June 14, 2001

Reply to RingGirl

I have to agree in part with the comment that the hobbits (and other characters--don't get me started) might have been better cast.

No offense, but you're criminally insane, right? If I may enlighten you: you are one of the only individuals I have encountered throughout all my travels that is dismayed with the casting. The casting is SUPERB! Simply superb. How can you make such a blanket statement and then leave it like that. I don't know who in all the world you thought would be better -- but the rest of the world disagrees.

My fears that the computerized shrinking would look fake were realized. The image looks like just that--two images of different proportions superimposed on one another. Not only is the overall height of the character diminished, which would be spendid if it stopped at that--but their hands, feet, and especially their heads look much too small compared to the other people in the picture.

Huh? So you wanted little bodies, with big heads and hands? Um... that's not what Tolkien had in mind. The hobbits are supposed to be smaller in every detail -- hands and heads included! That's one of the main reasons Jackson was using normal-sized actors and not dwarves. As for it looking "fake" -- how so? Why don't you give some kind of example to support your statement? Once again, everyone who has seen more then 4 minutes of footage total has said that the scaling of the characters works extraordinarily well. Obviously your fears were unfounded.

While hobbits may have been described by Tolkien as being perfectly proportioned little people half the size of humans, I'm sure he did not mean their heads were only half the size of human heads as well! This frame looks very odd to me in the trailer, and makes.

You DO realize that this statement makes no sense, right? Reread it... you're essentially contradicting yourself.

P.J is obviously wanting star appeal before anything else, not that star appeal is always bad; but in this case, the group of people who would by far be the most appreciative of this movie must take their lumps and defer to the greater popular culture: those who will only be drawn to the movie (supposedly) if Liv Tyler gets third billing. *sigh*

Star appeal? STAR APPEAL? Oh yes... I suppose I forgot the massive "star appeal" of Viggo Mortensen, Dominic Monaghan, Sean Astin, Ian McKellen, Andy Serkis, Billy Boyd, John Rhys-Davies, Sean Bean, and Orlando Bloom. These people are not household names. Do you even know what "star appeal" means? These people were chosen for there acting ability, not for their supposed "star appeal" which doesn't exist.

And how about Viggo Mortenson as Aragorn? While many of us are vehemently objecting to Liv Tyler as Arwen because she's too young and too hip (and seemingly not quite intelligent enough--forgive me Liv--for the introspective Arwen), how can we reconcile the very pretty, very young Mortenson as the grim ranger who has "had a hard life and a long"? Like his noble lady, Aragorn is not young; additionally, nor is he much to look at. The richness and the depth of the story will suffer somewhat with the casting of such young, less dimensional actors as Tyler and Mortenson.

Your kidding me, right? You've GOT to be kidding me. Once again, you are among the smallest minority I've ever seen. Mortensen looks pretty? Have you even seen the movie stills? And do you know how old Mortensen is? He is by no means "young" I'll tell you that much. Truly, I can't even spend more time on this. You are a tiny, tiny, tiny minority -- probably one of those people who is displeased with everything concerning these films and so you pick one thing and rants about it. Get over it. You are wrong.

And while I'm on a role, I just want to add that if P.J. truly felt he had to go with a young, non-British heroine, why not put one where it would count? Eowyn's steely defiance and warrior-saavy might have been served well by someone other than Miranda Otto, who at thirty-something hardly seems to fit the bill as the impressionable maiden who has a girlish crush on Aragron. Leelee Sobieski would have been my choice, while Madelyn Stowe (or someone Madelyn Stow-ish) or an un-pregant Catherine Zeta-Jones or even a Sophie Marceau (insert almost any name other than Liv Tyler) would have made a far superior Arwen. Ok, if we have to go with a pretty face for Aragron, I would vote for Liam Neeson--at least he's got a bit of age on his side. Nevertheless, ultimately, I would have voted for a cast of unknowns, but who has ever heard of such a preposterous thing? I must concede it's all about the Benjamins; who am I to say anything about it? We all have to make a living in the end.

I find this paragraph humorous. You go through a list of well-known actors who might contain *gasp* a great deal of "star appeal" -- and then recant and declare you would cast unknowns. That's funny. What's funnier is that you don't agree with Jackson's casting -- which is comprised mostly of either A) Excellent actors who are well-known amonst their circles, or B) Complete and utter unknowns who impressed Jackson so much that he cast them.

Where was your argument again? I guess you're just another one of those people who feel a need to trash the adaptation. You're in the minority -- your arguments don't stand up to even a slight breeze.