Home Films/DVD Asylum

Movies from comedy to drama to your favorite Hollyweird Star.

[ Follow Ups ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Films/DVD Asylum ]
[ Alert Moderator ]

Re: "Yeah JRR Tolkien was an idiot and you are a genius."

Are you not bright enough to understand the meanng of "either?" Why should I try again when #1 was a bingo? Use your brain dude.

I understand the meaning of either, and your either/or was assinine. Thus: "try again!"

So if you think Jackson failed to bring the original content and intent of Tolkien please feel free to tell us how and why. Otherwise deal with the fact that you just stuck your foot in your mouth.

"Like I said, do a search."

Get back to me when you have something of substance to support your rants. I'm not going on some easter egg hunt on your behalf. I'll bet all you previous posts were no more substantial than the drival you have posted on this thread. Ge back to me when you ae willing o get off your intelectual ass and make a valid point. Till then you ae dismissd.

I'm not here to do you any favors. The effort it would have taken you to do a search using the terms "Bulkington" and "Tolkien" or "LoTR" is minimal. Detailed argumentation takes time, as you well know. Instead of making an honest effort to engage my opinions on these films, which I'm pretty sure are just a quick search away, tell me where your real interests lie. It's convenient for you to assume I wrote long posts reducable to variations on "kaka." Whatever makes you feel good.

"I'll try getting back to you. I've got a job to do here. But, no, Jackson did not bring the original content and intent of Tolkien to film. I'd be more than happy to debate the point with you."

Fine ball is in your cour. You have made your assertions now try to suport them. Til then....

Your refusal to do a search for my previous posts leads me to believe you're not in any way genuinely interested in hearing what I have to say. If you show genuine interest, maybe I'll indulge you. I don't have much at stake in this however, and the dumb shit you've written in response to me doesn't make me very interested in defending my credibility against the likes of you.

"But that said, so what?"

You don't see the value in faithfulness o an original work that is loved by millions and has an intene dvevoted fan base? You are unaware of the history of highly successful films that were faithful to original works as apposed to the very spotty record of films hat were far less faithful to their originals? No, it isn' a requirement for a good movie to be faithful to a book upon which it is based. But if the book is outstanding enough it stands to reason that a fiathful skillful film adaptation is very likely to be outstanding as well. Books and movies re both forms of stroy telling. Tell the same story well enough nd you likely get the same results with either medium.

What you just wrote is so outragious naive it's staggering. Literature and film are two totally different media, and the success of both is measured not by content alone--content being, apparently, your only standard of faithfulness. Again, Jackson's films could have been faithful in content (they weren't, and I'm not sure why you'd need someone to point this out to you) and style (which determins how the content is experienced), and still it would not necessarily have been successful. Tolkien's books weren't screenplays. "Faithfulness" to his books results in a worthy film as a matter of course no more than a great screenplay of a great film, if re-shot, would result in anywhere near as great a film.

"That doesn't prove Jackson's stupidity in the slightest."

Your name calling certainly doesn't prove it either.

You're grasping.

" In "failing" to be faithful to the content and intent of the original, or in pointedly departing from them, a good film still might have resulted."

You get to talk about that when you have shown how Jackson strayed substantially from the content and intent of the original books.

I get to talk about whatever the fuck I want when I want. Do you seriously have a problem with the principle as stated? If so, I'm not sure you're worth bothering over. I'm totally serious.

" Likewise, faithfulness doesn't assure success."

I disagree. Skillful intelegent faithful cinematic adaptaions of great literary works pretty much inevitably make for an excellent films. If you can think of any exceptions feel free to name them.

I seriously cannot fucking believe you just took that line of argument.

I can't believe it.

"That you can't seem to see that I assume to be characteristic of most of the praise for the films."

That you can't demonstrate that I assume to be characteristic of most of the criticism of the films.

Sigh.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Signature Sound   [ Signature Sound Lounge ]

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
You can not post to an archived thread.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]