Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [mythsoc] Movie announcement

Expand Messages
  • David Bratman
    ... I know about the one where they all (as adults) get involved in a war between A.E. Waite and Aleister Crowley, but I missed the one you recall. (I haven t
    Message 1 of 49 , Oct 27, 2006
      David Emerson <emerdavid@...> wrote:

      >As I recall, somebody on this list recently panned an
      >already-published fantasy novel in which JRRT, CSL,
      >and CW participated in an adventure as children,
      >supposedly when all three were about 12. So this is not
      >only not the first Inklings-characters fantasy novel, but
      >it's not even the first to get it all wrong.

      I know about the one where they all (as adults) get involved in a war between A.E. Waite and Aleister Crowley, but I missed the one you recall. (I haven't been reading all the posts here lately.) Anyone care to point it out? I want to keep track of these things.

      Amusing that your post should have generated a defense in the form of a reference to "Young Sherlock Holmes," because I was about to mention that film as another example of getting it all wrong - and wrong about fictional characters, yet! There's a huge difference between "The Seven Percent Solution," which exploits an already dicey and deception-filled spot in the canon, carefully covering its tracks and explaining how the received story came to be, and YSH, which simply contradicts a basic fact in the storyline - the account of Holmes and Watson first meeting - for apparently no better reason than that it'd be cute to see little boys acting in these adult roles. It's not offensive, just stupid.

      The Tolkien equivalent of 7% might be a number of clever articles - which have actually been written - protesting that LOTR is propaganda and putting forth Sauron's point of view of the story. The Tolkien equivalent of YSH might be more like a "Hobbit"-like story of Young Legolas and Young Gimli going off to fight a dragon, which I hope nobody will ever write.

      - David Bratman
    • Walter Padgett
      Yes, Ms. Dean, A great tale, indeed, is _The Silmarillion_. Yet how many operas would one fit into a movie of about 2 hours? What from the story would be
      Message 49 of 49 , Nov 21, 2006
        Yes, Ms. Dean,

        A great tale, indeed, is _The Silmarillion_. Yet how many operas would one
        fit into a "movie" of about 2 hours? What from the story would be
        selected? One Great Tale" is _The Silmarillion_, yet who could begin to
        understand all its nuances of meaning and fulfillment? And a more
        perplexing question yet-- to whom could the monumental tasks of reviewing
        and reading the existent body of literary criticism connected to that
        particular book be entrusted, if the purpose of making a movie out of the
        book were to be approached with what one could call "care"?

        No single individual could capture all the important nuances of the Hobbit.
        Yet in the hypnotic voice of John Houston the person of Gandalf entered out
        of Tolkien's book and into the life of the mind in a new and important
        way through the well-known animated version (78 min?) of that book. Just
        ask John Rateliff.
        We in part know Gandalf because of our understanding of the history of the
        "VOICE" of John Houston. This is my point.

        Who is Gandalf, now? Temporally, or con temporarily speaking, isn't it Sir
        ...... Mc ..... ?

        Isn't he also "Magneto"? (yes ... for X-Men fans, you get it)

        Do Hobbits play in the Silmarillion? Should Gandalf be played by John
        Houston in the movie version of The Silmarillion?

        Such questions should be considered in the making of a movie, either the
        HOBBIT or The Silmarillion.

        Did anyone enjoy *Arnold Schwarzenegger's *(aka, the brute's) versions of
        Robert E. Howard's CONAN THE BARBARIAN books? You should read the books and
        then check out those movies again. It can be quite arousing in that
        context.

        The Hobbit ... The Silmarillion ... whatever. Who cares who makes the
        money? WE only live so long, and the movies will last a lot longer than
        US. Money motivates, but does it actually make the movie? NO. Does it
        even sell the movie? ... ? Nooooo....

        The point is clear. WE have the spirit and the initiative to teach about
        Tolkien's writings. It is WE who should endeavor to do so.

        Thanks, Walter.







        On 11/21/06, Margaret Dean <margdean@...> wrote:
        >
        > Walter Padgett wrote:
        > >
        > > First of all, the Hobbit is a movie. It's doable, unlike LOTR; however
        > PJ
        > > would have done it, given his abilities.
        > >
        > > Second, The Silmarillion is an OPERA.
        >
        > Oh, the Silmarillion is =several= operas. My Tolkien discussion
        > group once decided that the tale of Turin would make a trilogy of
        > operas in the Wagnerian style, the story of Beren and Luthien
        > should be a ballet, and the Fall of Gondolin a disaster movie!
        > :)
        >
        > --Margaret Dean
        > <margdean@... <margdean%40erols.com>>
        >
        >


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.