Fan Made Condensed Edited Version

Where it's not Ranger related. Rankin Bass, Bakshi, PJ, or independent. If it's not specifically ranger related, let's talk movies (or TV)!

Moderator: caedmon

User avatar
Daerir
Amrod Rhandir
Posts: 446
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 4:15 am
Location: McVeytown, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Fan Made Condensed Edited Version

Postby Daerir » Wed Jan 21, 2015 3:30 am

http://imgur.com/gallery/thlJ16M

I have not watched it myself but will soon see how much better it will be without all the BS. This is a link to the link, showing you what has been changed before you click the link to watch it.
An archer practices until he gets it right. A ranger practices until he never gets it wrong
~Halt, Ranger's Apprentice
Straelbora
Haeropada
Posts: 847
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 7:00 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN USA

Re: Fan Made Condensed Edited Version

Postby Straelbora » Wed Jan 21, 2015 3:07 pm

Daerir wrote:http://imgur.com/gallery/thlJ16M

I have not watched it myself but will soon see how much better it will be without all the BS. This is a link to the link, showing you what has been changed before you click the link to watch it.


I watched the editor's 3 minute condensation of the 'barrel ride' scene and it still contained the absurd flying, spinning Bombur, so obviously he and I have different tastes. I'll wait to watch someone else's revision.
Vápnum sínum skala maðr velli á
feti ganga framar því at óvist er at vita
nær verðr á vegum úti geirs um þörf guma
Hávamál
User avatar
Ringulf
Naugothrain
Posts: 2381
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Central Florida
Contact:

Re: Fan Made Condensed Edited Version

Postby Ringulf » Wed Jan 21, 2015 4:16 pm

A lot of his revisions were very good and did propel the story line in a much more Bilbocentric manner. I suppose it would have been hard to include out of the frying pan into the fire with all the Azog stuff but he is mentioned enough in the conversation with the great goblin that I felt loosing the entire fifteen birds in five fir trees and the pinecones and most importantly the eagles was sad. Running down hill on the eastern slopes of the misty mountains then ending up at Beorn's with no eagles and no Carrock (which were in the film and could have been used even briefly to complete Tolkiens original creation) was also frustrating. As long as you are going to make a fan edit, why not use some of the lovely exclusions in the extended addition like some of the Bilbo in Hobbiton extra footage and the propper "meeting Beorn" scene. Taking out so much superfluous nonsense left enough time to put in actual written storyline that Tolkien really did write (interpreted as it is for film) :wink:
A heartening sight by Day or Night, Dwarven warriors bold! To add their Might to any Fight, Precious more than Gold! A Dwarven friend is to the end, Never shall they fail! Their word does not bend, wherever they wend,
through Cavern, Hill or Dale!"
User avatar
Manveruon
Thangailhir
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:11 am
Location: Littleton, CO
Contact:

Re: Fan Made Condensed Edited Version

Postby Manveruon » Wed Jan 21, 2015 10:13 pm

Yeah, I was concerned about this edit the moment I read about it. I feared the editor went a little crazy, and furthermore, he obviously hasn't waited for the Battle of Five Armies Extended Edition yet, which probably contains a lot of good Tolkien-centric stuff (I'm really hoping for Thorin's funeral, please please please). I haven't watched it yet, but hearing you say they cut the eagles and the pine tree escapade out entirely seals the deal: this is NOT the edit for me. I also feel like completely eliminating the Dol Guldur subplot, as well as the entirety of Tauriel's character, may have been a bit extreme. I would honestly be fine with a two-part version, with two movies at around 2.5 to 3 hours apiece, as long as they could fit all the best stuff in. If I had the ability, I would do my own edit, but alas, I don't have the software or the know-how. But I DO have friends who might... hmmmmmm... very very tempting.
User avatar
caedmon
Balku'npâ
Posts: 729
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 4:30 am
Location: Palmer Alaska

Re: Fan Made Condensed Edited Version

Postby caedmon » Thu Jan 22, 2015 12:23 am

Watched it in fast forward last night. In all, it's pretty good. Sounds like he's putting the pine tree back, hopefully sans fighting. Would also like to see the dishes put back in. Even so, it was enjoyable.
-Jack Horner

----------------------------
Impression: Boater Wesman ( Balku'npâ Adúnerama ) bronze founder living in Archet, Breelander of mixed dúnedain descent. c. 3017
User avatar
Manveruon
Thangailhir
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:11 am
Location: Littleton, CO
Contact:

Re: Fan Made Condensed Edited Version

Postby Manveruon » Thu Jan 22, 2015 12:34 am

Aw man, he took out Blunt the Knives? I get that it was a little campy, but frankly, it was a little campy in the book, and overall a very nice page-to-screen translation, in my opinion.
User avatar
Ringulf
Naugothrain
Posts: 2381
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Central Florida
Contact:

