 | | Re: Saw the movie today! (bit OT) —James Stacey
|
| | | saw the film last night and words fail me in a family newsgroup like this to adequately describe how dire it was. If it was indeed as close to the book as some say I'm suprised its only Neil Gaiman who is (apparently) suing. There wasn't one (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.harrypotter)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Saw the movie today! (bit OT) —Steffan Davies
|
| | | | | "James Stacey" <james@minifig.co.uk> wrote in message news:GntA1M.2HD@lugnet.com... (...) to (...) <snip> The same Neil gaiman of "Sandman" fame? Why's he suing? I for one will not be seeing the Harry Potter movie or reading the books. Why (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.harrypotter)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Saw the movie today! (bit OT) —James Stacey
|
| | | | | | | (...) oo-er :) (...) yes the very same. It was over a character from the book of death, but he's not going to sue now (I checked) whoo hoo 15 days till Fellowship of the Ring -- James Stacey ---...--- www.minifig.co.uk #925 - I'm a citizen of (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.harrypotter)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Saw the movie today! (bit OT) —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | | | (...) I am an outsider on both counts as I am someone that would prefer to read the source mythology over most fantasy fiction in the first place, but even I am excited by the LOTR movie. LOTR has stood the test of time, and while I somehow never (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.harrypotter)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Saw the movie today! (bit OT) —Ian Bishop
|
| | | | | (...) to (...) Never mind the film itself, what about the SW part 2 trailer? That was worse. SW has clearly drifted into the mainstream Hollywood bracket, with all those earth-bound shots of scenic beauty and lovey-dovey romantic diversions. Pah! (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.harrypotter)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Saw the movie today! (bit OT) —Michael LeCount
|
| | | | (...) Show me any book that is totally original. As a childrens book, which as you point out it is, I have to say that the series is building up to be an impressive set of books with the prisoner of Azkaban being my favourite so far. Yes of course, (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.harrypotter)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Saw the movie today! (bit OT) —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | (...) Speaking as an outsider, since I haven't read more than a few pages of Potter (though I'm casually familiar with the overall plot), I would suggest that one of Rowlings' greatest virtues is that the vast story she's crafted is one of very, (...) (23 years ago, 4-Dec-01, to lugnet.loc.uk, lugnet.harrypotter)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Saw the movie today! (bit OT) —Erik Olson
|
| | | | | (...) I'm an outsider, too, but if you remember what was on the children's fantasy list 20 years ago, there were a tremendous number of books about witchcraft, not derivative of those things either. Susan Cooper doesn't count (too Arthurian) but (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Saw the movie today! (bit OT) —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | (...) That's not a bad point, and I should have specified "major 20th century works of Western fantasy. All of these Victorian Witchcraft writers played their part, but honestly none can be said to have had the impact of Arthur, Gandalf, or Harry. (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Saw the movie today! (bit OT) —Erik Olson
|
| | | | | | | (...) That's a little premature. When I was a kid, *everybody* in my class had read or listened to those authors I brought up (thanks to reading lists). Tolkien was obscure by comparison (few are able to conquer Tolkien before age 12. He didn't win (...) (23 years ago, 6-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Saw the movie today! (bit OT) —Erik Olson
|
| | | | | | (...) Asimov's magazine (arrived yesterday) carries an article contrasting polar opposites Tolkien and ... Mervyn Peake (_Gormenghast_). Somehow I have managed to delay learning more than how to spell that, and this columnist considers him the (...) (23 years ago, 7-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Saw the movie today! (bit OT) —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | (...) Hmm.. Another great point. Maybe I should reduce the "absoluteness" of my earlier comment, and say simply that many post-Tolkien writers are very heavily influenced by him. How's that for non-commital?! 8^) (...) Feh! Time and space are surely (...) (23 years ago, 7-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Saw the movie today! (bit OT) —Erik Olson
|
