In Reply to: Ummmm... posted by Audiophilander on July 10, 2005 at 22:56:58:
If I read the book I would not need to see the film and if I need to read the book to understand the film then it's a bad film.The problem with people who have READ the book is that they can read into the film polititical or societal satire because in the book it may have been quite profound. When it is NOT there in the film but one remembers the book they "fill-in" the missing gaps. The audience who have not read the book don;t have the gaps to "fill-in" and therefore the film is in isolation and can be more objectively viewed.
It is the same with LOTR - the film without reading the Book is overlong tiresomme one note and not the least bit deep. I can only imagine that the book has some sort of political satire or point other than power corrupts whioch is the only thing the films harped on for 9 hours and thanks I alreayd know that.
Some crtics have been on about terrorism and 9/11 in War of the Worlds...Holy read anything you want into this film Batman because it just is not there. Interestingly idf there was commentary, the lopsidedness of power in the world today the film SHOULD have been set in Iraq with the aliens finally dieing from not understanding different cultures -- that MIGHT have worked.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- A film should stand ENTIRELY on its own merit! - RGA 11:44:44 07/11/05 (1)
- "If I read the book I would not need to see the film..." - It's a classic! I thought that everyone had read WoTW... - Audiophilander 17:01:02 07/11/05 (0)