In Reply to: Why is it that some Boston critics have to pretend like they're writing reviews for The New Yorker? posted by Audiophilander on January 2, 2004 at 21:58:15:
Check out the current issue.For some book fans, no adaptation will ever be worthy enough. They will never be comfortable with another's personal vision, much less changes in emphasis or cuts - all necessary in the transition from page to screen.
The Boston Glove writer has missed much in the film, particularly regarding character development.
Jackson's LOTR is not perfect - few movies are. But I believe the essentials of Tolkien's story are well captured in Jackson's films. The spirit and themes of the book are there, if one has eyes to see.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Except that The New Yorker critic loved ROTK. - Harmonia 15:36:39 01/03/04 (5)
- Maybe you better read that again. Here ya go! - clarkjohnsen 12:12:35 01/04/04 (3)
- Maybe YOU better read it again. - Harmonia 13:21:50 01/05/04 (0)
- Anthony Lane is my hero (nt) - Bulkington 20:03:40 01/04/04 (1)
- Great writer, pretty good critic... nt - clarkjohnsen 09:41:09 01/05/04 (0)
- Re: From Anthony Lane's review... - rico 17:07:39 01/03/04 (0)