Gandalf falling scene, pro/con (was Re: ROTK news about Saruman's scenes - SPOILERS)

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Calvin Rice) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (zosdad) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Binkelman) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > > Personally, I think the opening of TTT, with the
> > > flashback to Gandalf falling with the Balrog was NOT a cohesive
> > > opening at all. I think that scene would have been better inserted as
> > > a flashback when Gandalf reveals himself to Aragorn and company in the
> > > forest. I would've preferred to open with Frodo and Sam realizing they
> > > are lost. 
> > Wow, that's the silliest thing I've heard in awhile...
> 
> Nothing silly about it at all.  PJ's way was exactly the way Saturday serials
> used to open, with the previous week's cliffhanger resolved, showing how
> the hero survived after all.  This sort of opening would have been right
> for Indiana Jones sequels, but not for Tolkien's book.
> 
> -cr

Like I said, silly.  No cliffhanger was resolved -- if you recall,
Gandalf had already *fallen* from the dang cliff in FOTR.  Rather, the
scene showed us that Gandalf kicks so much ass that falling from the
cliff doesn't phase him.  That scene put the cliffhanger back into the
movie, if you like.  Maybe Gandalf's not dead after all...maybe
there's still hope.  It certainly made me sit up and pay attention,
especially because I've read the books a million times, it caught me
completely by surprise and blew me away.  It was artistic license in
the best sense of the word -- a little detail left to our imagination
by Tolkien, fleshed out on film in spectacular fashion.

I really don't get the ultra-literalist opinion.  The LOTR movies are
the most faithful, careful, rendition on film of any substantial book
that I've ever seen.  Generally only short stories or short books
convert to film well, because there's just too much stuff in a book. 
But PJ & crew somehow managed to get the money, people, talent, and
vision to do the books like they should be done.  No, the movies
aren't *exactly* like the book, but heck, they're close enough. 
Unlike most movies, these are clearly made *for* the people who've
read the books, not for people who haven't.  I've already noticed that
most people who haven't read the books don't like the movies much --
too many characters, too complicated, what's going on, etc.

All MHO, of course...