Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
02-15-2005, 05:04 PM | #121 | |
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
|
Davem:
I agree with nearly all of what you say. I therefore hesitate to pick upon a minor point, especially one that's tangential to the topic, but I can't help myself. You say: Quote:
So I don't think that Jackson's change can be explained simply as a result of Jackson's failure to understand the elements of compassion and mercy in the book. Even failing to understand those aspects, he could still have had Faramir act rationally. But for the sake of that constant tension with which he is obsessed, he felt it necessary to alter the character's perfectly reasonable behavior. |
|
02-15-2005, 08:28 PM | #122 | ||
Laconic Loreman
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
02-16-2005, 03:39 AM | #123 | |
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Essex, England
Posts: 887
|
Davem, I'm struggling to come to terms with your point
Quote:
The film has at least two areas where Gandalf shows mercy towards gollum showing to me that he wants to perhaps 'save' him as you put it. Gandalf discusses Gollum with Frodo in Moria, explaining that Bilbo himself showed pity towards the creature, insinuating that Frodo might do the same. And he brought 3 Eagles with him to Mount Doom didn't he? One for Frodo, one for Sam. And one for Gollum. Frodo shows pity for Gollum in various parts of the film. For example, there's pity when he is speaking alone with Gollum in the Dead Marshes, and most notably after Gollum has betrayed him to Shelob (where Frodo stops beating up on Gollum and says he has to destroy the Ring for both of them). Doesn't this show that Frodo also wants to 'save' Gollum? PS Faramir showing compassion, pity & mercy to Frodo? Yeah, by sending him to what he thought was an almost certain death! |
|
02-16-2005, 12:42 PM | #124 | |
Ghost Prince of Cardolan
|
Quote:
Fordim was right by saying that the scene which is quoted above would have been boring to both book fans and none. Obviously not everything on paper can be made visual. That’s why it was written down in the first place. The scene has to “work” visually, and though some movies can gracefully get away with 20 minutes of dialog between to sitting characters, Lord of the Rings was a fast paced polar opposite to such films. Many of the huge changes in the movies I’m sure actually have very good reasons for being changed. I’m also sure that if you ever sat down with the production team that some so loath that they’d be able to tell you all about their reasons, how they used trial and error and it came out the way it did. I was impressed that this wasn’t a cut and paste job movie, no one can argue that it was cheaply or lazily made. There were few short cuts, that was Mr. Jackson’s pride.
__________________
Solus... I'm eating chicken again. I ate chicken yesterday and the day before... will I be eating chicken again tomorrow? Why am I always eating chicken? |
|
02-16-2005, 01:37 PM | #125 | |
Shade of Carn Dūm
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Standing amidst the slaughter I have wreaked upon the orcs
Posts: 262
|
Quote:
__________________
____________________________________ "And a cold voice rang forth from the blade. Yea, I will drink thy blood, that I may forget the blood of Beleg my master, and of Brandir slain unjustly. I will slay thee swiftly." Last edited by Neurion; 02-16-2005 at 04:54 PM. |
|
02-16-2005, 02:23 PM | #126 |
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,256
|
My own feeling is that book Faramir was more aware of Frodo's 'mission' & its 'divinely ordained' nature. Faramir is one of the most spiritually aware characters in the book. It seems to me that he realised that Frodo had been 'appointed' to perform the task of bringing the Ring to the fire, & in that sense his releasing & aiding of Frodo in that task, rather than taking him as a prisoner to Minas Tirith, was an act of 'compassion'. He was making Frodo's inevitable task as easy as possible. He puts compassion before duty, & takes a great risk in doing so. In fact he is putting all he cares for at risk in order to help Frodo as he does.
