The Children of Hurin - The Film

[tumhalad2]

Oh dear, do I need to wash my mouth out? You're obviously not a linguist if you believe that linguistic items have proper usages. How prescriptivist of you. But I agree it's a useful concept.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by tumhalad2

Oh dear, do I need to wash my mouth out? You're obviously not a linguist if you believe that linguistic items have proper usages.

Thank goodness, no. But come, admit it, my friend: you really didn't have any idea there was a distinction at all until I pointed it out, did you? You really ought to thank me– there's much more embarrassing ways you could have found out, you know.

[tumhalad2]

Oh, okay I really had no idea that such a logical fallacy was called by the name "begging the question". *Prostrates himself in front of Nerwen*

To be honest though, at least where I'm from, it's used in rather polite discourse to mean something essentially *raises* the question. Go figure...

[Nerwen]

*graciously accepts your surrender*

Well, now that we've settled that–

How theoretical are you being here? It doesn't seem likely that anyone will be making a film version of CoH in the next few decades (and goodness knows what cinema will have mutated into by the time it finally goes out of copyright).

[tumhalad2]

Well, I'm being completely theoretical. This is not about whether they will make a film or not, it's about the effects such a project might have upon Tolkien's image as a popular author.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by tumhalad2

Well, I'm being completely theoretical. This is not about whether they will make a film or not, it's about the effects such a project might have upon Tolkien's image as a popular author.

That would depend, in part, on the film– my guess is that any such adaptation would end up being completely butchered.

But even if it wasn't, how many people judge an author solely by the film versions of his or her novels? It would be rather silly of them, don't you think?

Of course, a successful film version will encourage people to read the original novel– but that's a two-step process, which isn't what you've described.

[tumhalad2]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

That would depend, in part, on the film– my guess is that any such adaptation would end up being completely butchered.

But even if it wasn't, how many people judge an author solely by the film versions of his or her novels? It would be rather silly of them, don't you think?

Of course, a successful film version will encourage people to read the original novel– but that's a two-step process, which isn't what you've described.

Going back to my original post, I'm interested in how a film version might change the kinds of "memes" that 'pop up' in people's heads when the hear the word "Tolkien". Put it another way; how might a film version of CoH inculcate itself into popular culture, and what effect would this have on ideas that are held about Tolkien atm? Would our perception of him change radically? This of course assumes CoH is a very different story to LoTR in many respects, which I contend it is, particularly in its stand alone form.

As I explained, film has the power to reach a far greater audience than a book does. When the novel was released, many reviewers were surprised or astonished at the contents, which were unfamiliar "memes" that one usually wouldn't associate with Tolkien, at least not in popular culture. An academic study of Tolkien can of course be far more perceptive, and we may tease out layers of convergance or similarity, but I still contend that there is a fundemental metaphysical difference between the universes depicted in LoTR and CoH. One is fully providential, the other is atheistic (this is in no way meant to be a pejorative term).

[Galadriel55]

Personally, I am against the making of COH movie. It is quite different than LOTR, and addresses much more powerful themes. I consider the LOTR movie a disaster - and I'm afraid to think what COH could turn into .

I don't think that COH contradicts with LOTR. It is my belief that Tolkien (unintentionally, perhaps) summarised our world in his books. Although LOTR is not exactly a "hobbit walking-party", jokes are added in good measure, and lighten the atmosphere (as a whole) significantly. COH is totally different: although there is less description, it goes deeper. To say that - I'm not saying that LOTR isn't deep, - even the hobbit-jests are deep in a way - but it's in a different way than COH. I don't see how adding a different theme to his creation would make a dent in Tolkien's works, especially if you see the as I do.