Following his submissions, the Saucepan Man had taken a seat towards the rear of the courtroom.
At a convenient lull in the proceedings, he stands and makes his way noisily back to the stand.
"I would like to make a few closing comments, if it would please the court."
"Very well, Mr Saucepan."
"M'Lud, it is an established principle of law that, if court proceedings are to have any vestige of legitimacy, then they must not only be fair but must also be seen to be fair. In light of M'Lud's acceptance that his presiding over these proceedings might give the appearance of bias, I would submit that the only fair way to proceed is to suspend them until such time as a wholly independent judge may be appointed. That is, of course, if the trial is to have any legitimacy ...
I am nevertheless glad to see that M'Lud has accepted the defence of artistic license in the case of trivial matters such as hair colour. Of course, if the artisitic license defence is to apply to matters such as this, then it should apply equally across the board. Where a film-maker has the legal right do adapt a book for screen, he clearly has every right to make such alterations as he considers necessary to ensure that the film appeals to its intended audience. It is irrelevant that some individuals may object to such alterations. Equally, it is irrelevant whether the film-maker succeeds in his intended purpose although, in light of the popularity and critical acclaim that Mr Jackson's films have enjoyed, and continue to enjoy, it seems fairly clear that Mr Jackson has suceeded greatly in this regard. Nevertheless, it is, in my submission, clear that he was within his rights to make such alterations and it follows that he has a complete defence to each and every charge that has been laid before this court.
As for loss and injury, I would answer M'Lud's question thusly. Mr Jackson's visualisation does of course affect my own visualisation when reading the books. But I believe that there is very little criticism that can be made of this aspect of the films. For myself, where the visualisation does not accord with my own imagination, as in the case of the Kamikaza Hyenas, then it does not interfere with my conception. It happens that the two mostly coincide. As for the plot and character changes, I would challenge anyone to read the books and imagine Jackson's Faramir in place of Tolkien's Faramir. How can matters such as that impair one's enjoyment of the books? I would simply reiterate that no injury has been occasioned by these films which is not vastly outweighed by their benefits.
Finally, I would like to admit in evidence the following statement made by the Prosecutor in this matter on this very forum:
Quote:
|
I would not choose anyone else besides Peter Jackson to the a film adapatation of The Hobbit. Not only have I been thoroughly moved by his first two Lord of the Rings films (and I hold out hope that the third will be even better!), I could not imagine anyone else's artistic take being brought into a Hobbit movie, as it would ruin the continuity of the Tolkien-film genre.
|
If even the Prosecutor holds such views about these films, then it seems to me that there is simply no case for the defendants to answer."
With this, and in full recognition of the fact that his comments will make little difference to the outcome of the proceedings, the Saucepan Man leaves the stand and clatters his way out of the courtroom. While passing the defence team, he leans over and whispers to defence counsel, "Seems that there's little that you can do here. I would wait for the appeal."
And, with that, he is gone.
<font size=1 color=339966>[ 8:18 PM December 14, 2003: Message edited by: The Saucepan Man ]