[ExI] why the book is better
atymes at gmail.com
Tue Dec 14 17:32:31 UTC 2021
Waiting For Godot.
On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 6:24 AM William Flynn Wallace via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
> Agree. They did a great job of casting in Lord of the Rings. Trivia
> question: Do you know of another movie in which the title character is
> never seen? bill w
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 8:11 AM Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat <
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>> On 13/12/2021 20:13, billw wrote:
>> Book of course lack the visual aspects - Hermes
>> Au contraire - I love the visuals in my head far better than the ones on
>> the screen. The actors never seem to look like what I imagine.
>> This (for me, at least) hits the nail on the head. When you read a book
>> (if you are a visual thinker, anyway), you create your own visuals, imagine
>> how the characters look and move, etc., and set the overall visual tone.
>> When you then see the film of the book, it's inevitably different, and
>> suffers in comparison.
>> Purely by chance, the characters in Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings
>> films are very close to my imagined versions from reading the books
>> (especially Gandalf and some of the elves, and, oddly, Smeagol), so I
>> thought they were excellent films. On the other hand, the films derived
>> from Anne Rice's 'Vampire Chronicles' books (of which there won't be any
>> more because she just died) weren't very good because the characters, and
>> other visual aspects of the films were wildly different to my imagined
>> extropy-chat mailing list
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat