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

bbc and other adaptations of lotr.

Expand Messages
  • Mich
    Hi all. wile we are on the topic of lotr and the adaption of lotr by pj. I would like to ask what people s thoughts are about the bbc dramas of lotr and the
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 21, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi all. wile we are on the topic of lotr and the adaption of lotr by pj. I would like to ask what people's thoughts are about the bbc dramas of lotr and the hobbit? for me the thing that I found annoying about the dramatization of the hobbit was the miss pronunciation of the names of key characters for instance toren instead of thorin Goloom instead of golum etc. For me I first red the lotr books unabridged red by rob inglis back when the first lotr movies were being made. I also of korce red the hobbit before unabridged by a person from the cnib. I wonder if any one knows of other unab versions of lotr that are out there to bye that are not red by rob inglis? I also have to say that jmo the radio play in 13 parts from the bbc that was dun in 1981 with Ian Holme as Frodo was very well dun. again that was the first interduction that I had to lotr was through that radio play. from Mich. 
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2012 7:33 AM
      Subject: Re: [mythsoc] Peter Jackson's Hobbit movie

       

      Hi, 


      On 21 November 2012 10:49, John Davis <john@...> wrote:
      I don't understand why people _still_ feel the need to post so strongly about this issue. Some people loved the films, some people hated them. But if you hated them, surely your life would be better if you stop thinking about them. 

      If only it was that simple . . . 

      I loved the Jackson LotR films _as films_, but I hated what they did to Tolkien's story. 

      A large part of my problem is precisely that they worked so much better as films than the earlier attempts, and also that they are, in terms of visualization and what I would call the "surface plot"* very successful (or "faithful" if you will) as adaptations, while being so very faithless (in my view) when you scratch the surface just a bit: character motivations and personalities changed, in some cases beyond recognition, thematic content changed (the fooling of Frodo on the stairs of Cirith Ungol implying, to my mind, that pity and mercy is merely foolish), etc. 

      It was so much easier to ignore all this with the Bakshi _LotR_ (and that horrible Rankin/Bass _Return of the King_, or their adaptation of _The Hobbit_) because they didn't work on any level - with these films, there was no question of visual immersion or of their being, by and large, highly faithful to the "surface plot", and so there was no contrast between their "faithfulness" in the various aspects of adaptation. And of course they were nowhere near as successful and hence pervasive in popular culture as Jackson's films have been. All of this has made it quite easy to ignore the older attempts, and it has conspired to make it very nearly impossible for any Tolkien enthusiast to ignore Jackson's films and stop thinking about them. 

      It is much easier to watch Jackson's _LotR_ films from DVD at home - that way I can skip the worst parts (amounting to perhaps 2 - 4 % of the EE run-time) and enjoy the films and their visual reconstruction of Middle-earth ;-)   But I will go and watch the _Hobbit_ films, of course I will, and I will expect to be well entertained. I hope that the lessons learned ten years ago will help me not only ignore the inevitable changes to the plot, but also the changes to the characters and thematic content. 



      * By surface plot, I mean the plot reduced to a string of events that can be described in a sentence -- that part, the thin top layer, of Tolkien's story that is an adolescent adventure story -- though neither of these capture what I mean very well. There's an anecdote about some old film tycoon who believed that all stories could be reduced to be retellings of one of three old stories: at some point in such a reduction of story, you get to a point where all dialogue has disappeared, all that is going on inside the characters has been removed along with any nuance that might hint at this, and you are left with just the skeleton plot - "Boromir attempts to take the Master Ring from Frodo, Frodo flees, Boromir returns to the camp." At this level I think that Jackson's _LotR_ film trilogy is exceptionally faithful to Tolkien's book - this is, however, for me a very unsatisfactory level at which to look at the story. 



      Best, 
      Troels


      --
          Love while you've got
              love to give.
          Live while you've got
              life to live.
       - Piet Hein, /Memento Vivere/

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.