[SouthernRonin]

In that case I must point to Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers as an experiment in gags overtaking humor. All the praftalls of the dwarf Ghimli do nothing to advance the story or reveal anything insightful about the character, it's just making a mockery of him (and the story) for a cheap laugh.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have to disagree with you, for one specific reason: all of the humor concerning Gimli are about his refusal to admit he really is a short person. That's why he's so embarrassed about being tossed into battle, he has to admit he can't do it by himself, and Aragorn can. Even though he certainly is played for comic relief, it's not without purpose, because by the end of the series, he's matured into an understanding and sympathetic character.

I think from our point of view, dwarf-tossing sounds like a joke (and certainly, to a degree, it could be) but I think for Gimli it's clear that this is an enormous insult, and he acts accordingly.

[ernesttomlinson]

"Even though [Gimli] certainly is played for comic relief, it's not without purpose, because by the end of the series, he's matured into an understanding and sympathetic character."

He did? I missed that. Jackson's Gimli is a moron and a bad joke right to the end. When Legolas takes down the Imperial Walker - er, the oliphaunt - Gimli grouses about the body-count. (Thus does Jackson take a few paragraphs from one chapter of the book and turn them into a dreary running joke.) When Aragorn dismisses the Dead - but only after dithering, because loyalty to an oath, central to Tolkien's fiction, is apparently a strange concept to Jackson - Gimli's right there, suggesting the wrong thing to do. Gimli is never correct about anything in Jackson's movies, ever. I daresay that he's the product of some screenwriting class's lecture about the necessity of comic relief.

[Despondent]

It's not the best comedy, and it's not really relief.

I understand being upset with Gimli's portrayal. I wasn't crazy about the burp either.

But there's a lot in this world which smacks in the face of tradition. People can mess with 6000 years of mores and standards, but don't change my Tolkien book?


Regardless, it wasn't as jarring as binks.

[ernesttomlinson]

"...but don't change my Tolkien book?"

Well, no, not if you're pretending to make the definitive screen adaptation.

I know that messing with the Lord of the Rings weighs pretty lightly in the scale of crime but, still...Jackson's distortion of Gimli was just a small example of his more general talent for, well, colossally missing the point of the books. This isn't a "do elves have pointed ears or not?" or "Did the Balrog have wings or not?" matter. Jackson missed the moral centre of the stories he got the rights to; turning Gimli into an idiot was a small side effect of that fundamental error. (Cf. "The Voice of Saruman" from The Two Towers and the part that Gimli plays in that chapter. Jackson did not adapt that scene and it's just as well; he would have bungled it badly had he tried.)

[SouthernRonin]

"...but don't change my Tolkien book?"

Well, no, not if you're pretending to make the definitive screen adaptation.

I know that messing with the Lord of the Rings weighs pretty lightly in the scale of crime but, still...Jackson's distortion of Gimli was just a small example of his more general talent for, well, colossally missing the point of the books.  This isn't a "do elves have pointed ears or not?" or "Did the Balrog have wings or not?" matter.  Jackson missed the moral centre of the stories he got the rights to; turning Gimli into an idiot was a small side effect of that fundamental error.  (Cf. "The Voice of Saruman" from The Two Towers and the part that Gimli plays in that chapter.  Jackson did not adapt that scene and it's just as well; he would have bungled it badly had he tried.)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This comes down to a fundamental difference of opinion, in the end. There will be those that say LOTR was poorly interpreted, and others that will say it nailed it on the head. I imagine it depends on what facet of the book was most important to you.

As for me, I liked the books, but I couldn't be called a fan. I'd only read pieces when the first one came out, and then I read the others just to get a feel for the series.

But the original point in the whole thing was this: from a storytelling perspective, the comic scenes featuring Gimli would be considered humor, not gags, because they add to the story Jackson is trying to tell. In Jackson's LOTR, Gimil's story is about a loner learning to work with a team and accept his own (pardon me dearly) shortcomings.

Whether that story was the same as the one Tolkien was trying to tell, I have no idea, I didn't follow the books well enough to judge. But that's really a diferent discussion.

[Despondent]

I watched some of the FOTR on the tube tonight. Chuckled a few times. The littlest orcs (jawas?) scurrying down the stair right after "the horn of Gondor" and before Movie-goer gets it.

The more obvious, "gag" was Pippin's et al reaction to the skeleton falling into the Moria pit.

the cave troll and his sneak around the rock, SCARE was a little trite. But there was humor in the book that doesn't translate on the screen, in a 11+ hour experience. Even Barend's adaptation has taken longer than the journey itself. That's not a criticism, I'm just suggesting good things ought not be rushed. So with the LOTR movies, take what you can get.

At least it wasn't that "that's what bilbo baggins hates" song from The Hobbit cartoon. (Which I kind of like. Better than Yub-yub, not as good as Jedi rocks.)

[KurganX]

I watched some of the FOTR on the tube tonight. Chuckled a few times. The littlest orcs (jawas?) scurrying down the stair right after "the horn of Gondor" and before Movie-goer gets it.

The more obvious, "gag" was Pippin's et al reaction to the skeleton falling into the Moria pit.

the cave troll and his sneak around the rock, SCARE was a little trite. But there was humor in the book that doesn't translate on the screen, in a 11+ hour experience. Even Barend's adaptation has taken longer than the journey itself. That's not a criticism, I'm just suggesting good things ought not be rushed. So with the LOTR movies, take what you can get.

