XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien   
   From: steuard@slimy.com   
      
   [Tremendously belated reply, I know. But a line caught my eye...]   
      
   In message , Troels Forchhammer   
    wrote:   
   > AFT & RABT haven't really been the hotbed of film-rumours that we saw   
   > up to and during the releases of the LotR films -- perhaps that is   
   > one of the signs that Steuard may be right in his assessment of the   
   > groups being at least less pro-film than they were (I am still   
   > uncomfortable about the term 'purist').   
      
   From my perspective, the fact that there was an active thread   
   seriously discussing whether or not Jackson's films deserve to be   
   called "an adaptation of Tolkien's LotR" is proof positive that the   
   tone of the newsgroups is largely anti-film these days. It comes   
   across very much like sour grapes, and I doubt that you'd see most   
   people (or even most Tolkien fans) give such a claim any more time   
   than it took to laugh it away. I don't know if "purist" is the *right*   
   word, but I quite suspect that an outsider looking in on that   
   discussion would have applied it liberally to all involved.   
      
   Steuard "Not Actually As Grouchy As That Sounded" Jensen   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)