XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien   
   From: mr@sandman.net   
      
   In article <7ec6975912oj8gqgrbh2g2ccsd5vbbpvif@4ax.com>,   
    Paul S. Person  wrote:   
      
   > >That would of course only hold true if there was some form of   
   > >universally agreed upon metric which led to the Hobbit only possible   
   > >running length could be 80 minutes - which of course is absurd.   
   >   
   > I'm sorry, but that is not the case. Not that such a metric would not   
   > be absurd (it would be) but that such a metric is required.   
   >   
   > The existing version of /TH/ runs 80 minutes and includes almost   
   > everything in the book (it drops Beorn, but then, even at 9hrs 20min,   
   > PJ's /LOTR/ drops Bombadil). Comparing the existing, adequate, version   
   > with the projected monstrosity (and two films, presumably 3 hrs each,   
   > do constitute a monstrosity, given how short the novel /TH/ is) does   
   > not require agreement on an 80 minute metric.   
      
   This presupposes that a given story can only be told in one way, and   
   that the existing TH is a template for that way. Obviously, I don't   
   agree with that.   
      
      
   --   
   Sandman[.net]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)