Of course Jackson and Tolkien were working with different aims and motives and coming from different directions. I quite willing to accept that. But I don't accept that this invalidates Jackson's acheivement.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by davem
Still, Tolkien was an artist & followed his muse, Jackson seems to have followed the audience & to have given us very little beyond stereotypically pretty pictures & a deal of gruesome imagery.
|
Jackson is an artist, in his own way. Admittedly a very different type of artist to Tolkien, but an artist nonetheless. And he provided me (and, it would seem, many others) with a great deal of enjoyment. I expected very little else and, thus, was satisfied. Perhaps I am just easily pleased, but I do not regret being so.