Quote:
Originally Posted by Sauron the White
One thing kept coming up in posts from people who tend to not say very good things about the films: and that is that Peter Jackson had the gall to think he could do it beter and make improvements over the book
|
Whenever has PJ stated thta his films are better than the books? And he has acknowledged many times how good the books are.
Quote:
|
Lets face it folks - more people have seen the film version of LOTR than have read the books. And that is the great sin of Peter Jackson. He was so successful that purists despise it that LOTR is now thought of as a film in the minds of hundreds of millions of people all over the world.
|
LOTR is continuosly near or at the top of best loved book lists here in England. Thousands of people have been drawn to the book and have read it BECAUSE of the movies.
Themovie is an adaptation of the Books. If we wanted a word for word copy of the book on celluloid, it would take about 54 hours (the length of the unabridged narrated works available on audio) - Not 9 or 12 hours which we are given - Parts had to be left out and some changed to work on screen.
I'm not saying things were NOT done different to how I would have. But I didn't commit 10 years and probably a lot of my own money to make the films. Neither did you. But Peter Jackson did.