Going off our discussion in class, on how Tolkien’s choices were deliberate in creating his tale, and how even a slight change would alert the story completely and the impact of the scenes, I’m going to explore, once again, the choices filmmakers made in comparison to how the book was written. I find these differences very interesting as I grew up on the movies—my mother’s a huge Tolkien fan—and had never considered reading the books until this January. (Maybe slightly pondered it when I signed up for the class in November of last year, but it wasn’t really on my radar even then.)
Specifically, what I want to look at is the drastic tonal difference regarding the Mines of Moria scene. In the book, Gandalf and Aragorn discuss the pros and cons of venturing through the mines in which Aragorn is against it, warning Gandalf it would be perilous for him (foreshadowing much), while Gandalf is all for it. Contrastingly, the filmmakers took Aragorn out of the equation completely, had Gandalf incredibly wary of going into the mines, as he had some sense of his fate there, and left the decision up to the ring bearer, Frodo.
This pressure, placed on Frodo, to decide the fellowships' next course of action then places the blame of what happens in the mines on him, in a sense. Whereas when Gandalf made the decision, his fate fell on him only. This change compounds the grief Frodo feels at the loss of Gandalf as he also appears to feel a sense of guilt over the outcome too. He is more crushed by it than anyone else, while in the book, the grief seems equally dispersed amongst the group.
This difference alters the way the audience perceives this scene as well as the events that follow. While the course that is followed is pretty much identical, the atmosphere is not the same.
Elwing,
ReplyDeleteI had never thought of the choices the filmmakers made compared to Tolkien! I actually had this section in our recent class activity, and I didn't even think about shifting the decision onto Frodo. I believe a major pro of the decision is that it helps Frodo begin to feel it is more real as well and makes him feel the weight of the journey on him. It adds another moment of growth for him. Although of course a con is that it makes Gandalf seem more... foresighted? I'm looking to say, in the book (as we talked about in class) it seems as if Gandalf's trust of his old knowledge can get the best of him at times and even he too can make the wrong decision. It also gives Aragorn a moment of feeling like he is becoming more of a leader, as before they were relying more on Gandalf and so he could feel as if he can trust his own gut more. This is obviously lost in the movies, but I think as it is (mainly) Frodo's story that it is a good decision. Which metadecision do you prefer? Tolkien's or the film-maker's?
Elendil