XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien   
   From: mr@sandman.net   
      
   In article ,   
    Stan Brown  wrote:   
      
   > On Sat, 4 Aug 2012 04:37:55 +0000 (UTC), Lewis wrote:   
   > > Yes, but I was talking about *Christopher* Tolkien, not JRR. I have no   
   > > idea if JRR himself ever said anything about movies or not. He did sell   
   > > the rights to have movies made, so he couldn't have been that opposed to   
   > > the idea.   
   >   
   > It was in Letter 202 (1957-09-11): he quite explicitly said he's take   
   > a little money for a movie that was faithful to the story, and a   
   > whole lot of money for a movie that wasn't: "Art or Cash".   
   >   
   > In June 1958 Letter 210 to Forrest Ackerman outlined a lot of   
   > Tolkien's objections to the proposed movie script.  It's interesting   
   > to read that letter in the light of hindsight after Jackson's LotR   
   > was released.  Perhaps the key sentence: "If details are to be added   
   > to an already crowded picture, they should at least fit the world   
   > described."   
      
   I would say that the Jackson movies stays faithful to that passage.   
   Had it read "the story described" or "the themes described" it would   
   have been a bit more artist-centered. But "the world described" is   
   pretty loose. It could be read as loosely as "Don't add spaceships and   
   lasers" to make an extreme point.   
      
   Everything in the movie world is very faithful to the books. From the   
   black gate to the Argonauts. Sure, some things are a bit off, but for   
   visual reasons. Like the location of Bara-dûr. And... I don't know if   
   I can think of anything else... I was going to say that the layout of   
   the Hornburg is off as well, but I don't remember if it's off from the   
   description or from my own vision of it.   
      
      
   --   
   Sandman[.net]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)