Thread: Forever?
View Single Post
Old 11-19-2004, 07:51 PM   #61
The Saucepan Man
Corpus Cacophonous
 
The Saucepan Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A green and pleasant land
Posts: 8,390
The Saucepan Man has been trapped in the Barrow!
1420!

I am having real difficulty here seeing any significant difference between Frodo succumbing to the Ring (an external evil) because he did not have the strength of will to resist it and Frodo succumbing to the evil within himself (an internal evil). To my mind, it is in the very act of succumbing to the external evil (and surely the Ring has to play a part here) that Frodo succumbs to his own internal evil.

As to the nature of Frodo's inner turmoil following the destruction of the Ring, I shall content myself with waiting until I read these chapters together once again (probably as part of the Chapter-by-Chapter discussion) before drawing any firm conclusions. But I do think that guilt (if that is what he feels) is a justifiable reaction to a failure of will.

But, to get back on topic (*hint *), doesn't the very nature of the discussion going on here illustrate exactly how the perfect film of the book could never be made, at least for those who have already read the book?

One person's perfection would always be another's failure.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Lalwendė
Hollywood is also quite a lazy beast and there is a tendency to adapt pre-existing works rather than make a 'pure film'; when a film is based on an 'original' concept then it is a very different product. You only have to look at the fan worship surrounding such 'pure films' as Star Wars, Donnie Darko and The Matrix. When Hollywood adapts pre-exisitng works it so often gets it very wrong.
An interesting point. But say, for example that Star Wars was based upon a much cherished book which concerned itself in much more detail with the themes explored in the film (because, as a book, it was able to). Wouldn't the same criticisms be being made of it? Much as I love the original Star Wars film, I do think that the LotR films suffer unfairly in comparison with it. Yes, I know that it is an original work, rather than being adapted from a book. But, then again, it is very much based on the Hero Myth, and so is not entirely original.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Lalwendė
Many 'Downers do not seem to like His Dark materials very much, but it provides grown-up comment on the nature of religion and of democracy; and this is one book I shudder to think of being made into a film, as I am convinced it will be wrong.
I very much enjoyed Pullman's trilogy, but I did feel that, ultimately, he failed credibly to portray the massive (parallel) universe-wide war that he sought to depict. And it is there that I think that his trilogy suffers in comparison with LotR, rather than on any theological issue. It will be interesting to see how the films work out, given that Pullman himself is very much involved with them. I am going to see the plays next month, which I have been told are rather good.
__________________
Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind!

Last edited by The Saucepan Man; 11-19-2004 at 07:56 PM.
The Saucepan Man is offline   Reply With Quote