|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lacrimae Rerum
Grey Havens
Aug 28 2012, 11:51am
Post #201 of 216
(4231 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I don't know about "improvement"
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
As I don't really understand the use here in a compartive sense but from my own perspective I think it's super that large numbers of people, who would not otherwise have encountered Tolkien*, are talking and thinking about his stories.
I feel much the same way about this as I do about people reading or watching Shakespeare. On a first encounter many will not understand and appreciate every word, phrase or idea (myself included) but I think it is much better for people to engage than not.
LR
*Some who watched the films would certainly have encountered the texts anyway but it seems clear from the numbers that many would have been unlikely to.
|
|
|
Noria
Gondor
Aug 28 2012, 11:52am
Post #202 of 216
(4248 views)
Shortcut
|
 Sir Dennis, if your post was in response to mine, I don’t understand what you’re talking about.
Maybe that’s because my post was not intended as a direct response to yours and was meant as a comment on the whole conspiracy theory thing. Obviously I didn’t make that clear.
I don’t think it’s wrong to speculate about anything, including GdT’s departure from The Hobbit, and I think it's questionable whether or not you really needed to apologize for your initial comments. My point was that PJ and GdT have made their statements and they don’t owe the public anything more. So the notion that we will get some additional explanation of what went down is both unlikely and unnecessary, IMO.
Conspiracy theory is a strong term to use for what happened with the Hobbit production but it is cut from the same cloth as suspecting that the whole truth was not told. But I stand corrected because I was one of the ones who objected to the use of the term fan fiction for additional scenes created by screenplay writers during the adaptation process.
I am also Canadian and the notion of two Canadians quarrelling on the internet is kind of mindboggling. Aren’t we supposed to be mild and polite or something?
|
|
|
SirDennisC
Half-elven
Aug 28 2012, 3:11pm
Post #203 of 216
(4223 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I knew there was something about you that I liked
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
No, actually I thought your earlier post was quite good and sensible -- sorry I didn't respond to it directly. Anyway, I was replying to Black Breathalizer's post here: http://newboards.theonering.net/...i?post=486657#486657
By the way, if you're reading in "flat mode" and aren't entirely sure whose post another post is in response to, click on "In reply to" which appears to the right of the subject line in the post your are reading. Actually this can be useful in "threaded mode" as well.
For a quick run down on the difference between thread and flat modes check out this post by our resident tutor and collector of minutia: http://newboards.theonering.net/...i?post=144421#144421
Incidentally, I've noticed you around the place, diving right into some of the more intense debates we've had this season... I figured you were either a Canadian or a very brave newbie (just kidding!!!). In case no one has said so already, welcome to TORn Noria!
(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)
(This post was edited by SirDennisC on Aug 28 2012, 3:11pm)
|
|
|
kzer_za
Lorien
Aug 28 2012, 8:26pm
Post #204 of 216
(4202 views)
Shortcut
|
|
The films are generally held in high regard
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
I know not everyone enjoys them, but they are liked across a lot of demographics. I know plenty of non-geeky women who like them, for example. While it's too early to say it definitively, I think their impact on popular culture is likely comparable to Star Wars or The Godfather (not to say they're the same quality as The Godfather I/II, though I would put them ahead of Star Wars except maybe ESB). You can still do a Gollum impression or whistle the fellowship theme or say something about "the ring" and most people will instantly recognize it, which isn't true of very many ten-year old films.
So I would say that while the movies may give people a wrong impression of some elements of the books, I think most people who haven't read the books will assume they are high-quality. And I would say they get more right than wrong, but I don't think I'll convince you there.
Plus, sometimes people dislike the movies for reasons like "too much walking"! They would dislike the books even more and probably give up after a couple of travel songs. ;)
That said, Christopher has every right to dislike the movies. He's dedicated his life to preserving and chronicling his father's work, so I'm sure he has much more attachment to it than us.