At least it wasn't that "that's what bilbo baggins hates" song from The Hobbit cartoon. (Which I kind of like. Better than Yub-yub, not as good as Jedi rocks.) 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

FOTR wasn't bad. The jokes were funny and didn't overly distract from the story. The ones in TTT by contrast were really distracting. The audience guffawed at every klutzy thing that Gimli did. He was the comic relief in that film, which I thought was rather unnecessary. Thankfully ROTK didn't go for that angle (though theater audiences I was with considered it overly long and wanted to leave when the "multiple endings" started). The real trouble with the LOTR movies is that they're not designed for a non-intermission theater. Your butt hurts, your bladder gets full and you get a headache. Since theater owners are being idiots, you don't get a break in a 3+ hour movie. So the DVD market is a far superior viewing venue for them (watch the EE's as a mini series... in six 90 (give or take) minute episodes, cool.).

[Lord Aquaman]

FOTR wasn't bad. The jokes were funny and didn't overly distract from the story. The ones in TTT by contrast were really distracting. The audience guffawed at every klutzy thing that Gimli did. He was the comic relief in that film, which I thought was rather unnecessary. Thankfully ROTK didn't go for that angle (though theater audiences I was with considered it overly long and wanted to leave when the "multiple endings" started). The real trouble with the LOTR movies is that they're not designed for a non-intermission theater. Your butt hurts, your bladder gets full and you get a headache. Since theater owners are being idiots, you don't get a break in a 3+ hour movie. So the DVD market is a far superior viewing venue for them (watch the EE's as a mini series... in six 90 (give or take) minute episodes, cool.).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree. Too bad Just Your Average MovieGoer and Madam Corvex aren't here to comment.

This post has been edited by Lord Aquaman: 20 August 2005 - 08:53 AM

[Jaded Wolf]

In that case I must point to Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers as an experiment in gags overtaking humor. All the praftalls of the dwarf Ghimli do nothing to advance the story or reveal anything insightful about the character, it's just making a mockery of him (and the story) for a cheap laugh.

It's not as painful as putting up with Jar Jar but it's still pretty bad.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Huh? I don't remember any gags from Ghimli. I remembering laughing as Ghimli and Legolas (spelling?) went back and forth about their differences and competition.

As for Jar-Jar, although my wife loves him *cringe*, I sincerely wished that Anakin would have made a detour to Naboo before he went to the volcano planet and killed Jar-Jar. Maybe Anakin would have said, "Thanks moron for tainting my story, you prick."

[Jaded Wolf]

It's *more* painful than putting up with Jar Jar because, while Jar Jar is Lucas's creation to ruin as he likes, Gimli is Tolkien's; he wrote Gimli a certain way but Jackson and his screenwriters decided it would be funny, or something, to turn the dwarf into an incompetent, moronic, comical sidekick.  (But then what can we expect when the director of MEET THE FEEBLES inexplicably got his paws on the Lord of the Rings?)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I rather like Peter Jackson's rendition of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. I wish he had been there for the Star Wars prequels. It is because of Jackson that now Narnia and other of my favorite fantasy novels are getting the light of day on the big screen. Paws indeed...

[Despondent]

Been watching some of the old James bond movies lately.

You know, many of James' gags are more (or as) obvious as Threepio's.


But they're always delivered with full believibility. We accept what we respect.

then of course, there's the fact that the RE-introductions (and signature moments) don't make fanboys wet their pants.

[SouthernRonin]

Been watching some of the old James bond movies lately.

You know, many of James' gags are more (or as) obvious as Threepio's.
But they're always delivered with full believibility. We accept what we respect.

then of course, there's the fact that the RE-introductions (and signature moments) don't make fanboys wet their pants.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Despondent, that's an excellent point, and I think you've struck to the heart of the problem of the prequels, which is: the fans expected a saga. Lucas was trying to deliver a second set of popcorn movies (which is what he thought he gave us the first time).

No one minds cheesiness from James Bond because everyone acknowledges Bond is an action movie, and doesn't expect anything mythical or especially dramatic.

[Despondent]

the fans expected a saga.  Lucas was trying to deliver a second set of popcorn movies (which is what he thought he gave us the first time).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nicely put. That's what he gets for thinking.

[Madam Corvax]

No one minds cheesiness from James Bond because everyone acknowledges Bond is an action movie, and doesn't expect anything mythical or especially dramatic.

There you go. But I DID expect mythical and dramatic from LOTR.
FOTR was so brilliant because it had comic reliefs in all the proper places ande from all proper persons - Pippin and Merry.

TTT+ROTK - the comic relief fell into Gimli's lot. A warrior dwarf is turned into burping idiot, playing drinking game with an elf. There wasn't any character development, nothing - just gags.

Jar Jar Binks - just gags, but it does not pain me that much as Yoda's antics.

This is the worst insult for me is Yoda, Yoda, who says to Luke "Lumuinous beings we are, not this crude matter" engages in antics which should have been below a Jedi master. A slap in the face. It's like having Arwen lap dance for Aragorn wearing sexy lingerie.

[Lord Aquaman]

There you go. But I DID expect mythical and dramatic from LOTR.
FOTR was so brilliant because it had comic reliefs in all the proper places ande from all proper persons - Pippin and Merry.

TTT+ROTK - the comic relief fell into Gimli's lot. A warrior dwarf is turned into burping idiot, playing drinking game with an elf. There wasn't any character development, nothing - just gags.

Jar Jar Binks - just gags, but it does not pain me that much as Yoda's antics.

This is the worst insult for me is Yoda, Yoda, who says to Luke "Lumuinous beings we are, not this crude matter" engages in antics which should have been below a Jedi master. A slap in the face. It's like having Arwen lap dance for Aragorn wearing sexy lingerie.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You can say that again, Madam Corvax.