vasa

All right, I still gave it a seven, and the evening wasn't wasted.

But, once all the gush is over, I think this will go down like the equally (initially) hyped TITANIC, and for the same reasons: too much hyperbole, and a reckless disregard for the beauty of the source.

I can quite understand that a film about as dense a book as this must cut out detail. But why ADD detail- and detail that distracts considerably from the integrity of the story?

Let's see: the Ents have to be duped into joining the fight; Faramir does not show his essential difference from his brother Boromir, and captures Frodo and Sam, only releasing them later; Wossisname- the king of Rohan- is physically enchanted by Saruman. (I also don't recall him- or his people- being the way they were portrayed. Thought I'd stepped into a showing of Schindler's List for a while there) Maybe that was why they had to have a wholly unnecessary battalion of elves show up, doubtlessly transported there by Deus ex Machina Airlines?

Tolkien eschewed any use of allegory- spoke outright against it, in fact. Quite a contrast to the several Shakesperian orations (Forests good! Technology bad!!!) in which we discover unsuspected depths in our hobbit friends. Clowns and buffoons in the first, Machiavelis in the second: what will they do in the third?

-And speaking of clowns, am I the only one who objects to Gimli being the comic relief?

Boy, that Tolkien... great story line... if only he'd known how to write...

Not the world's worst movie: very good acting, the usual high standards of cinematography and special effects- but the story! The continuity!!

Even I, (not even an amateur) could have clipped the last 30 minutes down to about three or so. People, (and thingys) wander in and out of the plot without rhyme or reason- certainly without continuity- and, of course, dreamwork's cloying cuteness is a real danger to my diabetes.

Wonder why no one has ever filmed the greatest story along these lines, Theodore Sturgeon's "Helen O'Loy"?

Gormenghast must be one of the densest novels of the century. For years, I've dreamed of filming it, while realizing, (like REAL film people), how impossible it would be. And it is. Beautiful though the film is, it still pales in comparison to the book.

Though the attempt is certainly worth while. It does manage to cover most of the themes, though many are downplayed or chopped out. (In the book, when Steerpike kills Barquentine, his son Sourdust becomes the Master of Ritual; while the horror of Swelter and Flay (with his creaking joints wrapped in flannel to muffle the sound) is minimized. (By the way: Christopher Lee is terrific.)

Too much sex, which is quite absent from the books, but not badly done; and the costumes are magnificent.

Incidently, the casting is incredibly accurate to the caracatures Peake did of the main characters. You'd think the cartoons were sketches of the actors, rather than the other way around.

FANTASTIC! (In the true meaning of the word)