April 7, 2003

4 Responses in 1
Chambers

1) I must say that your article, Foolofatook, is perhaps patriotic (to Tolkien I mean) to an 'unhealthy' extent. Read that article about the Disney remake, and then try to call the new movies "Jackson's Adventure resembling The Lord of the Rings". A gross exaggeration, to say the least. Judging by the many articles I've read, other than Undomiel's, I think I speak for many when I say, learn some respect.

I for one find that many of the changes that Jackson has made, to be almost refreshing. You have the stories. You can see them in your imagination. There is no need to put the books on screen exactly as they are, in fact that would almost be a waste of time. The reason for an adaption is to give something new. I'm not saying totally new, just the same atmosphere, the same theme, nearly the same plot, and nearly the same characters. But with some new interpretaions that make it all the more interesting to the lovers of the books. I'm telling you I love the books and the changes: Faramir being 'humanized', Arwen's expansion, especially the 'Aragorn funeral' scene, and the ring to Osgiliath are some of my favourite parts. It's exciting to see something new when it's done well and with respect to Tolkien's style. I think if the 'purists' would have made the movie it would have only been exciting to people who hadn't read the book. The people who had read the book would find that seeing the exact same story on screen would only be less interesting then seeing it in your mind's eye.

2) As for your question about elvish, I can't say that I didn't find your 'dialect' a little humerous.

3) And to the guy that said wait until the battle at Minas Tirith for Pippin's death, I have no idea what your getting at. Please expand on this.

4) And finally to Burnet, I read your "Galadriel preserving the elvish eccentricity" article, and I fully agree. Love and Respect to my brizzo fo' shizzo. Peace.