XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien   
   From: Troels@ThisIsFake.invalid   
      
   In message    
   Paul S. Person  spoke these staves:   
   >   
   > On Sun, 09 Oct 2011 12:41:59 +0200, Troels Forchhammer   
   >  wrote:   
   >>   
   >> In message    
   >> Steuard Jensen  spoke these staves:   
   >>>   
   >>> 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.   
   >>   
   >> You could very well be right -- I don't know how serious it was,   
   >> but perhaps I am just projecting my own attitude onto others.   
      
      
      
   >> who will treat the position that Jackson improved on Tolkien's   
   >> story with the same disdain and ridicule as we will the position   
   >> that Jackson's films are not worthy to be called an adaptation   
   >> of Tolkien's story (or that Jackson's films ought never to have   
   >> been made)   ;-)   
   >   
   > 1) The only thread I recall lately on this topic was about the   
   > upcoming films alleged to be of /The Hobbit/.   
      
   I frankly don't care if the ratio of original to new story-line is   
   1:10, if the story broadly speaking follows the same story-line and   
   the film-makers say that the films are based on Tolkien's /The   
   Hobbit/, then it is, in my book, an adaptation.  It may be a horrible   
   adaptation and it may be a fantastic adaptation, but I think the   
   ratio of original to new 'run-time' is a rather unsafe indicator to   
   use also for the quality of the adaptation -- I could, for instance,   
   easily imagine that it would have required a huge amount of new   
   material to deal with the underlying thematic content of LotR in such   
   a way that Tolkien would feel that it adequately represented his own   
   ideas and position.   
      
      
      
   > 2) Filmmaking is a craft. A really good director, such as   
   > Hitchcock, is a Master Craftsman; PJ is not. PJ is a Journeyman:   
      
   I am not sufficiently knowledgeable -- or even interested -- in   
   matters of cinematography to offer a qualified opinion of the   
   relative merits of various directors as craftsmen.  All I have to go   
   upon is my own preferences based on the relatively few films that I   
   have seen.  Of these I will maintain that, for me, the LotR films are   
   the best fantasy films I have ever seen (I'd even include the /Star   
   Wars/ films in the fantasy category and maintain my assessment), and   
   that I regret that my few problems with the adaptation of Tolkien's   
   underlying thematic content prevent me from fully enjoying them as   
   such.   
      
   --   
   Troels Forchhammer    
   Valid e-mail is    
   Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.   
      
       They both savoured the strange warm glow of being much   
       more ignorant than ordinary people, who were only ignorant   
       of ordinary things.   
    - Discworld scientists at work, /Equal Rites/ (Terry Pratchett)   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)