![]() |
€uromeinke, FEJ. and Ghoulish Delight RULE!!! NA abides. |
|
|
|
|
#1 |
|
"ZER-bee-ak"
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,409
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I'm well aware of the alterations made by Jackson, Walsh, & Boyens. Other than a few trifling quibbles, I'm totally fine with their changes. My "from the pen" comment was meant to convey issue with a whole new story being created. If Tolkien had written a book that detailed the goings on in Middle Earth during the period between Hobbit and Fellowship and a well written script adapted that for the screen, I wouldn't be kvetching. Admittedly, I am not a Tolkien scholar, but other than perhaps a passing mention in The Silmarillion, I'm not aware of any story he wrote about that period.
|
|
|
Submit to Quotes
|
|
|
#2 | |
|
Biophage
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Moon
Posts: 2,679
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Quote:
I mean sure, it may be crap in the end, but I don't think the idea is DOA. I'm not sure why The Simarillion is being brought up though, since I'm pretty sure the only events brought up in that were pre-Hobbit to begin with. And iSm, doing the books by "cross-cutting" through the stories was not "lazy". (if anything is lazy, doing it exactly the book's way would have been lazy) I don't think that doing it the book's way in a movie would be inherently better or worse than the way PJ did it. This is Peter Jackson's vision of Tolkien's Lord of the Rings, after all. There was plenty that was changed or altered to make a better cinematic experience in PJ's estimation anyway... the only thing that was "mucked up" by doing that was the Mouth of Sauron sequence, which was a reason it was cut from the original film.
__________________
And they say back then our universe Was a coal black egg Until the god inside Burst out and from its shattered shell He made what became the world we know ~ Bjork (Cosmogony) |
|
|
|
Submit to Quotes
|