The story of LotR is not simply about destroying the Ring of Power, its about Frodo's struggle to destroy the Ring. The task has been appointed to him. Only Frodo can bring the Ring to the Fire. That's what he's was born to do. In that sense he is a Galahad figure. Only Galahad may achive the Grail because that was the reason he was born. Whether movie Frodo wants to 'save' movie Gollum is another question. Yes we see Frodo showing concern for him, & hear Gandalf saying he is deserving of pity, but these are all things taken from the book. What the writers of the movie do is introduce another reason: he tells Sam 'I have to believe he can come back.'. This immediately makes his behaviour & treatment of Gollum selfish. Movie Frodo is effectively attempting to save himself. This is the difference between what the writers import into their movie & what they introduce. What they introduce are their own explanations for, or 'commentary'on, Tolkien's story. Yes, they give Gandalf's words to Frodo about pity, & 'not striking without need' & Frodo's words on first encountering Gollum ('Now that I see him I do pity him.'), but when they attempt to 'explain' Frodo's motivation to the audience they make it selfish. |
02-16-2005, 03:53 PM | #127 | ||
A Mere Boggart
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: under the bed
Posts: 4,814
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Gordon's alive!
|
||
02-16-2005, 03:55 PM | #128 |
Wight
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hominum que contente mundique huius et cupido
Posts: 213
|
Wow! This topic is a lot hotter then I thought it would be.
__________________
War is not the answer, War is the question and the answer is yes Quis ut Deus |
02-16-2005, 04:13 PM | #129 |
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,256
|
The impression I get from the books is that Boromir & Faramir almost symbolise the two aspects of Aragorn's character. Boromir is his 'warrior' side, the side that seeks to achieve his destiny & rule Gondor & Arnor, while Faramir is his 'spiritual' side.
Its interesting how in the book its only when Boromir dies that Aragorn starts to manifest signs of Kingship - Legolas sees a 'crown' of flame on his brow, etc. The 'Boromir' side of Aragorn seems to have died along with its human 'manifestation'. At this point Faramir appears, almost symbolising the side of Aragorn which will become dominant - his true 'royalty'. It seems to me that the screenwriters prefer the 'Boromir' side. Aragorn throughout is presented as far more like Boromir & movie Boromir is presented in a far more sympathetic light than book Boromir. They actually make Faramir a kind of 'lesser' Boromir, a Boromir 'wannabee', rather than a character in his own right. Their idea of Faramir seems to be that he is an originally weak character who doesn't know his own mind, one who needs to 'grow up' & become like his brother. As I said, in the book, its like Boromir & Faramir are 'mirrors' of Aragorn's own inner state. Boromir would be an adequate steward for Aragorn as we first meet him, but Faramir is the kind of steward he needs by the end of his 'journey' because Aragorn is on a 'spiritual' path just as much as Frodo, who also has his two 'mirrors' - Smeagol & Sam... |
02-16-2005, 05:54 PM | #130 |
Gibbering Gibbet
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Beyond cloud nine
Posts: 1,851
|
A quick note: I've been working through the commentaries for the EE of RotK and there was one very interesting nugget from Phillipa Boyens. When she was discussing the decision to have Frodo send Sam away, she says that one of the reasons she likes this change is that it "shocked fans of the book". She sees that shock as a good thing as it shakes them up and makes them wonder just how this movie is going to turn out.
I have to admit that this got me to thinking -- how much would I really want to see a completely faithful adaptation of the book. I've already read it, I already know it, I already have visuals in my mind of it. With the changes that are there, I was able to enjoy the films -- as films -- insofar as there was still the possiblity of surprise, suspense and reversal for me. I was on the edge of my seat, because while I knew that things were going to turn out all right in the end, I could never be precisely sure of how this was going to happen. And is that not one of the things that makes the book so wonderful. The only thing we can know for sure is that good will triumph, but the suspense comes in though not knowing how it's going to play itself out, and who is going to be lost or hurt along the way. The book-Faramir, for example, is a sacrifice that is made meaningful by the final accomplishment of the goal: the eucatastrophe of the film's conclusion. Ahhhh. . .now there's a question: does the film have the same eucatastrophe of the book or not? That's, I think, where this whole discussion is really headed.
__________________
Scribbling scrabbling. |
02-16-2005, 07:18 PM | #131 | |||||
Corpus Cacophonous
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A green and pleasant land
Posts: 8,468
|
Back to feed the hounds ...
