Thursday, October 15, 2009

The Lord of the Rings project

10:59 PM / Books / Comments10 Comments

Books

At one point, J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings was my favourite book. That may no longer be true, but if so I'm unable to think of another book that would claim the throne in its place. In terms of its impact on the fantasy genre, its importance can't possibly be overstated, and the fact that it has been voted more popular than the Bible in several surveys is a source of considerable amusement and satisfaction for me. (It's a far better novel, too.)

This partial (yes, partial) selection of related books and other assorted odds and ends should indicate just how deeply my obsession ran at one point:

My obsession

As you can see, I don't do obsessions by half. For me, it doesn't really count unless there's grounds for the state intervening and incarcerating me for my own protection.

I first discovered The Lord of the Rings when I was ten years old and was introduced to it by my primary school teacher at the time, after we had done a class project on its predecessor, the more children-friendly The Hobbit. By Christmas, I had finished the first of its three volumes (it was split into what has been inaccurately referred to a trilogy and published in three stages between 1954 and 1955, against its author's wishes), and by the summer of the next year, the whole novel. I've read it so many times since then that I've lost count, although it's been a while since I last cracked it open.

That's going to change. I've decided to read The Lord of the Rings again, cover to cover, appendices included.

My reasons for this are many. First, I simply want to experience the story of the War of the Ring again - no great mystery there. Secondly, it has, as previously mentioned, been a long time since I last read it, and I want to see whether or not it still holds up. Certainly in the intervening years I've become more attuned to its flaws, real or perceived, thanks mainly to the plethora of online pundits who went gaga over the 2001-2003 film adaptations by Peter Jackson and then discovered that the source material wasn't to their liking.

Thirdly and finally, and perhaps the real point of interest from your perspective, is that I plan to review the three adaptations that I have access to and want to have a clear picture of the original text in my mind before doing so. These are, in chronological order:

  • The 1978 animation/live action hybrid film directed by Ralph Bakshi, covering roughly half the book
     
  • The 1981 BBC radio dramatisation adapted by Brian Sibley and Michael Bakewell
     
  • The 2001-2003 live action film trilogy directed by Peter Jackson

I'm aware that there are other adaptations, including a 1979 American radio dramatisation; a 1980 animated TV movie of the third part, The Return of the King, by Rankin/Bass; and an unabridged reading of the text by Rob Inglis from 1990. I haven't encountered the first two, and as the third of these omits nothing from the text, there's not much to review beyond Inglis' delivery of the material (which I may mention at some stage, but won't be treating to a full-on review).

Of the three versions that I will be covering, my existing opinions of them (based on my most recent viewing or listening of them) is as follows: I think the BBC radio dramatisation is the definitive adaptation, with Ralph Bakshi's interpretation serving as a fascinating but flawed curiosity piece that manages to be both superb and dreadful in equal measure, and Peter Jackson's trilogy offering up a polished but by-the-numbers telling of the tale which takes some liberties so extreme as to completely bastardise aspects of the story's very heart and soul.

This is going to be a lengthy project and one that I don't expect to be posting any more about for some time. However, I'm alerting you to it now so I don't have any excuse to chicken out midway through - my logic being that, if I've announced it, I'll have a harder time backing out. I'll be covering each "version" chronologically: Tolkien first, then Bakshi, then Sibley, then finally Jackson. By the way, as far as versions go, I'll be watching the extended editions of the Jackson films and listening to the original thirteen-part versions of the radio adaptation (rather than the re-edited CD versions). For the book itself, I'll probably be reading from my tatty old three-volume HarperCollins copies from 1991. These contain a smattering of misprints (mostly minor), but are considerably more portable than my copy of the more definitive 50th Anniversary Edition from 2005, and in any event are now so battered and dog-eared that I won't need to worry too much about keeping them in good condition.

Wish me luck!

 
10 Comments

1. Marcus said:

I suggest you also purchase bullet-proof vests, as any criticism of the Jackson trilogy is met with violent hostility from the fanboys.

(Posted on Friday, October 16, 2009 at 4:13 AM)

2. MCP said:

Good luck! You choose a task that would frighten even me ;)

I, too, opted to read the books in order to better enjoy Jackson's 12_hour_long extended version, but it took me a good 18 months just to finish the trilogy. Fantasy is not my literary cup of tea, definitely, and I knew that; but I didn't expect to struggle for such a long time. Guess what? I still haven't found the time or the will to see the movies...