| | | | | | a somewhat fuller review: Thomas M. Disch: _The Dreams Our Stuff Is Made Of: How Science Fiction Conquered the World_ I didn't realize how sardonic his book was until I had paid for it. In the first chapter, The Right To Lie, Disch explores how (...) (23 years ago, 10-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Saw the movie today! (bit OT) —James Stacey
|
| | | | I fully agree that lending aspects from other litriture or sources is valid and can lead to greater creativity and fantastic works. Shakespear's plays were nearly all reworkings of existing stories, Tolkiens LotR contains many aspects and concepts (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Saw the movie today! (bit OT) —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | (...) So, any time four characters unite against a powerful enemy, it's derivative of Tolkien? (...) So, any time an old character has a pre-story history with the enemy, it's derivative of Tolkien? And I would point out that Gandalf isn't (...) (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Saw the movie today! (bit OT) —Jeremy H. Sproat
|
| | | | | (...) This only helps to reinforce my assertation that LotR is basically Star Wars with the serial numbers filed off. Cheers, - jsproat (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Saw the movie today! (bit OT) —John Neal
|
| | | | | In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Dave Schuler writes: My point is that, if you use selective observation as you have done, it's (...) ??? Really? Please prove and do this for Monty Python's Holy Grail and The Matrix... :-) John (23 years ago, 5-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Saw the movie today! (bit OT) —James Stacey
|
| | | | Ah yes cool I'd forgotten those. I'll add them to the list :) (by the way the list in the last posting was a JOKE) :P -- James Stacey ---...--- www.minifig.co.uk #925 - I'm a citizen of Legoland travelling Incommunicado "Dave Schuler" (...) (23 years ago, 6-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | LoTR v. Harry Potter —Aaron Dalan
|
| | | | (...) snip and James goes on to give several other striking similarities. I am 30 years old, and I have read the Hobbit, LoTR, and most all of JRR Tolkien's other related works, as well as most of Christopher Tolkien's scholarship on his father's (...) (23 years ago, 7-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: LoTR v. Harry Potter —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | (...) **snip of some discussion of theme archetypes** The central issue is originality and cleverness of presentation. To this end, I would say Rowling has definitely achieved originality of the whole if not of the parts, and that's really all an (...) (23 years ago, 7-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: LoTR v. Harry Potter —Aaron Dalan
|
| | | | | | (...) I stand by my characterization. Did you happen to walk around on Halloween night? There were LEGIONS of kids wearing wizard costumes. The story has struck a chord with the children of the world to such an amazing extent that they are actually (...) (23 years ago, 8-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: LoTR v. Harry Potter —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | (...) screens. Maybe, maybe not. Would these legions of consumers have been wearing HP costumes if the movie hadn't been at the crest of a marketing wave since early Spring? I doubt it, though we can never know for sure. In any case, you're (...) (23 years ago, 10-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: LoTR v. Harry Potter —Aaron Dalan
|
| | | | | | | (...) I had seen that Onion piece earlier, but it didn't really support my argument so I didn't deighn to mention it:) Maybe 10 years from now, Harry Potter will be long forgotten, and I will have egg on my face. Star Wars, Raiders of the Lost Ark, (...) (23 years ago, 10-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: LoTR v. Harry Potter —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | | | (...) Yeah, well, I'm STILL gonna go see The Lord of the Rings - I've been waiting (wait, I've run out of toes and fingers!) a long time for this. :-) Bruce (it's not like I haven't read it enough) (23 years ago, 10-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: LoTR v. Harry Potter —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | (...) I am not really taking issue with the above statement, but it reminded me of a great essay in cultural anthropology: "Shakespeare in the Bush" (URL) surprised to find it online and for FREE! I love that essay... -- Hop-Frog (23 years ago, 7-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: LoTR v. Harry Potter —Aaron Dalan
|
| | | | (...) Just read and enjoyed the essay. Now your assignment--right a fictional account of someone trying to explain the plot of LoTR to those tribal elders. :) Aaron D. (23 years ago, 10-Dec-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | |
