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

Re: Jackson Films

Expand Messages
  • dbltall42
    ... In his review of the first film in the Times Literary ... Bilbo and ... But that s just exactly what he DIDN T need to do. Cate Blanchett and Ian Holm are
    Message 1 of 108 , Aug 30, 2007
      --- In mythsoc@yahoogroups.com, "Doug Kane" <dougkane@...> wrote:
      In his review of the first film in the Times Literary
      > Supplement, Shippey wrote:

      >In scenes which owe a debt to horror tradition, but are
      > quite in keeping with the author's intentions, both Ian Holm as
      Bilbo and
      > Cate Blanchett as Galadriel turn momentarily into snarling and monstrous
      > caricatures of themselves, as the temptation of the Ring falls on them.

      But that's just exactly what he DIDN'T need to do. Cate Blanchett and
      Ian Holm are both ACTORS. If he'd simply let them ACT, and shown the
      temptation of corruption by facial expression and body language - a
      cruel and monstrous appearance - the films would have been so much
      better, IMHO.

      I have the same opinion about Theoden (is it even plausible that the
      Rohirrim believe Jackson's Theoden is in his right mind and fit to
      lead?) and especially about Gandalf and Saruman.
      He had Ian McKellan and Christopher Lee, for heaven's sake! Why
      couldn't he just have let them have a silent, mental battle - both
      actors are more than capable of putting that across in a dramatic way.
      It would have been much more satisfying to watch than all that kung fu

    • aveeris523@aol.com
      ... appropriate. ************************************** Check out AOL s list of 2007 s hottest products.
      Message 108 of 108 , Dec 7, 2007
        In a message dated 12/7/07 9:41:39 AM, dbratman@... writes:

        > Very much the opposite opinion here. I don't recall anything harmful being
        > done to the text, but the image was definitely a problem. Tolkien says she was
        > "beautiful beyond enduring, terrible and worshipful." The only word in this
        > that Jackson seems to have followed was "terrible" - and he seems to be using
        > it in the sense of "scary and terrifying," rather than "eliciting awe" which
        > is what Tolkien presumably meant.
        > Good point David! Beautiful and Terrible like an angel would have been more

        Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest


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