Re: Fan Made Condensed Edited Version

Postby Ringulf » Thu Jan 22, 2015 3:27 am

Agreed the song and the arrival of the dwarves, though thorin came late in the movie and not in the book could have stayed in my opinion too.
A heartening sight by Day or Night, Dwarven warriors bold! To add their Might to any Fight, Precious more than Gold! A Dwarven friend is to the end, Never shall they fail! Their word does not bend, wherever they wend,
through Cavern, Hill or Dale!"
User avatar
Manveruon
Thangailhir
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:11 am
Location: Littleton, CO
Contact:

Re: Fan Made Condensed Edited Version

Postby Manveruon » Thu Jan 22, 2015 5:28 am

That's the thing - I'm NOT a Tolkien purist. I do respect Tolkien and his novels immensely, but I don't think any filmmaker has an obligation to be 100% faithful to the source material. Therefore, some stylistic changes and rearranging of certain plot elements (or their omission altogether, in the case of Tom Bombadil) are perfectly acceptable to me, with the one HUGE HUGE HUGE caveat that, if the filmmaker decides to deviate from the source material, he or she do it for a legitimate reason having to do with adapting the page to the screen. Jackson began already to veer from that path when he brought the elves to Helm's Deep (though it could be argued that there were legitimate reasons to do this from a filmmaking standpoint, and I personally wasn't totally turned off by it), and then his tendency towards self-indulgence grew from there. Certain changes from the Hobbit book to the Hobbit films were, if not necessary, then at least acceptable in the name of making it an interesting MOVIE rather than an interesting BOOK. I just think we need a cut without all the stuff that A) was not included in the original novel, OR... B) did not at the very least further the plot or character development of the film in any significant way. Tauriel is a decent example. I actually didn't mind her character, in theory, but in the end you really could cut her out of the films entirely and not ultimately change a damn thing.
User avatar
Ringulf
Naugothrain
Posts: 2381
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 1:50 pm
Location: Central Florida
Contact:

Re: Fan Made Condensed Edited Version

Postby Ringulf » Thu Jan 22, 2015 3:56 pm

I think it goes back even further in the film when he has Arwin substituted for Glorfindel. Now I can see the reasoning for the change as Tolkiens work was rather light on heroines, but I feel that omissions are perhaps allowable, for the right reasons, but downright revisions to the point that they become contradictions give us an altered story line altogether...Bear Bombs indeed! (sorry still reeling from that farcical aeronautical cerimony during the BO5A!!) :shock:
A heartening sight by Day or Night, Dwarven warriors bold! To add their Might to any Fight, Precious more than Gold! A Dwarven friend is to the end, Never shall they fail! Their word does not bend, wherever they wend,
through Cavern, Hill or Dale!"
Straelbora
Haeropada
Posts: 847
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 7:00 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN USA

Re: Fan Made Condensed Edited Version

Postby Straelbora » Thu Jan 22, 2015 5:08 pm

Manveruon wrote:That's the thing - I'm NOT a Tolkien purist. I do respect Tolkien and his novels immensely, but I don't think any filmmaker has an obligation to be 100% faithful to the source material. Therefore, some stylistic changes and rearranging of certain plot elements (or their omission altogether, in the case of Tom Bombadil) are perfectly acceptable to me, with the one HUGE HUGE HUGE caveat that, if the filmmaker decides to deviate from the source material, he or she do it for a legitimate reason having to do with adapting the page to the screen. Jackson began already to veer from that path when he brought the elves to Helm's Deep (though it could be argued that there were legitimate reasons to do this from a filmmaking standpoint, and I personally wasn't totally turned off by it), and then his tendency towards self-indulgence grew from there. Certain changes from the Hobbit book to the Hobbit films were, if not necessary, then at least acceptable in the name of making it an interesting MOVIE rather than an interesting BOOK. I just think we need a cut without all the stuff that A) was not included in the original novel, OR... B) did not at the very least further the plot or character development of the film in any significant way. Tauriel is a decent example. I actually didn't mind her character, in theory, but in the end you really could cut her out of the films entirely and not ultimately change a damn thing.


Exactly. Creating Tauriel to include a prominent female character when all we have in the book is mention of a 'captain of the guard?' Fine.
Creating Tauriel and then reducing her to a love interest? Blech.
Vápnum sínum skala maðr velli á
feti ganga framar því at óvist er at vita
nær verðr á vegum úti geirs um þörf guma
Hávamál
User avatar
Elleth
êphal ki-*raznahê
Posts: 1664
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 5:26 am
Location: in the Angle; New England

Re: Fan Made Condensed Edited Version

Postby Elleth » Thu Jan 22, 2015 9:08 pm

Honestly with the exception of Eowyn - who's called out as an exception -I don't like either warrior-Arwen or Tauriel in the PJ movies. They just seem too 21st century fan service, just like bouncy dwarves that make a nice laugh line but wreck the drama and tension of a scene.

Katniss or Lara Croft or Princess Leia with a blaster are all awesome.. but lady warriors as a normal thing reads wrong in Tolkien to me.
Different genre, different rules.

