Asymmetrical Information

American Beauty, The Hours, Chicago, Far from Heaven...Is there much doubt that Rings will endure long after these are forgotten (not that the ephemeral and political have their own purposes....Nash,and not Ogden)

I am reminded of how I felt when Romanticism returned to Science Fiction, especially Cherryh

Jackson is like, making MOVIES again

American Beauty, The Hours, Chicago, Far from Heaven...Is there much doubt that Rings will endure long after these are forgotten

I don't know if the movies you've listed will be forgotten, exactly, but you've got an excellent point. My grandkids will probably never see American Beauty, but I'd bet a lot of money that they'll know the LOTR movies by heart.

The LOTR phenomenon is the direct result of an outstanding story that was made into an outstanding movie - complete with a plot, themes, and characters that you care about, even though you may already know the ending.

I would be inclined to add the Harry Potter movies to the aforementioned soon-to-be-forgotten list.

And Liv Tyler IS a princess.

The LOTR phenomenon is the direct result of an outstanding story that was made into an outstanding movie - complete with a plot, themes, and characters that you care about, even though you may already know the ending.

I would be inclined to add the Harry Potter movies to the aforementioned soon-to-be-forgotten list.

And Liv Tyler IS a princess.

"I confess that I've enjoyed the Lord of the Rings movies more than nearly any others in recent memory. I think it's because it allows me to spend a little more time in the world of heroism and wizardly that I roamed freely as a child."

BS. You're in lurrve with Viggo's manly stubble.

Rather a stupid comment there, Tom, much as it is recognizably an attempt at flip humor.

I'm with you, Jane. A friend of mine who has written some wonderful fantasy novels published in the last couple of years by a major publisher, but who has a general dislike of movies, comics, and other visual media, and so loves Tolkien, was so offended at the notion of Tolkien movies, no matter how well done, swore she would never see them. She despises the nothing that people will have their own imaginatory images replaced in their minds by unique individual visualizations.

(Anyone really active in the field knows who I mean, as she's not shy about her opinions, which have been well-expressed on Usenet for years; for her sake, I'll leave her otherwise unnamed, as she's otherwise brilliant and a wonderful person and writer.)

I understand perfectly well where she's coming from, but I think it's an overly extreme attitude. As a rule, the movies are merely far expanding the audience for Tolkien, and a significant proportion, of course, go on to read the books where they never would have before. And, in general, I think more people than not are capable of allowing the movie to supplement their mental playground of Middle-Earth, not lock it and limit it with impermeable borders.

I look forward to ROTK, and to affording to buy the Extended Version of TTT and ultimately ROTR, to add to my Extended Version DVD of FOTR and Regular Version of TTT.

Then, after a decent interval, in five years or so, we can begin lobbying for the thirty-hour billion dollar full tv serial adaption.

I'm only one quarter kidding.

Rather a stupid comment there, Tom, much as it is recognizably an attempt at flip humor.

I'm with you, Jane. A friend of mine who has written some wonderful fantasy novels published in the last couple of years by a major publisher, but who has a general dislike of movies, comics, and other visual media, and so loves Tolkien, was so offended at the notion of Tolkien movies, no matter how well done, swore she would never see them. She despises the nothing that people will have their own imaginatory images replaced in their minds by unique individual visualizations.

(Anyone really active in the field knows who I mean, as she's not shy about her opinions, which have been well-expressed on Usenet for years; for her sake, I'll leave her otherwise unnamed, as she's otherwise brilliant and a wonderful person and writer.)

I understand perfectly well where she's coming from, but I think it's an overly extreme attitude. As a rule, the movies are merely far expanding the audience for Tolkien, and a significant proportion, of course, go on to read the books where they never would have before. And, in general, I think more people than not are capable of allowing the movie to supplement their mental playground of Middle-Earth, not lock it and limit it with impermeable borders.

I look forward to ROTK, and to affording to buy the Extended Version of TTT and ultimately ROTR, to add to my Extended Version DVD of FOTR and Regular Version of TTT.

Then, after a decent interval, in five years or so, we can begin lobbying for the thirty-hour billion dollar full tv serial adaption.

I'm only one quarter kidding.

