<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Peter Jackson was a long-time Tolkien fan, and claims to have the highest respect for JRRT's works. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Well, he can claim to be the Queen of Sheba if he wants.<P> <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Furthermore, making statements like "he must not have liked it very much" is not a coherent way to make an argument.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Okay: by constantly undermining the character of Frodo and skipping or changing important parts of the characterisation and motivation of other characters such as Aragorn, Elrond, Gandalf, Faramir, and Saruman Jackson has demonstrated that he is not willing to film what is the easiest aspect of the book to adapt: the characters. Since this is also the most important aspect of the book we must ask why he changed it. <P>The obvious answer is that Jackson simply didn't care enough about the characters to try. Why else would he not bother with the resolution of Saruman's story? Why else destroy the entire purpose of Frodo's stand at the ford and his leaving of the Fellowship? Why play around with Sam and Frodo's relationship? ANYONE that liked the book would see these scenes as absolutely crucial to story. <P>The added material likewise shows that Jackson was not very interested in the book: the terrible side-trip to Osgiliath was probably the low point of the second film, unless it was Aragorn's "death" which was also added.<P>Do you think Jackson added this crap material because he prefered the original? Of course not! He added it in because he thought it was better, and if that's what he thinks is better he must have a very low opinion of the original.
|