About the naming of the inn: I like it, but I'm not sure that Bard is the one to whom Balin should have made the suggestion. Would not the proprietor be more appropriate? Or is that Bard? 🙂
Edit: Also, Balin says that he was inspired by the Green Dragon in the Shire, after which, Bilbo corrects him that it was, in fact, the Green Dragon. I'm thinking that your brain may have just revolted against the error while typing it out.
Re-Edit: Ok, I see what you're doing now. I'm not really sold on the joke, but I retract my earlier objection. 🙂
So, I figured out why the joke doesn't work for me. Because Balin mentions the Green Dragon immediately before, it makes the joke itself rather confusing. Since Balin is the one who brought up the punch line, it feels kind of like a "Dad Joke" to me.
So, I figured out why the joke doesn't work for me. Because Balin mentions the Green Dragon immediately before, it makes the joke itself rather confusing. Since Balin is the one who brought up the punch line, it feels kind of like a "Dad Joke" to me.
I thought Bilbo needing to remind Balin of something he just said would make it funnier and illustrate that Balin is not thinking clearly, but I can take it out if you think it does not work.
So, I've been looking at the scene where Angrod tells Thingol about the Kinslaying. It seems like an awfully long stretch of dialogue for an actor to say without interruption, especially in a tense situation. Also, that he continues to tell the story the way he does suggests desperation rather than anger. Finrod's aside to him while in full view of Thingol and his guards would likely come across as presumptuous to them. It also reads a bit slow for someone being dragged from a room.
So, I've been looking at the scene where Angrod tells Thingol about the Kinslaying. It seems like an awfully long stretch of dialogue for an actor to say without interruption, especially in a tense situation. Also, that he continues to tell the story the way he does suggests desperation rather than anger. Finrod's aside to him while in full view of Thingol and his guards would likely come across as presumptuous to them. It also reads a bit slow for someone being dragged from a room.
I agree that Angrod's recap of Season 3 is a bit much on the exposition front. There would likely be a way to imply that he tells the story rather than to actually have him tell the story.
One common technique is to have a scene that brings people together and establishes that one of them is going to 'catch up' the others on the current situation. Then, you cut to the next scene, where they are all seated/listening, and the tale is finished. One of the listeners then says 'So you're telling me....' and does a 'highlights' version of the recap. In this version, 'following' a guard out of the room and then coming back at the tail end of Angrod's speech would be the natural way to interrupt the story time.
...And then there's the Princess Bride version.
"Let me explain. No, there is no time. Let me sum up. Buttercup is marry Humperdink in little less than half an hour, so all we have to do is get in, break up the wedding, steal the princess, make our escape. After I kill Count Rugen." That is delivered in 12 seconds, but works better in a comedic context then a tense/serious one, clearly! 😉
There are times and situations when you can get away with monologuing. Telling the audience a recap of a story they already know isn't typically one of them.
Here are the final(ish) scripts for Season 4. I am still happy to go back and make minor changes if anyone catches problems or typos that I've missed. Rather than posting new threads, I'll just change the files attached here. I want to thank everyone involved in SilmFilm for the wealth of...
forums.signumuniversity.org
On page 46, when Thingol delivers the Ban, there is no reference to the public wearing of jewels. In Silm Film, it was decided that this would be part of the Ban to give a visual component to those who comply and those who flaunt the ban in this media.
I realize that isn't in the original dialogue from the text, but just as discussion of Galadriel is worked into the conversation, we can certainly add a line about Noldor who adorn themselves in jewels expressing agreement with Fëanor, who slew all those innocent elves over his stolen jewels.
Here are the final(ish) scripts for Season 4. I am still happy to go back and make minor changes if anyone catches problems or typos that I've missed. Rather than posting new threads, I'll just change the files attached here. I want to thank everyone involved in SilmFilm for the wealth of...
forums.signumuniversity.org
On page 46, when Thingol delivers the Ban, there is no reference to the public wearing of jewels. In Silm Film, it was decided that this would be part of the Ban to give a visual component to those who comply and those who flaunt the ban in this media.
I realize that isn't in the original dialogue from the text, but just as discussion of Galadriel is worked into the conversation, we can certainly add a line about Noldor who adorn themselves in jewels expressing agreement with Fëanor, who slew all those innocent elves over his stolen jewels.
That oversight was deliberate. I am very opposed to the public wearing of jewels being part of the Ban.
While I understand that this was an idea brought up at the large-scale planning stage, we certainly don’t keep all of those ideas, and I believe this is one of those ideas that we should not keep. Thingol banning jewels is petty, pointless, and will only cause problems later in the story.
A visual component is not necessary to convey the Ban. In fact, I have made a point of working references to the Ban on Quenya into scenes from Episode 8 onwards. If the severity of the Ban has not been sufficiently conveyed, I would rather rewrite those episodes than add a reference to the banning of jewels.
The hosts did not comment on Thingol not banning jewels in the script review for this episode and seemed to like the delivery of the Ban as it stood in the script. We also have nothing planned for later seasons that would necessitate a ban on jewels.
When the Hosts discussed the Ban, they said it would include jewels. They came back to this idea later, and discussed the various attitudes of the different Feanorean brothers towards personal adornment as it related to the Ban. Therefore, by executive decision, the Ban includes jewels in Silm Film.
When the Hosts discussed the Ban, they said it would include jewels. They came back to this idea later, and discussed the various attitudes of the different Feanorean brothers towards personal adornment as it related to the Ban. Therefore, by executive decision, the Ban includes jewels in Silm Film.
Given that this decision was made several years ago at this point, challenging it would require retreading of material that the Hosts just aren't going to do. Despite your opposition, this decision is going to stand for now.
You are correct, these discussions happened before these scripts were written. To my knowledge, the Execs never changed their mind on this. Corey Olsen did express surprise over how much characters were discussing the Ban in later episodes, but he never okayed the Ban being language-only after deciding, on two separate occasions, that it would be language and jewels.
If whether or not the Ban extends to jewels comes up in a session or becomes relevant to discussion of a later season, I’ll point out to the Execs that jewels are not banned in the scripts and we can address the issue then.