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And, when it comes down to it, I doubt that there are many other directors with a sufficient combination of skill, flair and interest in and passion for the book to make these films work. Of those who might fall within this category, I would put Jackson fairly near the top of the list, if not at the top. Quote:
Quote:
While I agree with Fordim Hedgethistle that Jackson largely captured the essence of Tolkiens work, I think it is unrealistic, both for the reasons stated above and due to the constraints of screen time, to expect him to have captured it entirely. As I said, he is not Tolkien. He has own individual beliefs and outlook on life. And he was addressing a predominantly different audience and largely for different purposes. Finally, as for this mercy issue, I am with Essex. The lines addressing this aspect were primarily those written by Tolkien. But Jackson and the other writers would not have included them if they did not feel them important. I was particularly taken with the inclusion, in the Extended Edition of TTT, of Sams speech, transposed (appropriately, I feel) to Faramir, on the fallen Southron. I have always liked these lines because they convey a sense of compassion for those Men who have been duped or coerced into fighting under Saurons banner. By giving the words to Faramir, one gets the sense that he would offer mercy to his enemies on the field of battle (at least those who are not portrayed - in the books as well as the films - as irredeemably evil). But, for me, the most important scene in the film, when it comes to the question of mercy, is one that was added. Essex has already mentioned it. It is the scene between Frodo and Gollum following Frodos (initial) escape from Shelob. This comes at a stage when it must be clear to (film) Frodo (as it is to the audience) that Gollum has been irretrievably lost to the lure of the Ring. Frodo no longer has any basis for believing that Gollum can be saved. And yet he forgives Gollum and offers him compassion. Frodo could have killed him at this point, but he does not. He is instead fortified in his belief that the Ring must be destroyed. And so the central concept of the Ring being destroyed in consequence of Frodos (selfless) mercy is retained.
__________________
Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind! |
|||||
02-17-2005, 03:19 AM | #132 | |||
A Mere Boggart
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: under the bed
Posts: 4,814
|
Quote:
When I first read the books, I did not know that good would triumph, I did not know what was going to happen along the way, and I was thoroughly gripped by the suspense. Alas, this experience can only be had the once, and it was a long long time ago (thankfully I was somehow aware of this and so took my time in reading the books) and it is all too easy to forget that the books are full of suspense and surprise. For me, I wasn't too bothered about having suspense in the films as I knew the story. Then they altered the story, perhaps to add suspense, but that sensation was short lived and ultimately I'd rather have the more deep satisfaction of seeing the full extent of the story played out in the film medium. The thing with suspense in a film is that once that thrill is done with, there needs to be substance to keep you watching again and again; thankfully the films do have that substance, but the scenes which were added or altered for purposes of suspense then show up all the more starkly as redundant. The ironic thing is that the greatest moment of suspense in the whole of the three films for me was the opening credits of FotR, as I sat there worried to death about what they might have done with my favourite book. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Gordon's alive!
|
|||
02-18-2005, 07:43 AM | #133 | |
Stormdancer of Doom
|
Skimming, but this popped out:
Quote:
That virtue-less culture is not particularly modern. Disinterest in virtue has preceded the downfall of many great cultures. |
|
02-18-2005, 08:33 AM | #134 |
Corpus Cacophonous
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A green and pleasant land
Posts: 8,468
|
I do not believe that society is any more or less dumb or any more or less virtuous than it has ever have been. We just have different things to be dumb and/or immoral about.
__________________
Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind! |
02-18-2005, 09:49 AM | #135 |
Auspicious Wraith
Join Date: May 2002
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 4,992
|
Virtue makes little money.
__________________
Los Ingobernables de Harlond |
02-18-2005, 10:16 AM | #136 | |
Corpus Cacophonous
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A green and pleasant land
Posts: 8,468
|
Nice avatar, Eomer. You can't go wrong with Joe Cool.
However ... Quote:
And I would also disagree as far as the film-making industry is concerned. I think that people do like to watch films that are morally uplifting - that make them feel good about their fellow humans. Indeed, I think that this, in part at least, accounts for the popularity of the LotR films. They may not present Tolkien's moral vision in its entirety. But, in comparison with other films of similar ilk, they do (in my view) put across some very good moral messages.
__________________
Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind! |
|
02-18-2005, 10:25 AM | #137 |
Auspicious Wraith
Join Date: May 2002
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 4,992
|
Oh, I agree, and please don't get me wrong Saucepan. I agree with what you said. I find many parts of the films very uplifting. However, I'm just considering that the portrayal of virtues were not exactly highest on the agenda of Jackson and his crew. I think this led to a simplified and inferior version of Frodo's relationships with Faramir and Gollum. I realise that it was hard work and that the filmmakers did a decent job with it, however I don't think they nailed it. I find that some of us twist and turn in all sorts of ways when trying to defend aspects of the relationships betwixt film characters.
