Re: Jackson Films
- --- In email@example.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 areBilbo and
> quite in keeping with the author's intentions, both Ian Holm as
> Cate Blanchett as Galadriel turn momentarily into snarling and monstrousBut that's just exactly what he DIDN'T need to do. Cate Blanchett and
> caricatures of themselves, as the temptation of the Ring falls on them.
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
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
- 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]