Books to Movies: Fellowship--More on Excisions and Additions

Excising for the Sake of Focus

"The Sign at the Prancing Pony" and "The Knife in the Dark" contain far more information in the book than included in the movies. Jackson moves through both scenes very quickly by focusing on salient details. The ability to pick out salient details (and summarize them) is a skill that I spend a full semester teaching students. It is far more difficult than it sounds. A good summary is NOT a paraphrase (a blow-by-blow restatement of everything in a text) but a zeroing in on the stuff that actually matters. 

In Jackson's movies, the most important details in the two chapters are retained.

Unfortunately, a summary does mean eliminating beloved material. The radio dramatization offers a wonderful touching moment from the book in which Sam sings a poem taught to him by Bilbo about Gil-galad. It is a reminder that the landscape through which the characters move is full of history. The movie relies on its settings to convey the distant past instead. 

"The Council of Elrond" also contains information that is parceled out in the movie in other forms. The meeting basically comes down to Frodo's decision to take the ring, and that moment is impressively presented in the movie. The audience sees the council members arguing. Elrond slumps to the side, looking annoyed. Gandalf gets up to make his case. Frodo watches the members arguing, their images reflected in the ring. He makes his decision, and Gandalf--who both wanted and didn't want Frodo to accept--closes his eyes in pain.

Additions

Arwen is actually not an addition in the same way as Tauriel. In both cases, however, a female character is given a large role that includes fighting experience. Luckily, this is not out of sync with Tolkien's text. It doesn't feel heavy-handed. Plenty of Tolkien's female characters fight and plenty of his female elfs have been warriors.

That doesn't mean Tolkien would have necessarily approved of Jackson's use of Arwen. But it doesn't feel forced--as can sometimes happen with "historical" pieces (fantasy does have greater flexibility). Moreover, Tolkien's groups--human, dwarfs, elves--are varied enough within their borders that even hobbits of the Shire may have different expectations regarding gender roles than hobbits in Bree.

Arwen is a decent character and frankly her control of the river makes more sense than Gandalf being responsible--Gandalf is still missing when Glorfindel (the elf character in the book who finds Strider and the hobbits) locates Strider. (Granted, Jackson greatly shortens the amount of time it takes characters to walk anywhere--but who wants to watch a several week hike?)

So Arwen commanding the waters is more sensible an explanation.

And, as mentioned in another post, it is always good to give actors jobs.


1 comment:

Matthew said...

Warrior women appear in "fantasy" for ever. I mean in ancient mythology there are the Amazons (Greco-Roman) and Cuchulain's sword teacher in Irish mythology was a woman. There are actually some evidence of warrior-women among the Celts and others. So it does happen.

That said in movies today it can be considered overdone and badly done. (Actually just about anything seems badly done today.) But honestly the fainting helpless damsel in distress isn't necessarily any better.