It was inevitable that some of us would easily find flaws within the virtues displayed on film. I don't think the filmmakers consider this to be hugely problematic, though. P.S. I'll probably post a fairly hefty tale of events in the avatar thread to explain what some may call heresy.
__________________
Los Ingobernables de Harlond Last edited by Eomer of the Rohirrim; 02-18-2005 at 10:28 AM. Reason: Wargs, it was Wargs who did it, not me! Why won't you people believe me? |
02-18-2005, 12:39 PM | #138 | |
A Mere Boggart
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: under the bed
Posts: 4,814
|
Quote:
Maybe it is indeed indicative of our society today that spiritual needs and values are subject to the same kind of 'quick fix' that we might demand of our bodily or material needs. Just as many prefer surgery over exercise (or indeed just building self-acceptance) in order to look the way they want, many also do not wish to struggle with metaphysical questions and seek a quick answer in a self-help book or some such. Naturally, the films are a simplified version of LotR so the moral messages/questions will also be simplified. I can't disagree that the films are a whole lot more moral than many other films/TV/games etc., but they aren't half as complex as the books. Virtue is actually incredibly difficult, and while I have some faith left in the human race and think we'd all secretly like to be better people, it's easier sometimes to have another beer. And if a company is trading on its virtuous nature, then is it any more virtuous? Surely this is another way of marketing services or products? Or am I getting far too cynical?
__________________
Gordon's alive!
|
|
02-18-2005, 02:18 PM | #139 | ||
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,256
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
02-18-2005, 02:36 PM | #140 | ||
Scent of Simbelmynė
|
So much for personal distance
Quote:
Why should the book readers be shocked? This is a retelling of a story we already know. We (as established book-lovers) aren't going to see the film to find out what happens. Why should we have to wonder how the movie's going to turn out? Did they not realize that this "wondering" would probably take the form of "wondering which of the writers was on crack when they wrote this scene"? Quote:
Sophia
__________________
The seasons fall like silver swords, the years rush ever onward; and soon I sail, to leave this world, these lands where I have wander'd. O Elbereth! O Queen who dwells beyond the Western Seas, spare me yet a little time 'ere white ships come for me! |
||
02-18-2005, 02:53 PM | #141 | ||
Corpus Cacophonous
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: A green and pleasant land
Posts: 8,468
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Do you mind? I'm busy doing the fishstick. It's a very delicate state of mind! |
||
02-18-2005, 04:50 PM | #142 |
Auspicious Wraith
Join Date: May 2002
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 4,992
|
Though they must have realised that there was absolutely no way in which they could not have irritated at least some people.
__________________
Los Ingobernables de Harlond |
02-18-2005, 06:24 PM | #143 | |
Shade of Carn Dūm
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Standing amidst the slaughter I have wreaked upon the orcs
Posts: 262
|
Quote:
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRR RRRRRRRRRRRRRGHGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!
__________________
____________________________________ "And a cold voice rang forth from the blade. Yea, I will drink thy blood, that I may forget the blood of Beleg my master, and of Brandir slain unjustly. I will slay thee swiftly." |
|
02-18-2005, 08:27 PM | #144 | |
Stormdancer of Doom
|
Quote:
__________________
...down to the water to see the elves dance and sing upon the midsummer's eve. |
|
02-18-2005, 08:56 PM | #145 | |
Shade of Carn Dūm
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Standing amidst the slaughter I have wreaked upon the orcs
Posts: 262
|
Quote:
__________________
____________________________________ "And a cold voice rang forth from the blade. Yea, I will drink thy blood, that I may forget the blood of Beleg my master, and of Brandir slain unjustly. I will slay thee swiftly." |
|
02-19-2005, 10:58 AM | #146 |
Auspicious Wraith
Join Date: May 2002
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 4,992
|
That's perhaps one reason why it's so good.
