Viewing Thread:
"One Ring and One Scar"

The hype surrounding those two massive releases - Harry Potter and Lord of The Rings - is beginning to get to me, and not because of all the loot J K Rowling and Christopher Tolkein will have rolling in. It's because the quality of the books is getting lost in all this. People are going to go and watch Lord of The Rings and see a different story than Tolkein wrote. They've changed it, and the biggest difference is that Arwen will not be mooning about Rivendell, worrying about Aragorn like she should be. No, those film producers have gone all feminist and made Arwen a warrior-princess, running amok with a band of elven archers. Yep, sounds good to me, guys, but have you forgotten, you are basing this on a BOOK? This means your script is already there for you. OK, so some padding may have to be cut, but you can't significantly change it. It just isn't the story!

Sigh, these won't matter to the little kids. They'll trot into the cinema and gasp at pretty elfs and dwarfs. They'll hiss at orcs, boo at the Dark Riders and cheer Frodo. But they won't have the slightest what it all means. If Frodo or Bilbo refer to Smaug, or Dale, none of the little kids holding their Lord of The Rings popcorn will understand. But that won't matter, there's a shiny ring to look at! Oooo...

The same, gladly, isn't true of Harry Potter. Most of the kids have read the books, and this is why the Harry Potter phenomona is so widely regarded - it has got kids reading again. My parents are avid readers, and they got me reading at an early age. I read Lord of the Rings for the first time aged 9, and I'm grateful to my parents for that. But these kids aren't expanding their reading reportorie. I actually saw a kid ask for the latest Harry Potter book at Waterstones the other day when I was queuing with Terry Pratchett's latest offering in my hands. The assistant said no, and kindly refered to some remarkably similiar titles, with similiar appeal. Brian Jacques, for example. His Redwall sagas were one of my favourites from 10-12. This kids looked about old enough for that. But the kid looked angry at the assistant and walked from the shop. No doubt McDonalds was tempting him from round the corner. I was going to say something, but then I remembered I'm 16 and therefore shouldn't be seen in a bookshop, so I dutifully ducked my head and paid for my book, then stashed it in a O'Neill bag and ran from the store ;-)

Ok, so at least kids are reading. I love Harry Potter too, which isn't child-like. It's a great series, and deserves the sucess it has. Good for light-reading, so to speak, when I'm tired and my Terry Goodkind novel looks a bit too long-winded. This has made it possible for a movie to be made, and, thankfully, JK Rowling has had her hands tightly on the reins from the word go. Speilburg wanted to direct this movie, and I've heard rumours he wanted Haley Joel Osment as Harry Potter. That oh-so American kid from Sixth Sense and A.I? No thanks! JK has seen to it that the cast is British - John Cleese, Richard Harris, Maggie Smith and so on. Well done, her. The movie won't have been changed at all! I wonder what would have happened had JRR Tolkein still been alive now? No corruption of Arwen's character, I bet!

So, my point is : The literature is going to be lost. A stream of marketing has been unleased. I went babysitting the other day, and they had the TV turned off. What? Then I noticed "Mystery at Hogwarts" boardgame on the floor. Ah, I thought, and got my book out. Then they said I could be the green hat, and have Filch's card. Well, thats an offer no one can refuse ;-). Actually, it was quite fun. Quasi-Cleudo, sort of. I've seen Harry Potter everything, including perscription Harry Potter glasses. Oh, please. Kids no longer swop Pokemon cards, they swop Harry for Hermione, and hope not to get Snape in the next packet. Lord of the Rings hysteria hasn't really hit yet, but I bet it will.

If only they movie clerks could ask " Are you 12" AND "Have you read the book?", then entry for Lord of the Rings would be great. I'd be surrounded by people grumbling about how Arwen isn't moping. Super.

So, what do you fellow movie fans think? Dicuss, please.Maybe I'm not old before my time? Doubt it.

Cheers, Stryke.

Best not mention the bit were Kahlan wins "miss world" and Zedd develops a helpful type of anti-freeze from his own beard.

The 6th book hasn't got much magic in, hardly any at all, but I still think it's great.

Probably all the action, with the war and stuff.

Won't say too much as Stryke hasn't read Faith of the Fallen yet.

ooh ooh, can I play?

Erm... lets see I'm playing catch up here so I'll try to be concise.

Don't have a problem with Lord of the Rings really, that was just to wind people (Stryke) up ;-)

How long is the LoTR film going to be, cause the first part is a sizeable book, I bet the films only 2 hours.

Whereas, first harry potter book is quite small, but the film is about 3 hours long (God knows what they'll do when filming Goblet of Fire)!

Goodkind rules all (though I've heard Robert Jordan is good). I liked the first one most of all, but they've all been petty damn fine, 5th one is least favourite but I enjoyed it muchly, it wasn't much of a Goodkind book though;
WFR was all magical and crazy (Darken Rahl, Shadow people, plot twists aplenty), 5th book went all political. Hopefully Debt of Bones (which does have some pictures) will set Goodkind back into the magical frame of mind.

Last I hear "Pillars" was coming to UK December....

thankyou!

Yeah, 2 was good.

But the first one was the best. It was just so addictive. I stayed up 'til about 3am to finish that damn thing off one night, I haven't done that for any other book. Ever.

Thing is, it's probably the worst book to read again. You know what Kahlan is, which is the whole mystery for the first half of the book, so there's incentive to keep going.

Most books you can re-read after while without too many problems, but it just doesn't work for WFR.

Your Honour wrote:
> I wasn't too impressed with 5 (Soul of the Fire, if I'm not mistaken?).

Yeah, it was still a good book though.

6 is
> an impressive return to form, though I still feel the first one is the
> best.

Hmm, I quite enjoyed 2, to be honest.

I keep meaning to write a decent post about Goodkind, but I always seem
> to forget or have something else to do. Maybe I'll get round to it tonight...

You do that. See who else likes Goodkind. *cue FFF - Was it for PS2 or N64? No, it's a BOOK! Ah, an instruction manual?* I've already made a FAD attempt today in the reviews, so this was intended to be a short rant, but I didn't stop ranting, as usual.

I wasn't too impressed with 5 (Soul of the Fire, if I'm not mistaken?).

6 is an impressive return to form, though I still feel the first one is the best.

I keep meaning to write a decent post about Goodkind, but I always seem to forget or have something else to do. Maybe I'll get round to it tonight...

Gah, spamming newbies....

Tarrant? Ah, he hates Lord of the Rings! But I need to get TG's sixth book soon, I'm re-reading Number 5 at the moment.

Stryke wrote:
> [email protected]

Cheers, I'll add you tonight.

You want me to get the sad little newbies adding
> me? Heh, that always happens when I give out MSN address on SR.


Damn right! Rather you than me!

:-)

Cheers for
> the Goodkind site.

No worries, it's always nice to meet another TG fan. I didn't think there were many others, but Tarrant is one as well.

I suggest you try out Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series.
> Great fantasy series - 9 so far. Try www.wotmania.com

I haven't tried reading Jordan before, but I may well give it a go.

[email protected]

You want me to get the sad little newbies adding me? Heh, that always happens when I give out MSN address on SR.

Cheers for the Goodkind site. I suggest you try out Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series. Great fantasy series - 9 so far. Try www.wotmania.com

I do, but I can't use it during the day 'cos I'm at work.

What's your email?

Oh yeah, for more TG info, go to www.terrygoodkind.com