Re: [mythsoc] Re: Movie Interloper
- At 03:29 PM 1/2/2003 , jtg wrote:
>On Wed, 01 Jan 2003 23:31:12 -0800 David S BratmanNot really, no. Shippey spends most of his article discussing differences,
><dbratman@s...> wrote in part:
>>They believe it, but they're wrong. This is not a matter
>>that can be laid down to opinion: they're wrong.
>So, Dave, you disagree with Tom Shippey, then, in his review of a
and concludes that "the message survives the change of medium." By message
he means the necessity of courage; and "survive" does suggest that it gets
through against all odds.
What I said was wrong was the statement that the films are "true to the
books, in form and in spirit." That's a mighty broad statement, and I've
read what the filmmakers have actually said, in detail. They believe they
accomplished something a lot truer to Tolkien than letting a basic broad
message survive the transition. That's what they're wrong about.
>If LOTR is that specific--that is specific enough to be able to makeI don't see how the evocative quality of LOTR - that is, its ability to
>these judgments without question--I wonder how it can succeed in
>being such evocative myth?
make you think of other things - is at all limited by the simple question
of whether a film translation is true to the book.
- David Bratman