Rather a stupid comment there, Tom, much as it is recognizably an attempt at flip humor.

I'm with you, Jane. A friend of mine who has written some wonderful fantasy novels published in the last couple of years by a major publisher, but who has a general dislike of movies, comics, and other visual media, and so loves Tolkien, was so offended at the notion of Tolkien movies, no matter how well done, swore she would never see them. She despises the nothing that people will have their own imaginatory images replaced in their minds by unique individual visualizations.

(Anyone really active in the field knows who I mean, as she's not shy about her opinions, which have been well-expressed on Usenet for years; for her sake, I'll leave her otherwise unnamed, as she's otherwise brilliant and a wonderful person and writer.)

I understand perfectly well where she's coming from, but I think it's an overly extreme attitude. As a rule, the movies are merely far expanding the audience for Tolkien, and a significant proportion, of course, go on to read the books where they never would have before. And, in general, I think more people than not are capable of allowing the movie to supplement their mental playground of Middle-Earth, not lock it and limit it with impermeable borders.

I look forward to ROTK, and to affording to buy the Extended Version of TTT and ultimately ROTR, to add to my Extended Version DVD of FOTR and Regular Version of TTT.

Then, after a decent interval, in five years or so, we can begin lobbying for the thirty-hour billion dollar full tv serial adaption.

I'm only one quarter kidding.

I once asked a friend why he thought LOTR was so enduring, and his answer was brilliant: "Because Tolkein has this amazing knack of making magic seem so utterly believable and commonplace."

When I start pondering the genetic makeup of the offspring of Aragorn (human) and Arwen (elf), or start protesting "it's goelogically impossible for the mountain ranges of Mordor to form such a perfect square shape" etc I know Tolkein has succeeded. Heh.

Still, if you asked me 10 years ago whether I thought the impact of Star Wars would be neverending, I would've said 'definitely'. Now I'm not so sure.

"Rather a stupid comment there, Tom, much as it is recognizably an attempt at flip humor."

You'd think that anyone who would make a comment like this would be smart enough not to post the same thing thrice.

I would be inclined to add the Harry Potter movies to the aforementioned soon-to-be-forgotten list.

Not sure I agree with Steve on that. I haven't kept up with the more recent Harry Potter books, but I gather Rowling's writing has improved. Comparing the first Harry Potter to FOTR showed how lacking in depth the Potter movie was; perhaps by the seventh novel, Rowling will be closer to Tolkien in skill.

There have been lots of good movies made over the years, but the really enduring ones will have to have universal, exciting plots. My experience is that the movies with the best plots are usually based on excellent novels (or short stories).

I think Jackson's done an exceptional job in packing the whole LOTR trilogy into (effectively) one 10 hour movie; hard to imagine a worthwhile result if he'd had to keep it to six hours. Maybe with the advent of DVD, moviemakers will be escaping from the straitjacket of the 120 minute movie. This would allow many other great novels to be made into movies, and so we might see some more enduring classics in the near future.

1) There was a period in the early eighties when it was done pretty regularly....it was called the mini-series. Weren't really very good novels(Thorn Birds,Captains & Kings), or very good TV.

Recently revisited two of the best...."Shogun" holds up very well, but I found "Masada" to be talky and padded

2) There are quite a few instances of extended format stuff being done on TV now, "24" Sopranos,Carnivale.....maybe even the Whedon shows, maybe a lot of stuff...the difference between soap opera, Mexican "novella" have I got that right, and arced series or extended format is interesting to watch

3) I am just not sure about whether the experiences of reading a novel and watching a video representation of it are too different for me to have much hope of the media crossing. You simply absorb more information at a much faster rate while reading. A movie that is long enough to contain all the info of a ggod book is hust an exhausting experience, and, through art, making a movie that required multiple viewings would certainly not duplicate the reading experience

""Rather a stupid comment there, Tom, much as it is recognizably an attempt at flip humor."

You'd think that anyone who would make a comment like this would be smart enough not to post the same thing thrice."

True, and to not get the reference to Aragorn's secret diaries:

http://www.ealasaid.com/misc/vsd/

"Day Seven:

Suspect Eowyn fancies me. Cannot blame her as stubble so manly is turning even self on."

Comments are Closed.