__________________
Los Ingobernables de Harlond |
02-19-2005, 12:29 PM | #147 | |
Shade of Carn Dūm
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Standing amidst the slaughter I have wreaked upon the orcs
Posts: 262
|
Quote:
__________________
____________________________________ "And a cold voice rang forth from the blade. Yea, I will drink thy blood, that I may forget the blood of Beleg my master, and of Brandir slain unjustly. I will slay thee swiftly." |
|
02-19-2005, 01:44 PM | #148 |
Pilgrim Soul
Join Date: May 2004
Location: watching the wonga-wonga birds circle...
Posts: 9,916
|
Obviously this is not something that can be answered with any certainty, but if we could crawl through a wormhole/fall through a timewarp, I wonder if those changes tailored to the perceived mores of the time will seem as strange to future watchers as the Nahum Tate version of " Lear" does to us....
__________________
But Finrod walks with Finarfin his father beneath the trees in Eldamar.
Christopher Tolkien, Requiescat in pace |
02-19-2005, 06:10 PM | #149 |
A Mere Boggart
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: under the bed
Posts: 4,814
|
I can't see another version on LotR being made for quite some time, purely because this film version has had so much praise heaped upon it. I am thinking in terms of fifty/sixty years or more before anyone attempts another version. But maybe they will include more of Tolkien's text, and maybe they will stick to the story more. 'Remakes' often do strive to be 'more authentic', and tout themselves as being more true to the original book or to historical fact. Just as we saw the supposedly authentic Bram Stoker's Dracula (which, it turned out, did not stick to the book as it did not include anything of Whitby ) we might see the supposedly authentic JRR Tolkien's Lord of The Rings.
This would depend on authenticity holding any value in a future society of course. And many of the most lauded films simply do not get remade e.g. Gone With The Wind. But I can quite easily see people laughing at certain aspects of the films in 20 years' time, as some things will simply have gone out of fashion, such as the modern idioms used in the script. Just as saying "Man, that was outta sight!" would sound funny nowadays, saying "game over" might well be deeply cringeworthy in 20/30 years' time.
__________________
Gordon's alive!
|
02-20-2005, 09:37 AM | #150 |
Pile O'Bones
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 16
|
If you are a purist then you have to appreciate the movie version for it's scenery, costumes, and allowing you the opportunity to enter Middle Earth visually. You have to admit Jackson was "on the money" when it came to these things. The story itself was altered to appeal to the masses, and it succeeded immensely. The masses are not made up of superior intellectuals who would be willing to look deep into a story to appreciate its messages. Jackson wanted to make money, as any filmmaker does. While watching the Two Towers I heard many an audience member mumble "when is the fighting gonna start already". They were bored with the background story. The average moviegoer has the attention span of 1 1/2 hours for a film and they want to see action. It would be complete impossible for PJ to have stuck strictly to Tolkien's story and please the average audience. I think he did an acceptable job in his attempt. I used to get mad at the personality change in Faramir, but then I realized that the audience (who had not read the book) probably wants to see Frodo face impossible odds and probably many viewed the Ring going to Osgiliath as more exciting because it's dangerous for the Ring to go to Osgiliath. In summary I learned to forgive Peter Jackson for his alterations and I learned to appreciate the movies for the opportunity to see Middle Earth on film and the details that were amazingly accurate.
|
02-22-2005, 12:04 PM | #151 |
Auspicious Wraith
Join Date: May 2002
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 4,992
|
Ruo, you are hinting at what may be my main gripe with what happened in the films. The wishes of those who didn't really care about the story were considered, if not on a par, at least nearly as highly as the wishes of those who do care about the story.
And by 'those who care about the story' I include the people who had not read the book and were turned onto the book by the film, and also, I suppose, people of the future, people who have not yet been born; because these are people who will love the story for what it is. I am not at all saying that the book readers should be a closed community. New people will join this community all the time, and that's wonderful. Why should the person who couldn't care less about Frodo's delicate relationship with Gollum be satisfied by an extra fight scene, just so they can whoop and holler some more?
__________________
Los Ingobernables de Harlond |
02-24-2005, 06:48 AM | #152 | |
Brightness of a Blade
|
having your expectations contradicted isn't always pleasant...
I'm sorry I only had time to skim through the rest of this huge thread and I will only reply to this particular bit which attracted my attention in the EE as well.
Quote:
Maybe that's just me. But I'm sure that most of us agree that if they want to feel shocked and angsty they'd rather see a thriller or a horror show than a fantasy movie based on a Tolkien book.
