Quote:
Originally Posted by Boromir88
I didn't understand all the outrage of the idea of a new female character in the films. I just didn't know what people were arguing...
Was it, there are no female elves in Mirkwood? That's a rather silly argument.
Or Tauriel isn't in the Hobbit, therefore she isn't Tolkien and doesn't belong in a film called The Hobbit? Ok, that makes more sense...Maybe I'm the big meanie here, but if someone wants Tolkien stories, I've heard the man wrote a ton. It's like folks enjoy making themselves miserable when going to see something they know they're completely against.
|
Speaking for myself, my objection to Tauriel is fundamentally rooted in the foundational issue/problem I have with the films or (perhaps, if you want to take the long historic view) with what the films have ultimately turned into.
I believe the evidence is clear that Jackson is trying to cash in on Tolkien's work and name while at the same time considering himself a superior storyteller to Tolkien and using Tolkien's name as a cover for stories Jackson wrote himself.
Taken individually, these two things wouldn't stir such a strong reaction to me. People can try to make money on the Tolkien name if they have bought the rights to do so.
Also, people can believe themselves to be superior artists to Tolkien, that is a matter of opinion.
But put these two factors together, as Jackson does, and I find the results utterly crass and reprehensible. Believe it or not I'm (usually) not trying to spark an argument by using such strong words. Frankly, maintaining civility in my comments on this issue frequently causes me some degree of frustration because I truly believe there is no curse in the tongues of Men, Elves, or Orcs foul enough to do justice to my anger at what I see Jackson doing to Tolkien's legacy.
Getting back to Tauriel, she is yet more evidence that Jackson and co. don't believe Tolkien knew what he was doing when he wrote the stories. Either that or there must be Tauriel, this we know, for Political Correctness tells us so. I have no respect for either motive, although I suspect the reality is it is a combination of both.
If one wants to write one's own story, then by all means do so and put in whatever you want. Just don't use the name of another artist as cover for your work. Make your own name on the merits of your own skill and imagination.
Now, I suppose I shall be accused of A) hijacking this thread again and B) hypocrisy since I will still see the movie.
I shall answer B first. I would have to overcome powers far greater than myself and which with I cannot contend to avoid seeing the movie (my wife and parents).
This causes me no small frustration sometimes...which I cope with by ranting on electronic forums from time to time.
In this instance, I wanted to give
Boro what I hope is a mostly thoughtful response to his query.
