Re: Let's really dig in to Tolkiin and Lord of the Rings,
@Joseph, regarding music, light motiefs is quite an acceptable idea in opera or film score for that matter, and I don't disagree with shore's use, however most composers will make some attempt to alter and blend these motiefs with either what is going on at the time, or other motiefs. One of the best examples of this is found in Berlioz Symphany fantastique, which tells the story about a young musician day dreaming about an unrequited love. The first movement contains a small tune represented his beloved which is repeated several times. when however you get you to the last movement, where he is in the grip of a nightmare about murdering his beloved and seeing her as a demon in hell surrounded by witches, that same tune is played again, but in a mocking way as an accompanyment to an overlying witches dance theme which is the main theme of that movement, thus, the motief is maintained and reintroduced, but i n an altered way.
Shore does some of this it is true, for example repeating the lorien theme as a march played by brass when the elves arrive at helms deep, but usually he simply just repeats. Also, when not repeating he doesn't seem to manage to come up with anything that distinctive. It is as if he made the score to the first film and perhaps the rohirim theme then continued repeating that and just added a bit extra, with a few dramatic string chords chucked in here are there for good matter.
In fairness much as I did used to make jokes about it, I've come to have more regard for the soundtrack, but it's still not to my mind one of the better adaptations asociated with tolkien.
Btw, at the moment I'm actually trying to find the recording of Donald swan's settings of Tolkien's poetry, since that was the adaptation Tolkien was actually alive for, and with his intensive use of harmony Swan was perfect to make such changes (there are even recordings of Tolkien singing this himself).
As regards the nazgaul, I'm afraid joseph that is made fairly clear early on that the nazgaul can sense the ring, Aragorn even specifically states this on weather top in the book. It'd also be pretty stupid of the dark lord to send his principle servants after the ring, off to the shire on their own if they couldn't actually see it when it's in front of their collective noses, "sorry boss, --- -we might have had the ring, we're not really sure!" .
Regarding robbert stevens in the bbc version Bryan, I do agree he's not exactly convincing, being a bit too posh, indeed that is one of the few less than convincing castings in the bbc radio play. It's al so surprising given that shortly after in 1984, Robbert stevens would go on to play Abner brown in John Nasefield's box of delight, a criminal genius a powerful sorcerer who mascarades as a respectable vicar, ---- a part he played amazingly well as you'd imagine.
I'd actually like to hear the american radio play just for interests' sake, and of course don't forgit miss pronouncing wasn't just done in the states, the 1968 bbc adaptation of the hobbit makes some fairly serious errors as well, ---- who the heck is gol loom? .
@Dark abomination, while I do agree about the second and third films being far less respectful of Tolkien and far more taken up with hollywood tropes, at the same time there are still bits I like in both films. Golum is done very well, and I love the way tree beerd comes out as really quite disturbing. The battle also has some quite nice moments for all it goes on way too long, ---- I love the scene when their seeing the orc army arrive tramping through the mists and you hear nothing but the stomp of their feet.
Like wise the dead marshes were very nicely done and while I disliked Theoden in The Two towers, since he seemed to sacrifice any integrity or military genius just to make Aragorn look better (since of course forbid that anyone else is as good a general as the big hero), in Return of the King he did improve hugely, mostly because of being less useless. I also quite like Eowin, especially given how much charisma griemar has, ---- I never thought of him as actually some sort of apprentice evil wizard, and while his use of "a spell" is more of the hollywood blatant over symplification (in the book remember he just convinced Theoden of his own helplessless by playing on his old age), at the same time I did rather like the way the character was played sort of as Saruman's lacky.
All in all I'm most sorry that the series just didn't live up to the promise in the first, and while I certainly don't regard the second two films as total failures, at the same time I am really quite sad to see what liberties they took, and I would actually agree with christopher tolkien on that point, ---- though perhaps less so with regards to the first film.
Jackson did however do a very good job with the hobbit despite minigorn and the random subboss azog, and the rather strange appearence of radaghast (though as this was silvester mccoy, the 7th doctor himself this wasn't as bad as it could've been, albeit you do wonder why he wasn't in lotr).
I'm just a little worried what jackson will do with the next two films and how much of the hobbit will survive.
URL: http://forum.audiogames.net/viewtopic.php?pid=142732#p142732
_______________________________________________ Audiogames-reflector mailing list Audiogames-reflector@sabahattin-gucukoglu.com http://sabahattin-gucukoglu.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/audiogames-reflector