(This post was edited by kzer_za on Aug 28 2012, 8:27pm)
|
|
|
AinurOlorin
Half-elven
Aug 29 2012, 4:54am
Post #205 of 216
(4174 views)
Shortcut
|
I say it often, as it is true about so many things, many of them more immediately consequential to society than LOTR, strange as that may seem to an LOTR fanatic like me. Thrilled that someone took notice! I don't know why you guys are so negative towards PJ. Someone (please speak up if it was you - good post) recently lamented the "linear," or black and white, thinking that goes on these days where there is no degree of freedom on thought. What it means is that if we complain about one aspect of something, we must hate all aspects of it. Such unhealthy generalizations and false assumptions are just not true or valid thought. We can despise the corporate behavior of such things as The Green Tint, or what was done to selected aspects of the screenplay as an adaptation of The Lord of the Rings without despising the other 99.999% of the person involved. In fact, I think you would find almost everyone on this forum actually does like Peter Jackson as an atypically sincere Hollywood personality who stays true to himself.
"Hear me, hounds of Sauron, Gandalf is here! Fly if you value your foul skins, I will shrivel you from tail to snout if you step within this circle!"
"Do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. Even the very wise cannot see all ends."
|
|
|
geordie
Tol Eressea
Aug 29 2012, 12:25pm
Post #206 of 216
(4182 views)
Shortcut
|
- or at least, we're told he's seen Fellowship. This question came up recently on another site, and one of the posters there referred to a post by Carl Hofstetter in 2002 (ie before the other two movies came out). Carl is in regular correspondence with CT, and in this post he said that Christopher had seen Fellowship - he hated it, says Carl, and gave a long list of reasons which, CH says, he won't give here.
I don't know whether CT has seen TT and RotK, but I don't see any reason to assume that he hasn't.
And of course, CT is not the only one to view the films in this way. Verlyn Flieger says much the same things as Christopher said in his interview with Le Monde; only Prof. Flieger goes further. In a Q&A session published in ToRn's book 'More people's Guide to JRR Tolkien', Prof. Flieger says
"I didn't like the first film when I saw it, and I don't like the whole thing now that all three films are out. But then, it isn't aimed at me. It's aimed at the generations who've grown up on Star Wars and hunger for more and more action and special effects. Jackson has turned an extremely sophisticated, complex and subtle - and very long - story into an action movie that I think satisfies the audience for whom he made it. "
Flieger goes on in this way at some length. I agree with her, too.
(This post was edited by geordie on Aug 29 2012, 12:26pm)
|
|
|
macfalk
Valinor
Aug 29 2012, 1:34pm
Post #207 of 216
(4159 views)
Shortcut
|
Then again, many Tolkien scholars/experts do like/love the movies. Not every Tolkien scholar has a negative view on the films. Tom Shippey, Brian Sibley, Patrick Curry, etc
The greatest adventure is what lies ahead.
|
|
|
Shelob'sAppetite
Valinor
Aug 29 2012, 3:02pm
Post #208 of 216
(4152 views)
Shortcut
|
Flieger's comments are not very harsh! She disliked the films, as I did, but dislikes them for the same reasons many other people like them!
If CT feels similarly, as his one quote on the matter suggests, it's not the kind of "hateful" opinion some have characterized it as.
|
|
|
macfalk
Valinor
Aug 29 2012, 4:26pm
Post #209 of 216
(4131 views)
Shortcut
|
|
This is a rare thread indeed...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Where there's still discussion going on despite the fact that the thread has been pushed to page 3 
The greatest adventure is what lies ahead.
|
|
|
Kangi Ska
Half-elven
Aug 29 2012, 5:16pm
Post #210 of 216
(4119 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I depends how you have the page set
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
For me it is still page one.
Kangi Ska Resident Trickster & Wicked White Crebain
Life is an adventure, not a contest.
At night you can not tell if crows are black or white.
|
|
|
geordie
Tol Eressea
Aug 29 2012, 5:25pm
Post #211 of 216
(4121 views)
Shortcut
|
- and I've got a lot of time for all three gentlemen; though I don't have to agree with them about everything.
For example, I don't agree with Shippey when he says that, in spite of Tolkien's denials, the Rohirrim are 'Anglo-Saxons on horseback'. I've never thought that; (despite the fact that ol' Tom knows more about Old English than anybody else I know) - and since he said that, some new writings of Tolkien's have come to light which further emphasize JRR's further thoughts on the matter.
