Why Scissors?

Picture 2

 

Why do directors only use scissors?

The English translation (with a little context mixed in): Ian wants to know why directors like Peter Jackson (above) don’t cut and paste more than they just plain cut out parts.

As an author, I know I’d only sell my novel’s movie rights to someone who would let me be a big part of the process. I would want to make the scene cuts, and tell them “No way, absolutely not! She wouldn’t fall for him, and she can’t fall in love with him because it’s part of her character not to!” Etcetera, etcetera.

I would want to make sure the director didn’t screw everything up. Problem is, the director wants to add a little spice. That’s how directors “sign” their “masterpieces”. I think anyone, and everyone, would have done a great job with the Hobbit, and the Lord of The Rings movies, because the fan base was already established. Everyone and their brother, sister, uncle, aunt, cousin, mother, father, and their friend’s family(ies) would be watching the movies no matter what, because the author of the book did all of the fan base work.

Don’t take me the wrong way. You could think I’m bashing Peter Jackson, but this isn’t really about him, his movie Fellowship of the Ring (based on J.R.R. Tolkein’s Fellowship of the Ring) just got me thinking about this hot button issue.

I am not usually on the “I didn’t like the movie ’cause it wasn’t the book” side. I’m typically the the first person to say “Of course it wasn’t the book! You came to watch a movie, you doofus!” For whatever reason though, I can’t get over what Peter Jackson did in the FOTR! (Fellowship Of The Ring.:-) )

Again, this isn’t about him, but directors all of the world. Take the guy who messed up Prince Caspian for example. I don’t know his name, but he messed up the whole movie by putting everything out of order! I’ll take a little stylistic whatnot, but complete redo says, “I don’t think the author had a clue what he was doing when he wrote the book!”

That is unacceptable!

My father, my brother, and I, have just recently finished reading the Lord of the Rings series. We still have the images depicted by Tolkien emblazoned in our minds. Wether it be the beautiful landscapes, the faces, the objects, or just the air, Tolkien described it masterfully.

We have the story fresh in our minds, and we can easily observe the powerful structure of the LOTR series, which is really just one long book.

If there was one thing I had to compliment him on, it would most definitely be his characters.

Gandalf: Kind and loving; a fearful wizard of power. Friend to all; mentor to all. Sam: Loyal, loyal, loyal, loyal, loyal, witty, funny, loyal, loyal, loyal, loyal, loyal, loyal, loyal, loyal, loyal, and loyal. Frodo: Bold, and afraid. Self-controlled, Ring-controlled. Wise, humble. Incredibly strong, pitifully weak.

The pure genius in each character is perfected with a certain time aspect. It takes time to like someone. Time develops trust, love, and all other ingredients necessary in a relationship.

Peter Jackson through time out the window in the Fellowship of the Ring. Why? He needed more time? Yes, he did. He had to show the subplot of Saruman building up the Uruk-Hai. He had to show the orcs tearing down the trees.

But, why not show them in their own time? Why not copy the book that you’re modeling the movie after?

Why not tell it as the flashback it is?

I don’t rightly know, and I may not ever know. I certainly hope that’s not the case though, but as of now, directors around the world leave me wondering: “Why scissors?”

One Reply to “Why Scissors?”

  1. I don’t think that this is one of my better posts, but I was writing from the heart, as they say.
    I was writing while still in the thick of the disagreement with directors ruining books.

Comments are closed.