(Posted on Friday, October 16, 2009 at 6:05 PM)

My Limited Edition of L'amour Braque arrived today!
Hope to watch it some time this coming week or the one following.

Computer question for you: I recently bought a Sony VAIO laptop with Windows Vista pre-installed and a free upgrade to Windows 7 included.
Being that Windows 7 becomes widely available on the 22nd, would I be better off waiting to delve into the computer (it's still in the box) until I can upgrade right to 7 or does it really matter. My concern is setting up preferences and adding programs to Vista and then having to essentially repeat myself. Any help is appreciated.

(Posted on Friday, October 16, 2009 at 10:59 PM)

4. Author Profile Page Michael said:

Daniel:

My gut feeling is that there's nothing to be achieved by waiting. Assuming it's a straight upgrade installation (and it should be, if Sony are advertising it as such) rather than a complete re-install, all your settings and programs should be transferred over automatically. I've done upgrade installations in the past (Windows 98 to Windows 2000, XP to Vista) and it's always been a very smooth process.

Of course, there will I'm sure be some areas in which Vista features don't have a direct equivalent in Windows 7 (for instance, they've dropped the Windows Photo Gallery, so you'll have to download the Windows Live Photo Gallery if you want that functionality), but on the whole I get the impression that it should be plain sailing. I believe you can even use Vista drivers if there are no dedicated Windows 7 drivers for a device.

(Posted on Saturday, October 17, 2009 at 7:34 AM)

5. Brian said:

I have very fond memories of the BBC Radio version of Lord of the Rings. Good luck with your mammoth undertaking.

On a completely unrelated note, have you heard of a Japanese horror film called Grotesque? It holds the distinction of being one of the few films that the BBFC have banned outright in the last few years. Well, being a long time horror buff, that news was like a red rag to a bull for me, so I tracked it down online. Very brutal stuff, and contary to what's been said about it by the more rabid 'ban this sick filth' brigade, extremely well made and acted for its budget. Probably the most gruelling 74 minutes I've ever endured though. Anyway, I thought it might interest you, if nothing else, from the censorship point of view.

Anyway keep up the great work. I love your writing, even if I do sometimes disagree with you.

(Posted on Saturday, October 17, 2009 at 1:39 PM)

6. Author Profile Page Michael said:

Brian:

I've not seen Grotesque, but I am quite curious about it, for the same reasons you mentioned.

(Posted on Sunday, October 18, 2009 at 2:36 PM)

Thank you Michael!

And I conquer with Brian - I appreciate your site, even though I also sometimes disagree.

(Posted on Sunday, October 18, 2009 at 6:55 PM)

Ha ha.
Oops.

"concur"

(Posted on Sunday, October 18, 2009 at 11:51 PM)

9. tw said:

Michael, I'll be curious to know if you have the same problem I have when re-reading a novel that has been adapted; seeing the actors who have portrayed the characters, in your mind, as you read along which can be very distracting but impossible to avoid. There's nothing like reading a pure book where you imagine everything visually.

(Posted on Sunday, October 25, 2009 at 12:45 AM)

10. Author Profile Page Michael said:

TW:

Well, it's interesting because I not only have the Peter Jackson and Ralph Bakshi films to draw on when visualising the characters and world, but also the radio adaptation and also the copious paintings by the likes of John Howe, Alan Lee and Ted Nasmith. My introduction to The Lord of the Rings was with the three-volume HarperCollins paperbacks from the early 90s featuring cover art by Howe, and his interpretation of Middle-Earth has always been very much in my mind whenever I've read them. (He's far and away the best Tolkien illustrator, in my opinion.)

"My" Middle-Earth is basically a hodge-podge of different sources, combining both my own interpretations with those that have stuck in my mind from a variety of sources. For instance, the voice of Michael Hordern is Gandalf for me, whereas I can only think of Miranda Otto as Éowyn, and this painting by Carol Emery Phenix is how I see the attack on Weathertop.

(Posted on Sunday, October 25, 2009 at 1:50 PM)

 
To combat spam, commenting is automatically disabled on entries older than 30 days.

Did a comment you tried to post accidentally get eaten by the spam filter? It happens from time to time. I get upwards of 200 spam comments every day and unfortunately don't have the time to weed through all of them in case something genuine ended up there by mistake. If one of your posts gets incorrectly flagged as spam, email me at whiggles[at]ntlworld[dot]com and I'll do my best to retrieve it.