Quote:
Originally Posted by Lalwendė
But Lord of the Rings is a Quest, and that's inherently an action based story. Constantly moving on. And without the action of challenges along the way, it would be incredibly boring.
|
Aye. But.
LOTR was not a kind of story that I read because I was anxious about what happens next. If I want some of that, I'll reread my GoT. The action happens more subtly, peacefully, gently. You're interested about what happens next, but it doesn't have the kind of read-non-stop grip that some other books do. Instead, what gripped me was what is there besides the plot.
Once again, even books without plot still have some kind of plot, unless they are math textbooks or something like that (though even in those you may find many a plot point.... ok, bad pun on analytic geometry). All novels have some kind of plot. But in LOTR, despite its being a Quest, the plot is not what makes it remarquable.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lal
To be fair, I think the films did capture the same sense of movement and the same quotient of action as shown in the books. The sweeping panorama shots of the Fellowship moving through the hills are the filmic equivalent of Tolkien spending a few pages on exposition, describing a changing landscape.
|
That's true. I enjoyed those scenes the most, probably, with only a few exceptions. They have the right feel in them.