Re: (Next to no) discussion on extended version of TTT?

"jere7my tho?rpe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>  "Aris Katsaris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "MasterDebater" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > I agree that they could have put in 'The Voice of Saruman' as a denouement
> > > of 6 minutes (cut a minute out of what they had) then followed by the
final
> > > scene with Frodo, Sam, and Gollum. I guess it was too long.
> >
> > *snort* And yet they had time for silly falling-off-cliffs scenes...
>
>      Once again, it wasn't about time; it was about inserting a
> seven-minute denouement after the climax of the movie.  Jackson is
> willing to do that for the EEs, but not the theatrical release.  And the
> VoS will be back for the EE of RotK, so it's not like we lost it.

The theatrical version lost it. The theatrical version is supposed to be
as much a self-contained work as the extended edition version, isn't
it?

> > But that's also what Boromir did. "A chance for Faramir, captain of
> > Gondor, to show his quality" isn't that much different than Boromir's
> > imaginings in the book about using the ring to lead armies against
> > Mordor and his personal glory.
>
>      For Pete's sake, man, rent a DVD player and watch the EE.

Tell me, if someone finds "Lord of the Rings" (the books) flawed in
certain respects, e.g. the character of Galadriel not well-characterized
or whatever --  will you tell him to read "for Pete's sake, man read the
Silmarillion"? Sure, they may get a better characterization of the character
in question there, but it's not actually *relevant* to discussing the quality
of "Lord of the Rings" itself. It's only relevant when you are discussing
Tolkien's work as a whole.

If I find flaws in a work, then I find flaws in a work.
If I find flaws in the theatrical version of the movie, then you can't say
I should have seen the extended edition instead. Perhaps the extended
edition wouldn't have those flaws, but the theatrical version *does*
have them IMO.

And the theatrical version is as real as the extended one.

I will watch the extended edition when it's convenient for me to
do so. And I will keep on discussing the theatrical version which
I have full knowledge of, having seen it several times on its
entirety.

And the existence of the "extended edition" is irrelevant when
discussing the quality of the theatrical version.

> Jackson
> makes it blatant and explicit that Faramir succeeds where Boromir fails;
> he puts them in parallel situations, and Faramir is the one who gives up
> the Ring.  He also makes it clear that Faramir is trying to fulfill his
> father's wishes when he takes Frodo to Osgiliath, and is not, in fact,
> corrupted by the Ring.

Mad glimmer in his eyes aside?

Aris Katsaris