__________________
And no one was ill, and everyone was pleased, except those who had to mow the grass. |
|
02-24-2005, 02:34 PM | #153 |
Animated Skeleton
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: the captain's chair
Posts: 42
|
I haven't had time to read this whole thread, but I read bits and pieces and just have a couple things to say.
Isn't it hilarious that most of the people who are criticizing the movie also really like the movie? I mean, it's one of their favorites and yet they find so much fault with it. That must mean that most of the movie is awesome, and that these other things aren't enough to take the movie down too much. But I guess it's probably super frustrating to have something that's really good when, in their minds, it could've/should've been "perfect". If that's what you believe though (that an exact replication of the book on the screen would've been "perfect"), doesn't that mean you view the book as "perfect"- I mean, like it's the Bible or something?
__________________
You can't be a great painter. You only have one ear.
|
02-24-2005, 03:15 PM | #154 |
Auspicious Wraith
Join Date: May 2002
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 4,992
|
Well, I don't think the Bible is perfect...
__________________
Los Ingobernables de Harlond |
02-24-2005, 10:36 PM | #155 | ||
Animated Skeleton
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: the captain's chair
Posts: 42
|
Quote:
But it seems that my post was flawed as well. I had a bit of free time this evening so I read more of this thread, and it seems that the "sacred text" idea has already been brought up. Sorry for being redundant. I'm just a newbie. Quote:
When you are reading a book there's never a time when you turn the page and something jumps out at you (unless it's a pop-up book ) and there is never a time where an unexpected loud noise scares you. A book cannot shock and surprise in the same way a movie can. A movie can shock and surprise in many ways (and shocks and surprises always get a reaction from the audience, which is what directors are shooting for) therefore movie people are more obsessed with shocking people. It's in their nature. And as badly as we want a "true" version, just think if PJ had given it to us. Half the threads on every forum wouldn't exist. Someone would start a thread and say "Wow, that movie was good. It was just like the book." and then everyone else would post and say "yeah, that's what I think" and then mods would shut the thread down due to "redundant posts". (a bit of an exaggeration, we could still talk about the acting, visuals, and music- but if everything was exactly like the book than all character discussions and the like could simply be put into the books forum) Anyway, I loved the movies and though they perhaps would've been more "magical" for me had they stuck to the book, the deviations PJ made leaves the door open for a future director (in 35 years or so?) to make his mark by making a version that sticks to the pages a bit better.
__________________
You can't be a great painter. You only have one ear.
|
||
02-25-2005, 12:58 AM | #156 | ||
Brightness of a Blade
|
Quote:
But this is a little beside the point. Quote:
__________________
And no one was ill, and everyone was pleased, except those who had to mow the grass. |
||
02-25-2005, 02:52 AM | #157 | |
Wight
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: here, there, everywhere...
Posts: 124
|
Quote:
I dont mean anything in the long run . I'm just awed by this heated dbate
__________________
Reading this sig costs three Galleons, nine Sickles, and a Knut. Pay up! |
|
02-25-2005, 05:37 AM | #158 |
Auspicious Wraith
Join Date: May 2002
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 4,992
|
My distaste for religion had nothing to do with that post.
I actually don't know what your earlier statement means. I don't compare The Lord of the Rings to the Bible in any way. I am further baffled by this idea of perfection. The Lord of the Rings is not perfect nor imperfect; it is non-perfect, or rather, perfection has absolutely nothing to do with it. An exact replication of the book was always a fundamental impossibility, so there could never be a "perfect replication" to be called "perfect". A very good representation would, however, have been very good.
__________________
Los Ingobernables de Harlond |
02-25-2005, 10:15 AM | #159 | |
Late Istar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,224
|
TPotSS wrote:
Quote:
So to say that this "twist" was a cinematic effect at all seems incorrect to me. |
|
02-25-2005, 12:58 PM | #160 | |
A Mere Boggart
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: under the bed
Posts: 4,814
|
Quote:
Books do offer shocks and surprises just as much as films do. Why else would thrillers and horror sell by the bucketload? And who hasn't been kept up all night with a real 'page-turner'? Suspense and shocking moments are one of the mainstays of plot, and you find it even in Jane Austen novels - though perhaps I ought to pick on a bad writer for a good example here.
__________________
Gordon's alive!
|
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|