Peter Jackson chose action adventure flash over the less modern and more mysterious world of jrr tolkien.
In fact,
while we know from twenty angles how an orc's head can be severed from its body and the amazing swiftness with which an arrow can be dispatched through an adam's apple,-- the deeper storyline and the wondrous mysteries contained in Tolkien's dialog are barely whispered loud enough to hear above the crunch of bone and the roar of fire.
The imagination used many years ago when reading the four books (Lord of the Rings) is not insulted whatsoever by the visuals and the capturing of Middle Earth in Jackson's films. There is no fault to be found with the marvelous painting of another culture and the perfect details that take us there.
A mind is captured by plot when reading a novel or watching a movie for the first time-- then nuances of character and such devices as metaphor kick in on the second go-round, and subsequently the marvels of recapitulation and historical allegory amaze the readers of all great literature or even good novels.
That is why reading the hobbit is satisfying the third and fourth and fifth time.
That is why watching the movie was ok for one time.
I am sorry -- whether all the action adventure and additions to the movie were made in order to fill out three rather than two releases-- or Jackson is just seduced into thinking the public wants more of what it already has too much of----
none of us were impressed and instead were saddened by the contrast
between the breadth of feelings created back when the deeper story was read, (do you remember your first copy?)
and this movie--
the exchange of storyline/history/motives for the yawn of repetitive "action" packed movie--
we watched.
(and-- why eliminate or change scenes from the book? Why? WHY! AUUUGHHHHHH??!!?!
In fact,
while we know from twenty angles how an orc's head can be severed from its body and the amazing swiftness with which an arrow can be dispatched through an adam's apple,-- the deeper storyline and the wondrous mysteries contained in Tolkien's dialog are barely whispered loud enough to hear above the crunch of bone and the roar of fire.
A mind is captured by plot when reading a novel or watching a movie for the first time-- then nuances of character and such devices as metaphor kick in on the second go-round, and subsequently the marvels of recapitulation and historical allegory amaze the readers of all great literature or even good novels.
more hobbit and one horned goat HERE
That is why reading the hobbit is satisfying the third and fourth and fifth time.
That is why watching the movie was ok for one time.
I am sorry -- whether all the action adventure and additions to the movie were made in order to fill out three rather than two releases-- or Jackson is just seduced into thinking the public wants more of what it already has too much of----
none of us were impressed and instead were saddened by the contrast
between the breadth of feelings created back when the deeper story was read, (do you remember your first copy?)
and this movie--
the exchange of storyline/history/motives for the yawn of repetitive "action" packed movie--
we watched.
(and-- why eliminate or change scenes from the book? Why? WHY! AUUUGHHHHHH??!!?!
One Insult
An insult to true fans was the cartooning of the book. Impossible stunts turned the real world of middle earth into a transformers comic book. There were several that annoyed me. Sliding down gold (that was turned molten in 10 minutes) on a shield made into a sled was laughable.
Tolkien did not insult readers that way and moviegoers already have scores of directors who insult them mercilessly with crap.
We didn't need it like this.
The wonderful moments and
the fine acting were wonderful and fine.
Can we have some more of that please?
.
No comments:
Post a Comment