wrong but wromantic (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
sally_maria) wrote2005-02-04 09:17 pm
sally_maria) wrote2005-02-04 09:17 pm
Entry tags:
Film Denethor - why?
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.
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.
no subject
no subject
no subject
I suppose I do tend to cut them a fair amount of slack, even though there are some things they did that I really don't like.
The vital thing for me is that they took the story and the characters seriously. (Yes, I know comic relief Gimli but that was only one aspect of him.) The characters were allowed to appear as real heroes, not just action star stereotypes and there was no "post-modern" undertone of mockery. I love it in Xena, but nothing could have killed LotR faster, at least for me. I suppose it is a case of "think how much worse it could have been" but it was what made the films watchable and enjoyable for me.