I haven't seen the films because apart from the visual aspects I didn't like much about the LOTR films..so if the had another prop exhibiton I would go but ....... but the point is that Jackson took two of the most popular and sucessful books in history. and I bet that more people were attracted to FOTR by Tolkien's name than Jackson's and now we book lovers are being basically told to shut up or get lost.
You know we aren't half wits we know flms are adaptations and noone expects a literal word for word reproduction ~ though I note that the bits people seem to like ARE from the books ~ but does that mean we may not query why a shortish and simple children's story needs hours of extraneous material and, as a bbc reviewer put it, "knob jokes". How far can you deviate and still have the nerve to market the product as the Hobbit? It is like the sometimes surreal substitutions supermarkets make if you order online, like ordering a bottle of amontillado and getting not even British Fortified Wine but a Sherry Trifle and being told not to make a fuss because there IS sherry in and hey they have thrown in jelly and custard and cream too.
So i will shut up now and toddle lactose\Jackson intolerantly off back to the delightful sub 2.5 hour Jackanory adaptation that introduced me to Tolkien oh so many years ago and provided such a great introduction to the book.
__________________
“But Finrod walks with Finarfin his father beneath the trees in Eldamar.”
Christopher Tolkien, Requiescat in pace
Last edited by Mithalwen; 12-15-2013 at 01:52 PM.
|