(unknown)

[susanbones2003]

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" <rkdas at ...> 
wrote:
>
> --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "joxy" <joxy@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, "Karen" <kchuplis@> wrote:
> > >
> > > What did they "invent"?
> > 
> > They invented dozens of complete scenes,
> > and when they used original scenes they often invented a whole 
lot 
> of
> > crass dialogue to ruin them.
> > Just start at the beginning of FOTR, as Frodo jumps into 
Gandalf's
> > cart and hugs him like a long-last uncle - a ludicrous invention 
> and
> > pathetic dialogue!
> > I won't bore with any more details; the string of inventions
> > throughout the three films is well-known - notorious many would 
> say.
> > So sad, when they had the privilege of access to far more 
original
> > material than they could ever have used, so that they had no 
need 
> of
> > inventing anything.
> > But they didn't always invent, and there is much original 
material 
> in
> > the films, action and dialogue, which is a lot better than 
nothing 
> at all!
> 
> Jen D. here,
> You won't get me trying to convince you that all the invented 
stuff 
> they did was great. I just can't fight that battle with a serious 
> fan. But you will agree that Tolkien didn't always write in a way 
that would be amenable to film. When you look at the things they 
> invented, some times it was to get something established quickly. 
> Like that jumping into Gandalf's arms. And it would have been 
> idiotic had Frodo been his proper age. They chose to emphasis the 
> child-like nature of the Hobbits and then went one step further 
and 
> made them almost youngsters, untried, innocent. But did it matter 
to 
> you how much detail they went into in order to depict Middle Earth 
> properly? The Shire, all those many, many locations and the 
infinite 
> detail? I just finished reading the books and I can clearly see 
how 
> they rearranged information, created things, truncated or left out 
> so much. And it's not exactly the same story, of course not, but 
> it's got much of the same heart. That's my peeve with HP movies. 
> Sometimes I don't feel the film maker actually understood the 
heart 
> of the film. Putting in stuff can be self-indulgent, or it can 
serve 
> to make a better story, cinematically. I know they were going for 
a 
> better story cinematically. I never ever felt like they were 
> indulging themselves, or cutting a corner even. But I know you 
have 
> many people on your side. I won't convince you. Let's just hope 
the 
> next HP gets someone who is intent on getting at the heart of that 
> story because it is definitely the most difficult book to get 
> through!
> J
> >
>