Originally Posted by max
Oh, but there is a poetry to the language of landscape description that movies can't capture.
I saw the movie series in a movie house. I've read the trilogy several times over. I think the movie was a few notches lower intellectually than the books.
I just reread The Hobbit and like it because it is such a canny contraption; a child's book holding within it this much larger scheme, and only slightly adverting to it.There's a genius with the simple language, too. Language counts for a lot, and movies just can't present this.
you see, I thought the movies were a few notches lower in pretension that the books...
But then, I just loathe poems in 'Elvish' (hello? made up language alert!) and Tom Bombadil, so...
(and yes, I am very aware of the storylines and myth from which both those elements are drawn, they just irritate me, ok?
I love that about The Hobbit, a canny contraption indeed, and I worry that Jackson wants to stretch it out over three films. I thought this would be a perfect opportunity for one really good film.