Quote:
Originally Posted by Bêthberry
That bit of prosyletizing aside, I do think that DT could well work on his Tolkien credentials. Sure enough that those comments about heroic fantasy and swords and little people could be his attempt to ensure that his movie was not incorrectly catalogued as that sort of fantasy--Merlin adventures and all that. Yet at the same time he does need to demonstrate some appreciation for Tolkien's ethos if he hopes to avoid the kind of criticisms which Jackson has received. The Pan's Labyrinth website contains lots of media spin on DT's idea of fantasy and proclaims his credentials about the formal academic study of fairytale (which are even then selective). There's nary a mention of Tolkien's OFS. As I think I posted elsewhere on this forum, it would make a facinating interview (or media spin) for him to comment on Tolkien's idea of fairie.
|
Does anyone find it disturbing that Jackson -- with all his pompous rewrites and the egocentric need to steer Tolkien's plot as his own private vehicle, not to mention his original time investment -- should surrender such power to another director? What, he's too busy for such an important project? He was a relative second tier director prior to LotR (not wishing to disturb Jackson apologists, but he was never spoken of in the same breath as his contemporaries Scorsese, Ridley Scott, Coppola et al), and his production since LotR remains spotty (King Kong was dreadful -- the original black and white version remains the standard).
And so, succumbing to the power of the Ring (in this case representing corruptive power), Jackson has become 'thin — sort of stretched, like butter scraped over too much bread'. LotR was indeed Jackson's 'bread and butter', and I am still rather surprised he would relinquish the golden calf to a bull in the china shop (del Toro -- Ole!).