Re: [mythsoc] Jackson/Contamination
> Seriously, Jackson and the other film-makers saidYou may be on to something there.
> repeatedly that, while they could not adhere to all
> details of the plot, they would devote every possible
> effort to pleasing the Tolkien fanatics, i.e. the
> people who objected to contamination of their
> conception of the books.
> And in some respects, mostly set design, they did
> just that. Which makes their failure in other
> respects - and I _don't_ mean straight plot changes
> - all the more glaring.
I think the biggest issue is that the filmmakers are speaking Hollywood-ese,
and the Tolkien purists are not.
When the the filmmakers said that they were going to remain "absolutely
faithful" to the books, they meant that they weren't going to turn Frodo
into a bikini-wearing Amazon woman who carries a magic spear and travels
with a group of talking animals. When you consider Hollywood's treatment of
nearly /all/ literary works, Jackson has done a truly remarkable job of
remaining "true" to the books, especially given how non-cinematic the story
structure is. We're lucky that the story is even getting 3 films. Can you
imagine what would have happened if they had only been able to do one film
(or even two)? I think Jackson's commitment to the material is commendable,
given what he must have been up against.
You! You're my lover,
You're my hope, you're my dreams, my life
My passion, my love, my sex, my money,
Violence, religion and justice and death
- In a message dated 3/7/02 6:26:11 PM Pacific Standard Time, Stolzi@...
<< > What's PCA? Peer Counseling Anonymous?
Presbyterian Church in America... >>
Patient Controlled Analgesia