Also see:
The Nature of Faramir? - NZ Strider
Hall of Fire chat transcript - multiple fans
Defending PJ's Faramir - Teri
Weighing in on Faramir - multiple fans

David Wenham (Faramir)
Peter and the writers made a decision to give [Faramir] more jeopardy than he has in the book to increase the dramatic tension. If you shot what was in the book, the character doesn't change - he's inherently not dramatic and you couldn't put that up on screen. So hopefully the people who are obsessed with the Tolkien novel will understand that, and go along with it. I think they will, all those people have trusted Peter so far and I don't think that's going to change.

Peter Jackson (Director)
[Faramir has an "evil" touch] for a short time, yeah. This is really where being a filmmaker differs from being a writer. You make decisions as a filmmaker and, rightly or wrongly, you change things if you think they need to be changed. We wanted the episode with Faramir in this particular film to have a certain degree of tension. Frodo and Sam were captured. Their journey had become more complicated by the fact that they are prisoners. Which they are in the book for a brief period of time. But then, very quickly in the book, Tolkien sort of backs away from there and, as you say, he reveals Faramir to be very pure. At one point, Faramir says, "Look, I wouldn't even touch the ring if I saw it lying on the side of the road." For us, as filmmakers, that sort of thing creates a bit of a problem because we've spent a lot of time in the last film and in this one to establish this ring as incredibly powerful. Then to suddenly come to a character that says, "Oh, I'm not interested in that," to suddenly go against everything that we've established ourselves is sort of going against our own rules. We certainly acknowledge that Faramir should not do what Boromir did and that he ultimately has the strength to say, "No, you go on your way and I understand." We wanted to make it slightly harder, to have a little more tension than there was in the book. But that's where that sort of decision comes from.

Philippa Boyens (Screenwriter)
Faramir's character is completely static in the books, and thus wouldn't translate well filmically. We wanted to extend his character to give him more of a journey, and it would seem incongruous were Faramir immediately sea-green incorruptible; whereas all other Men in the film (even Aragorn) definitely have to wrestle with their conscience to a greater or lesser extent.

Quickbeam (Theonering.net staff member)
The whole Faramir thing is the biggest controversy, if we can call it that. It is criminal to many fans that he seems so unlikable. Even I was a bit surprised at how I emotionally reacted to the character the first time I saw TTT. But I've seen it three times now and I can offer something more to this discussion. Here is the really fascinating part about the "altered" Faramir. In this movie, the two hobbits are not allowed to sit in Henneth Annun and have a comfy lunch while their friends are suffering through war and strife west of the River Anduin. It gets tough for them too. The screenwriters are hell bent on raising the stakes for Frodo and Sam (and of course, Faramir) every step of the way. We will see more threatening situations come upon these characters than are actually in the books. Why? Because it is more interesting to see how they all react in the face of such threats. It really is as Philippa Boyens suggested: allowing a character like Faramir to change is filmically interesting. He may start out as bullying and myopic in his attitude, but events in the screenplay allow him to judge the weight of his conscience (letting Frodo go) versus the need to please his overbearing father (taking the Ring to Denethor). Personally, I find David Wenham's character really fascinating on a whole new level. No, he is not quite the same "nice guy" that I remember from the book. But this Faramir is going to turn around, just a bit more, and you can sense it when you look in his eyes. He will pay dearly the next time he speaks to his father; and don't you think the audience will feel something for him then? This is the kind of screenwriting the treats the character with respect and looks forward to what will make him complete when his story arc is done.

Elanor (Fan)
I want to answer some folk who think Faramir is "just like Boromir" in this version. I don’t see this at all. Unlike Boromir, Faramir is not immediately drawn to the Ring. He simply wants to know who these two (and Gollum) are, where they are going and why. He is thoughtful, not compulsive or combative, he is introspective where Boromir was anything but. I never see Faramir tempted by the Ring and his attitude is indeed consistent with "I would not take it if I saw it lying on the highway". It is his FATHER who wants it, and he knows this. After two viewings and much musing, I no longer have any trouble with the "changes" made by the writers and I trust that there will be some pretty interesting fireworks in film three once Faramir comes before Denethor. How he and Eowyn will fall in love I can’t fathom and I hope no one tells me. However, there are two issues in this section that still make me uneasy and I would love to hear other comments on it. I miss Faramir’s relationship with Frodo. I think it’s too bad that these two characters don’t really make a connection. The "pity of Bilbo" for Gollum is beautifully echoed in the "pity of Faramir" for Frodo and I mourn that loss in this version, even though a drop of it is there. On my first viewing I didn’t understand the close ups of Wenham’s seemingly blank face. Second time through I saw a lot more going on but it only made me more eager to have him talk, to voice those feelings. I want him to explain to Frodo why he feels he has to take them to MT and perhaps in doing so, we could see that he does not really have his heart in that act, but is constrained by the will of his father. I now have no problem with how the scenes play out. I agree completely with those who have said that clearly one of the filmmakers' reasons for going to Osgiliath is so at the end of the movie Sauron will know the Ring is in Gondor. It is safe to assuming the Nazgul will quickly report this back to Sauron. However, Sauron will think that the men of Gondor are using hobbits as HE would, easily controlled slaves, (he knows nothing about hobbits except that they are small and come from the Shire). There is nothing in the scene to suggest that he would figure out that a hobbit has been appointed to destroy it. If the Nazgul "saw" Sam's move he would interpret it as another slave grabbing for The Ring to USE it, not to protect his friend. I think this is a good development in the plot and anyway, the "change" is completely worth it for what Elijah and Sean bring to the scene. I also think the location serves another purpose and that is to introduce us to Gondor, to establish how close it is to Mordor, and how it is constantly under attack.

Back