I don't remember Patrick Curry's remarks on the movies; IIRC his slots on the dvd extras were spent discussing Tolkien and the environment, which is his speciality. I recall going to the launch of his book, 'Defending Middle-earth', and I still see him now and then, at T.S. events.
Brian Sibley is a lovely bloke; but I wonder whether he'd describe himself as a scholar? He's certainly a 100% Tolkien enthusiast; same as the other two gents (same as me, come to that). Brian got his big break by adapting LotR for radio, and made a v.good job of it. The first time I met him was back in 1981 (gosh!) at Oxonmoot. I think the radio series was still being broadcast then; we all had a laugh about one or two things which went a bit wrong here and there. And Brian has written a couple of books on the movies since then; and written a guide to the Middle-earth maps too, IIRC. But I wouldn't call those scholarly works. Some years ago, Brian made a classic blooper in a taped 'book' called 'JRR Tolkien: An Audio Portrait'. He reckoned a framed 'note' on the wall in the Eagle & Child is a letter from the Inklings to the pub landlord. It isn't; first, it's not a letter, but a photocopy of a note - and second, it ain't to the landlord. It's to an American admirer of CS Lewis, and the original is in the Bodleian Library. As even I know; and I'm not a scholar.
But going back to Christopher for a bit; and Carl Hostetter and Prof. Flieger. I just remembered that they edited a festschrift for Christopher, back in 2000. My copy is signed by both the editors; and later I added the signatures of some of the other contributors. I wish I'd been able to ask Rayner Unwin to sign it, too. Rayner was Tolkien's publisher for many years, and a good friend of the Professor. And the Tolkien Society too, as it happens - here's what Rayner says, in his introduction to the book - "No other author has ever had the advantage of a literary executor with the smpathy, the scholarship, and the humility to devote half a lifetime to the task of unobtrusively giving shape to his own father's creativity. In effect one man's imaginative genius has had the benefit of two lifetimes' work."
(Rayner Unwin, in 'Tolkien's Legendarium - Essays on the History of Middle-earth', ed. Verlyn Flieger and Carl F. Hostetter).
Now, that's the truth!
|
|
|
geordie
Tol Eressea
Aug 29 2012, 5:41pm
Post #212 of 216
(4128 views)
Shortcut
|
the quotes I gave were only the beginning - Flieger really gets her teeth into the subject;
"...As for un-Tolkienian lines like Gimli's 'Nobody tosses a dwarf', and Strider's 'Let's hunt some orc', they are beyond comment."
"I found Jackson's increased messing with the plot and character unnecessary and destructive to the story..."
"And the silly idea of having Gollum successfully turn Frodo against Sam... should have been stifled at birth..."
"...I thought it was gratuitous violence to Tolkien's concept to take out the phrases in his Elven languages that _he_ chose to include in his text... and then add unnecessary, made-up dialogue by someone else in which characters like Aragorn and Arwen who have been speaking English (what JRRT called the Common Speech) suddenly slip into Sindarin so Jackson can do subtitles."
There's more... and as it happens, I agree with these sentiments, too - 'gratuitous violence to Tolkien's concept', indeed!
|
|
|
Sinister71
Tol Eressea
Aug 29 2012, 11:16pm
Post #213 of 216
(4120 views)
Shortcut
|
i agree
|
|
|
kzer_za
Lorien
Aug 29 2012, 11:59pm
Post #214 of 216
(4166 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I believe John Rateliff (author of History of The Hobbit) likes them too //
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
|
|
|
SirDennisC
Half-elven
Aug 30 2012, 2:00am
Post #215 of 216
(4131 views)
Shortcut
|
"...in which characters like Aragorn and Arwen who have been speaking English (what JRRT called the Common Speech) suddenly slip into Sindarin so Jackson can do subtitles."
They might have chosen to use Sindarin during some scenes (between Aragorn and Arwen especially, but also between Legolas and Aragorn) simply because it sounded so much more romantic than Common Speech.
(This post was edited by SirDennisC on 0 secs ago)
|
|
|
geordie
Tol Eressea
Aug 30 2012, 12:03pm
Post #216 of 216
(4153 views)
Shortcut
|
- I hadn't heard this, though it doesn't surprise me. Can you tell us where John says this?
.
|
|
|
|
|
