidden? Why then does Elrond (in the book) encourage the marriage of Arwen and Aragorn? Why then does he offer shelter to Bilbo, support to Frodo, and allow the two Halflings to join the Elves in the Greyhavens? It diminishes the threat and evil presence of Sauron, which Jackson has been playing up. I was a little dissatisfied with the scenes with Galadriel in the first movie. First off, Sam also gets to look into the mirror, and he sees the Shire. The Lady gives him a box of earth and a seed, which he uses to replant the Shire. In a way, it keeps a piece of the Elves there in Middle Earth. Without that character building, Sam just looks two-dimensional, there to parallel Frodo's disintegration into madness and twisted subserviance to the Ring. He is no longer a simple, brave Hobbit, a gardener. There are reasons why his name is Samwise, and it is a shame that those only watching the movies and not reading the books will miss such a pertenant message. It is Sam, after all, that puts the Shire back together. His heart is the healing needed after the dark.
So I'm quite dissatisfied, and I think I have good reason. There are times that I am thoroughly entranced by Peter Jackson's work, and I will say that him and his team have been able to put together an astounding work. I enjoy watching it. I dedicate hard-drive space to it. I think about the movies quite often, and watch them intently when oppurtunity presents such. The Ents took my breath away, and the small moment where Sam said goodbye to Bill the Pony made me appreciate the movie even more, even if it was only 30 seconds of footage, it brought me back to every moment that I had my own movie of LOTR in my own head. It was familiar, and soft. I knew that I was going to find myself dissatisfied in some respect with these movies. After all, I fell in love with literature because of Tolkien. It is hard to live up to that, and I don't blame Peter Jackson for that amount of my displeasure. I am just disapointed that so much of the beauty I have found in these books has been ignored.