Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Boro
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galadriel55
The costumes in LOTR were very well done, IMO. I think that the wet-shirt-big-bussomed-young-woman-waving-swords-around expression in this discussion talks more about the role of the character, not the appearance. Personally, when I encounter such a descritpion now, I don't visualise the skimpy-dressed girl but I think of the horror of what the character's done to the story.
|
But making that "wet tshirt warrior" criticism is at best an innocent exaggeration for effect and at worst is deliberately misleading. |
I just don't think it's a fair criticism– and since there's really nothing in either the existing movies or the current "Hobbit" publicity to base it on, it just seems to me to say more about the person making it than anything else, quite honestly.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Boro
I don't believe I disagreed with this, I said if direwolves can be made into adorable bundles of furry cuddliness, than Jackson's attempt to sex up the dwarves....go for it, not a big deal.
|
Yes, but what does what a writer does with his own characters– and critters– have to do with the issue of faithfulness in an adaption? I don't see that it does,
Boro. (A palaentologist might object, I suppose.)