Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyBrooke
And I can't believe that you [meaning Mithalwen] have somehow managed to change a I wish he wanted to because it would have been a better movie into blaming him for the mistakes - I leave full blame for the mistakes on PJ.
|
Very well, but I think you still
implied at least (through your wish, even if unintended), that Christopher Tolkien 'should' have done something that he didn't, something that only
possibly might have changed the films
into some measure of better, which judging by the reactions on the web, 'better' for a film being quite subjective in the first place.
Quote:
|
All I said was that I wished Christopher Tolkien had a more active role, because I believe it could have and would have been a better movie. I can understand why he didn't, because he is an old man.
|
Not that you said otherwise, but Christopher Tolkien, at any age, is also entitled to his opinion about the suitability of the book being adapted for film, and we have no reason to not believe him. Plus, as you're talking about mights and maybes here, any involvement would also
maybe (which I think likely actually) result in the filmmakers claiming (something like): 'and we had Christopher Tolkien's input too' generalizing in the extreme and giving their films a false sense of 'authorization' even in some measure.
And considering how poor I think these adaptations are (and I obviously cannot speak for Christopher Tolkien), 'better' would need to be
significantly better, possibly starting with rewrites on page one, and a wholly different take on certain characters, tone, focus, action, 'modernization' and humor.
What if CJRT agreed with me after seeing the film treatment (as I'm sure he would)
Let's say after months of only hopeful work Christopher Tolkien gave us 'closer to Tolkien' here or there and arguably made the films better, but if the end sum is still significantly poor as far as 'faithful' is concerned, then I think CJRT would certainly be hailed as a contributor, yet in this possible scenario, would feel that he basically failed in a larger context in any case. Even if betterness is achieved (according to enough opinions) there's no guarantee of putting out a work that Christopher Tolkien would not mind having his name attached to -- which I think shirly would happen if the filmmakers changed even only a number of small details because of his advice.
I'm not in the camp of 'never try' to better something even if things seem unlikely, but afterall this is a film (hyperbole alert) not world hunger, and I think your wish places Christopher Tolkien into a
potentially unwanted situation; and it's not the first film based on Tolkien's work, won't be the last, and certainly isn't alone among various interpretations from various fields of art.
Ask a man somewhat advanced in years, who already doesn't think the book is suitable for film (for his own reasons) to drop his work on
The Children of Hurin (it would seem, and at least for a time), to try to sway some director about the latest film adaptation because it might be better in some measure (if they listen to him), but not necessarily faithful in sum to the work he truly cares about?