"Rick" <swtravlr.DeleteThis@NOSPAMtampabay.rr.com> wrote:
>"Paul S. Person" <pperson.DeleteThis@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote in message
>news:f6igvvc0tm3ferf9draquu8qavn20v49g0@4ax.com...
>> "Warchild" <bob.DeleteThis@bob.com> wrote:
>>
>> <snippo>
>>
>> >How long does one have to close their eyes, cover their ears, and go
>> >'lalalalalalalalala' to be able to come to the conclusion that the films
>are
>> >not adapting the books? Enquiring minds want to know.
>>
>> It requires no such effort. It is quite clear from watching them that,
>> great as they are as films, actually adapting JRRT was never PJ's
>> goal.
>
>
>Sorry, but it is quite clear from reading that last sentence that you have
>no interest in being accurate or truthful.
A question was asked:
"How long does one have to close their eyes, cover their ears, and go
'lalalalalalalalala' to be able to come to the conclusion that the
films are not adapting the books?"
And answered:
"It requires no such effort. It is quite clear from watching them
that, great as they are as films, actually adapting JRRT was never
PJ's goal."
If you do not like the answer, that is not my problem.
IIRC, it was announced very early that the films would be PJ's version
of the story -- and not JRRT's.
I have not found the quote yet, and may never find it, but I did
review some of the early interviews (GoogleGroups has messages
incorporating them or with links to them), and "based on" is used
quite a bit. That is also what the movies themselves claim to be. In
short, no claim by PJ or the films themselves to be adaptations or
even attempted adaptations is evident. And the films themselves
clearly are not adaptations. They are excellent fantasy adventure
movies with these links to JRRT:
1) Middle-Earth at the end of the Third Age is reproduced physically
as well as I would ever expect anyone to do it.
2) The broadest outline of PJ's plot follows the broadest outline of
JRRT's plot. However, the more detailed the plot-line you examine is,
the more differences (mostly pointless differences, as many posts on
r.a.b.t. have pointed out) between PJ and JRRT appear.
3) Named characters used by PJ have names used by JRRT (the most
notorious exception, Lurtz, is never named on-screen, at least, not in
the theatrical release). However, few of these characters are the same
person in PJ's story that they are in JRRT's (r.a.b.t. is filled with
the details of PJ's changes). Gandalf, Gollum, Sam and Eowyn appear to
be the least affected -- I would add Eomer but we see so little of him
that it is hard to be sure.
They are not, by any stretch of the imagination, an adaptation. Not
even an attempted adaptation. Sorry, you'll have to be content with
"excellent fantasy adventure" -- "adaptation" is just not credible.
--
I still mostly download on Saturdays & upload on Sundays. Patience is a virtue.
>> Stay informed about: [Film] Two Towers 
FAQ
Search
Profile
Private Messages
Log in
