Peter Jackson comes to Tolkien’s Oxford
Peter Jackson took part in Q&A as part of Exeter College’s celebrations of its eighth century, commemorating Tolkien, one of its most distinguished alumni. Some interesting comments, I thought.
Peter Jackson at Oxford
- Voronwë the Faithful
- At the intersection of here and now
- Posts: 46300
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:41 am
- Contact:
Peter Jackson at Oxford
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
Re: Peter Jackson at Oxford
I'm curious about what they meant as an "Americanized" version of LOTR.
---------------
GNU Terry Pratchett
---------------
GNU Terry Pratchett
'You just said "your getting shorter": you've obviously been drinking too much ent-draught and not enough Prim's.' - Jude
- Primula Baggins
- Living in hope
- Posts: 40005
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:43 am
- Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
- Contact:
Re: Peter Jackson at Oxford
I'm curious, too. I wonder if he's gotten more specific elsewhere.
I could probably guess the kinds of changes Miramax wanted, though. Changing at least one of the Fellowship to a female character? Giving Aragorn mighty thews?
I could probably guess the kinds of changes Miramax wanted, though. Changing at least one of the Fellowship to a female character? Giving Aragorn mighty thews?
“There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tor high up in the mountains, Sam saw a white star twinkle for a while. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, and hope returned to him. For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
- Voronwë the Faithful
- At the intersection of here and now
- Posts: 46300
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:41 am
- Contact:
Re: Peter Jackson at Oxford
I don't believe I have ever heard that specific comment before.
Maybe I'll ask Kristin Thompson. She would know if anyone would.
Maybe I'll ask Kristin Thompson. She would know if anyone would.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
- Voronwë the Faithful
- At the intersection of here and now
- Posts: 46300
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:41 am
- Contact:
Re: Peter Jackson at Oxford
Kristin finds it puzzling, as well.
I'm away at a film festival in Italy and haven't had a chance to read the Q&A. But the comment is puzzling. I can only guess that he means that Miramax (i.e., Michael Eisner of Disney) cut the budget and insisted on a one-film version, as I discuss in my book. That might be "Americanising" to PJ. I've never heard of anything else that they wanted to do to LOTR. Of course, the original script seems to have been aimed at Hollywood executives rather than actual audiences, but Philippa seemed to suggest when I talked to her that that was their strategy for getting the film accepted and that they planned to change it later. But that in itself had nothing to do with the split.
"Spirits in the shape of hawks and eagles flew ever to and from his halls; and their eyes could see to the depths of the seas, and pierce the hidden caverns beneath the world."
- Primula Baggins
- Living in hope
- Posts: 40005
- Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 1:43 am
- Location: Sailing the luminiferous aether
- Contact:
Re: Peter Jackson at Oxford
Thanks for carrying the question further, Voronwë.
“There, peeping among the cloud-wrack above a dark tor high up in the mountains, Sam saw a white star twinkle for a while. The beauty of it smote his heart, as he looked up out of the forsaken land, and hope returned to him. For like a shaft, clear and cold, the thought pierced him that in the end the Shadow was only a small and passing thing: there was light and high beauty for ever beyond its reach.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King
Re: Peter Jackson at Oxford
Wow.
---------------
GNU Terry Pratchett
---------------
GNU Terry Pratchett
'You just said "your getting shorter": you've obviously been drinking too much ent-draught and not enough Prim's.' - Jude
-
- Posts: 3154
- Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 9:31 pm
Re: Peter Jackson at Oxford
Odd. If anything, Americanization would involve turning it into six films, not one!Voronwë the Faithful wrote:Kristin finds it puzzling, as well.
I'm away at a film festival in Italy and haven't had a chance to read the Q&A. But the comment is puzzling. I can only guess that he means that Miramax (i.e., Michael Eisner of Disney) cut the budget and insisted on a one-film version, as I discuss in my book. That might be "Americanising" to PJ. I've never heard of anything else that they wanted to do to LOTR. Of course, the original script seems to have been aimed at Hollywood executives rather than actual audiences, but Philippa seemed to suggest when I talked to her that that was their strategy for getting the film accepted and that they planned to change it later. But that in itself had nothing to do with the split.
Re: Peter Jackson at Oxford
I can only guess Americanization refers more to things like the whole expansion of the Arwen story; or could it refer to the casting itself of several American actors? Is there a difference between Americanization and Hollywoodization?
PtB, you are certainly right that nowadays a Hollywood book adaptation nearly always means sequels, sequels, and even more sequels, but just back in 2000 a lot of high-budget films were produced where the movie stood on its own and possible sequels were at best (or worst?) something that could maybe happen if the movie succeeded at the box-office - not like today where you get a post-credits scene in every second film.
Not saying that bad/unnecessary sequels did not happen before 2000. But the sheer quantity/ratio of film franchises nowadays is simply astounding.
Does this assessment make me sound old?
PtB, you are certainly right that nowadays a Hollywood book adaptation nearly always means sequels, sequels, and even more sequels, but just back in 2000 a lot of high-budget films were produced where the movie stood on its own and possible sequels were at best (or worst?) something that could maybe happen if the movie succeeded at the box-office - not like today where you get a post-credits scene in every second film.
Not saying that bad/unnecessary sequels did not happen before 2000. But the sheer quantity/ratio of film franchises nowadays is simply astounding.
Does this assessment make me sound old?