Ramblings

Oct. 9th, 2006 08:37 pm
sally_maria: (Jack in Black)
It's been a busy couple of weeks at work, as I try to catch up on all the stuff that didn't get done while I was off. We've also got a new manager - or a new old manager - she used to be an assistant manager in our branch five years or so ago when I first started. Then she moved on to manage her own, slightly smaller shop, and has now been promoted back to our branch. So far we seem to be getting on ok, she's a stickler for the rules in ways our old manager wasn't but not in a bad way - sometimes it's nice to know where you stand.

This week it's time to start putting out the Christmas stock - though it would be nice if the warehouse had actually bothered sending us some. This means moving a large proportion of our stock around the shop floor and lots of complaints from customers who can't find something if you've moved it a couple of feet. :-) I got caught by [livejournal.com profile] gayalondiel this afternoon carefully not-swearing at a hanging bar that refused to fit into the wall straight - it would help if the wall itself was actually in line - but they get bent out of shape from years of having shelves and bars pulled in and out.

In the meantime I've been cheering myself up with two short Terry Pratchett crossovers:-

Ever wondered how DEATH would react to our amazing self-resurrecting archeologist?
Look here.

Or maybe Good Omens' angel and devil debating over the soul of a certain Professor Snape.
Look here.
sally_maria: (Eowyn)

I've been threatening this for a while - so here is my view on why a common complaint about Eowyn's character is misconceived.

Read more... )

sally_maria: (Eowyn)
One of the most controversial aspects of the Peter Jackson Lord of the Rings films was their treatment of the character of Denethor and his whole family.

Particularly since I have fallen among Denethor fans ;) , I have been wondering why the writers chose to make such a drastic change in his character.  I can't see it as simply due to incompetent writers or ones who don't care about the book; there are (to me at least) so many good things in the films that contradict that theory.

So is it just that introducing another psychologically complex character so relatively close to the end of the three films  would cause problems for the story? Maybe, but I am wondering whether there is another explanation.

There was also a considerable outcry when the theatrical version of Two Towers came out about the treatment of Faramir's character. As we saw the extended version and RotK, many people changed their minds or at least became more accepting because they saw his relationship with Denethor. So I can't help wondering whether the changes in Denethor's character were more a result of the changes in Faramir than just a need to simplify his character and motives.

In the book we have Boromir, who eventually succumbs to the Ring, but is always shown as being susceptible to it. And we have Faramir, who is very briefly tempted, but basically rejects the Ring almost immediately.

In the film, however, we have Boromir struggling with temptation for weeks, while Faramir drags Frodo off towards Minas Tirith, almost straight away. Even given the writers' need to show how powerful the Ring is, this has the characters almost backwards. Why should Faramir get the girl and the happy ending, while Boromir only has a redemptive depth in battle (and a wonderful death scene)? Answer, change Denethor from a proud and slightly chilly man who loves both his sons but objects to Faramir's faith in and love for Gandalf, to an insane tyrant whose love Faramir has tried in vain to win all his life. This immediately makes him more sympathetic and gives him a story arc, as he tries to outgrow his brother's shadow.

Book Denethor may have thought that Boromir woud have brought him the Ring, but he also raised his sons to have confidence in their own judgement and the security to disagree with him - in the end, Faramir has less problem with letting Frodo go than Eomer does with Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli. If that had been the case in the film, then Faramir would have been a much less sympathetic character, in making the decision he did.

It is an indication of how the book hangs together and how changing one element can have ramifications further down the line. Maybe, given the need, from a film point of view, to have a character arc for Faramir, there was no other way of handling Denethor's character; still it would have been interesting to see what other options people could come up with.
sally_maria: Daniel Jackson looking sideways (Default)
I've been thinking about this topic since I read the new story [livejournal.com profile] alyburns has linked from her journal.

On Death Stories

Read more... )

Profile

sally_maria: Daniel Jackson looking sideways (Default)
wrong but wromantic

May 2017

S M T W T F S
 123456
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031   

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 25th, 2017 04:27 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios