![]() |
|
|
|
Visit The *EVEN NEWER* Barrow-Downs Photo Page |
|
|
#11 | |
|
Illustrious Ulair
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties
Posts: 4,240
![]() ![]() |
This new piece on TORN seems quite relevant:
http://greenbooks.theonering.net/anw...es/030105.html Quote:
I do wonder what LotR would be like if Tolkien had written it recently - would he have taken for granted that his book would be optioned & so have written it with that in mind & done some things differently? Its interesting how many pro movie contributors have argued that novels & films work differently & that a book cannot be translated to the screen exactly as it is. It strikes me that many current novels are written so as to be as easy as possible to adapt to other mediums. I think this is perhaps what CT means by LotR being inherently unsuitable for dramatisation in visual form. It was never intended by the author that the story would have any other form. Hence the language (I don't just mean the dialogue)is central. Perhaps that's why I much prefer the radio series, because it not only retains most of the original dialogue but also place the narrator centre stage, & he uses Tolkien's original words. This means that the 'mood' of the tale, so much of which depends on the language & turns of phrase Tolkien used, is retained. In short, listening to the radio series feels like reading LotR, whereas watching the movies doesn't. The radio series is much more like a dramatised reading than a dramatiastion per se. Perhaps that's the only way it can work in terms of dramatisation..
__________________
“Everything was an object. If you killed a dwarf you could use it as a weapon – it was no different to other large heavy objects." Last edited by davem; 03-02-2005 at 02:32 PM. |
|
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
|
|