(And for that matter, it's the same reason reading the Silmarillion feels like visiting an older world of legend, but reading some of the Forgotten Realms novels feels like visiting a Ren Faire... the people don't just look different from us, they think different from us)
Persona: Aerlinneth, Dúnedain of Amon Lendel c. TA 3010.
User avatar
Manveruon
Thangailhir
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:11 am
Location: Littleton, CO
Contact:

Re: Fan Made Condensed Edited Version

Postby Manveruon » Thu Jan 22, 2015 11:05 pm

Elleth - in essence I agree with you. I do think the pursuit of the "strong female character" has led modern filmmakers and other story-tellers to veer away from historical concepts of gender, which ultimately makes those universes seem less plausible. That being said, Tolkien DID write Eowyn into his novels (and as an aside, I find it funny that she actually came out as a STRONGER character in the books than she did in the movies, partially because of PJ's tweaking, and partially because Miranda Otto is a terrible actress, IMO, but I digress), so he obviously didn't mind including the "strong female character" archetype.

In the end though, I am actually one of the few people who fully supports PJ's decision to replace Glorfindel with Arwen in Fellowship. I have numerous reasons for my support of that decision, but the primary reason is that Glorfindel was ultimately a one-off character who appeared in that scene, and then almost never again. He was not integral to the plot, and his omission was acceptable to me. However, Arwen WAS integral, if not to the plot, then at least to Aragorn's character development, and unfortunately the Professor didn't really give her much room to be fleshed out as a character in the novels. By introducing her early, and in the manner he did, PJ created a more well-rounded character, who was tough enough to be a believable of a match for her love interest, while also essentially remaining true to the character in the book, overall. I would, however, have been PISSED if they had left her in the Helm's Deep sequence, as they originally intended to do in the Two Towers movie.

Of course, I realize I'm kind of in the minority on this one, so I know people will disagree, and that's fine, these are all just my own personal musings on the subject.
Straelbora
Haeropada
Posts: 847
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2013 7:00 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN USA

Re: Fan Made Condensed Edited Version

Postby Straelbora » Fri Jan 23, 2015 3:28 am

Manveruon wrote:Elleth - in essence I agree with you. I do think the pursuit of the "strong female character" has led modern filmmakers and other story-tellers to veer away from historical concepts of gender, which ultimately makes those universes seem less plausible. That being said, Tolkien DID write Eowyn into his novels (and as an aside, I find it funny that she actually came out as a STRONGER character in the books than she did in the movies, partially because of PJ's tweaking, and partially because Miranda Otto is a terrible actress, IMO, but I digress), so he obviously didn't mind including the "strong female character" archetype.

In the end though, I am actually one of the few people who fully supports PJ's decision to replace Glorfindel with Arwen in Fellowship. I have numerous reasons for my support of that decision, but the primary reason is that Glorfindel was ultimately a one-off character who appeared in that scene, and then almost never again. He was not integral to the plot, and his omission was acceptable to me. However, Arwen WAS integral, if not to the plot, then at least to Aragorn's character development, and unfortunately the Professor didn't really give her much room to be fleshed out as a character in the novels. By introducing her early, and in the manner he did, PJ created a more well-rounded character, who was tough enough to be a believable of a match for her love interest, while also essentially remaining true to the character in the book, overall. I would, however, have been PISSED if they had left her in the Helm's Deep sequence, as they originally intended to do in the Two Towers movie.

Of course, I realize I'm kind of in the minority on this one, so I know people will disagree, and that's fine, these are all just my own personal musings on the subject.


Actually, I'm right there with you on this.
Vápnum sínum skala maðr velli á
feti ganga framar því at óvist er at vita
nær verðr á vegum úti geirs um þörf guma
Hávamál
User avatar
Elleth
êphal ki-*raznahê
Posts: 1664
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 5:26 am
Location: in the Angle; New England

Re: Fan Made Condensed Edited Version

Postby Elleth » Sat Jan 24, 2015 3:14 pm

I think giving Glorfindel's role to Arwen in fellowship makes storytelling sense - it tightens up the focus quite well, and was a good storytelling / moviemaking decision. And besides - the movies are getting watched by 21st century people, not Edwardian or medieval people. And frankly, I've always though Tolkien himself - sacrilege! - was a far better world builder than a storyteller.

All that said, I don't think Arwen's ride was a good decision within the context of the world itself, and it doesn't seem in keeping with her character in the books.
(A gal doesn't need to carry a sword to have a spine of steel)

Eowyn's another matter entirely. I quite liked how she was handled in the films.
Persona: Aerlinneth, Dúnedain of Amon Lendel c. TA 3010.
User avatar
Manveruon
Thangailhir
Posts: 1933
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:11 am
Location: Littleton, CO
Contact:

Re: Fan Made Condensed Edited Version

Postby Manveruon » Sat Jan 24, 2015 8:31 pm

Fair enough. I couldn't agree more about Tolkien being a better world-builder than story-teller though, haha. I think there are more people out there who agree with that sentiment than would openly admit it.

Return to “Tolkien Movie Talk”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest