Last Movie You Watched

[Jaakko Keskinen]

I think Peter Jackson utterly failed to understand Tolkien's work. He even failed to understand so simple thing as that The Eye of Sauron is a metaphor, not a huge literal eye-ball on top of Barad-Dur.

[Karl Henning]

I think Peter Jackson utterly failed to understand Tolkien's work. He even failed to understand so simple thing as that The Eye of Sauron is a metaphor, not a huge literal eye-ball on top of Barad-Dur.

Indeed.

[MN Dave]

The Eye of Sauron

I've already got one.

[Karl Henning]

("I told them we already got one!")

[Cato]

Thread Duty:

Over Monday and Tuesday evenings, the two-hour Decoding Die Hard, a fine balance of informative and great fun.

As a result, last night I watched Die Hard itself;  and yes, it remains wonderfully fresh.

I shall hold off on watching Die Harder . . . will save it for Christmas . . . .

Is that the one with the Sibelius Second Symphony in the soundtrack?

[Karl Henning]

Die Harder is Finlandia (the Second Symphony doesn't appear, I don't think.)

Which both nodded to the use of Ode to Joy in Die Hard, and reflected the fact that the director of Die Harder, Renny Harlin, is a Finn.

Separately, I was a little surprised to learn that someone with the name Renny Harlin is Finnish (even allowing for "Renny" being a nickname), but I see on Wikipedia that he was born Lauri Mauritz Harjola, which is full fadom Finn.

[Cato]

Die Harder is Finlandia (the Second Symphony doesn't appear, I don't think.)

Which both nodded to the use of Ode to Joy in Die Hard, and reflected the fact that the director of Die Harder, Renny Harlin, is a Finn.

Separately, I was a little surprised to learn that someone with the name Renny Harlin is Finnish (even allowing for "Renny" being a nickname), but I see on Wikipedia that he was born Lauri Mauritz Harjola, which is full fadom Finn.

Finlandia was used, right!  And understandable, since the director hails from Finland!

[André]

Finlandia was used, right!  And understandable, since the director hails from Finland!

I remember watching one of the films in the series. With its crude fake snow and ice, it had me giggling. I was thinking « this is snow for someone who lives in the Tropics ». And you say the director was a Finn?? 

When the theme of Finlandia was intoned I burst out laughing. It was just too much!

[Karl Henning]

I remember watching one of the films in the series. With its crude fake snow and ice, it had me giggling. I was thinking « this is snow for someone who lives in the Tropics ». And you say the director was a Finn?? 

That was one of the problems with production . . . they kept having to move farther north.  And, it was generally cold enough, but then . . . insufficiently snowy.  But yes, there were shoots for which they had soap-flake snow, and Wm Sadler recounts starting a scene, and looking the tough villain, and then a soapflake got into his eyes, and it burns, and ruined the take . . . .

[Madiel]

I think Peter Jackson utterly failed to understand Tolkien's work. He even failed to understand so simple thing as that The Eye of Sauron is a metaphor, not a huge literal eye-ball on top of Barad-Dur.

Much as you're failing to understand the difficulty in filming a metaphor.

[Karl Henning]

Well, there are techniques for conveying the Eye as something which Frodo perceives, which oppresses Frodo, without it being a radio tower.  I do think it a poor choice, rather than an insurmountable technical challenge.

[Madiel]

Anyway, what is the basis for this claim that it's a metaphor?

First wiki I found, says that this is a popular belief and also a false one. Certainly, my own recollection is that the books describe a genuine eye.

http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Eye_of_Sauron

[Ken B]

Anyway, what is the basis for this claim that it's a metaphor?

First wiki I found, says that this is a popular belief and also a false one. Certainly, my own recollection is that the books describe a genuine eye.

http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Eye_of_Sauron

And of course an object can be a metaphor too.







FWIW, I remember an eye searching out Frodo.

[Jaakko Keskinen]

Much as you're failing to understand the difficulty in filming a metaphor.

And why in the holy mother of fudge should it be filmed? Something that is not shown is much more effective and threatening.

[Ken B]

And why in the holy mother of fudge should it be filmed? Something that is not shown is much more effective and threatening.

I still quake with fear at the thought of President Gore.

[Karl Henning]

Anyway, what is the basis for this claim that it's a metaphor?

First wiki I found, says that this is a popular belief and also a false one. Certainly, my own recollection is that the books describe a genuine eye.

http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Eye_of_Sauron

What [lotr.wikia.com] says:

Contrary to popular belief, the Eye of Sauron was a visible, though perhaps not tangible presence during the events of The Lord of the Rings, made very clear when it appeared through a window when the clouds parted in Mordor.

If I read this right, it says the Eye appeared.

What Tolkien wrote (in that same article):

Far off the shadows of Sauron hung; but torn by some gust of wind out of the world, or else moved by some great disquiet within, the mantling clouds swirled, and for a moment drew aside; and then he saw, rising black, blacker and darker than the vast shades amid which it stood, the cruel pinnacles and iron crown of the topmost tower of Barad-dûr. One moment only it stared out, but as from some great window immeasurably high there stabbed northward a flame of red, the flicker of a piercing Eye; and then the shadows were furled again and the terrible vision was removed. The Eye was not turned to them: it was gazing north to where the Captains of the West stood at bay, and thither all its malice was now bent, as the Power moved to strike its deadly blow; but Frodo at that dreadful glimpse fell as one stricken mortally.

So, what was seen was, a flame of red, and then what is reasonably interpreted as a metaphorical apposite, the flicker of a piercing Eye.  Even there, it is not (strictly speaking) the Eye which is seen, but a flicker.  Furthermore:  ... the terrible vision was removed—not, the terrible sight was removed.

If you feel I am misreading this, and that Tolkien writes of a physical eye, please draw me a diagram.

[Jaakko Keskinen]

Interesting, Karl! Thanks.

[Karl Henning]

Although we discussed it earlier, I didn't comprehend the solution then. Tonight, watching Die Hard With a Vengeance, must be for the fourth or fifth time...and at last! I've sorted out the puzzle with the water jugs!

I guess I wouldn't have survived the bomb....

[Madiel]

And why in the holy mother of fudge should it be filmed? Something that is not shown is much more effective and threatening.

Yes. It's DEEPLY effective in the visual medium of film when the characters regularly refer to something in dialogue and the audience just takes their word for it that the thing exists. 

[Jaakko Keskinen]

Yes. It's DEEPLY effective in the visual medium of film when the characters regularly refer to something in dialogue and the audience just takes their word for it that the thing exists. 

Much more effective than having a literal flaming eye on top of a tower as a freaking spotlight, anyway.