Posted: December 11, 1999 at 12:02:23: by Ecthelion
: : Not being an expert on the dress, armor or of any time period, : : I can only comment on my common perceptions. On the one hand : : the film shouldn't look like Ivanhoe or even Excaliber. The : : characters wear a hodgepodge of boots, trousers, waistcoats or : : vests, cloaks, and hats along with the chainmail and perhaps : : some body armor. The Hobbits especially seem to dress in more : : "modern" styles, though that may have been a leftover from the : : Hobbit, not to mention the "clock" on Bilbo's mantle...: Unfortunately, Jackson's hobbits are dressed in medieval clothing, and I guess we'll have to wait and see if they have clocks. In general I agree with Martin's comments, although the Guards of the Citadel should indeed have an Egyptian look and feel to their helms (they're wearing chainmail, so the Norman knight comparison, conceded by Tolkien, is acceptable in that respect). : :...Certainly we have some anachronisms here. But overall the : : world of Middle-Earth should have a style and feel of it's own, : : rather than be reminiscent of either the all too familiar : : medieval style films we've all seen, or the current : : Hollywoodish sword and sorcery films, such as Conan. There : : certainly seems to be no hardships in the life of the Hobbits : : of the Shire, nor in many of the places to which they travel. : : Until the desolation of Mordor there aren't many places that : : indicate the kind of hard life and miserable existance we : : extend to medieval or pre-medieval peasant life in Europe. : That's the problem. People have been conditioned to look at fantasy worlds as if they are set in medieval Europe. Tolkien didn't have medieval Europe in mind. He borrowed freely from all ages and regions for his world. He wanted it to feel familiar and comfortable, identifiable for his European and American audiences, but he wanted to give it a variety of cultures and influences to make it seem broader. : And yet the ancientness of Middle-earth is seldom mentioned in discussions. Rarely do I see anyone speak of the ruinous cities, the lost civilizations, the failing knowledge, the dwindling memories of greater ages and glory. People get all hung up on the swords and chainmail (and chainmail was used by the Romans centuries before the Middle Ages occurred). : Much that Tolkien alluded to is lost on the modern audience simply because -- and I say this in no pejorative fashion -- many of his readers are simply ignorant or misinformed about the past. And we have a lot of past to learn about. Tolkien had studied the past for many years, more than most people do. He possessed a knowledge which even for his generation was considerable. : What disappoints me most about the movies (from a Tolkien purist's point of view) is that they apparently are going to pander to the ignorance of the audience, rather than be faithful to the original (which would cost nothing more, and would help show that Jackson really understands Tolkien's world). But people may feel that waistcoats and clocks would look silly. It's a shame. :::Excellent point. Personally, my great fear is that he will 'sell out' to the audiences, and go the way that might have more money in it, instead of going the way things are described in the books themselves. It is my opinion that any movies about the works of Tolkien should be made the way Tolkien would have wanted his works to be portrayed on screen, and I think the only way to do that is to be faithful to the original, as Michael said.
|