proving once again that they don't get it

[fileg]

Moving heaven and (Middle) Earth
After four years and countless last-minute rewrites, 'The Lord of the Rings' comes to the stage.
By Gare Joyce (click for article)

Such streamlining is typical in any big show, and a casual Tolkien devotee can pick up on threads of the story that have been pulled from the fabric of the stage production. (Farewell, Faramir.) Thus, adaptation gave way to readaptation. Scenes that were months in the making were shuffled, shifted, truncated, or discarded. And this will almost certainly continue until opening night March 23.

I really get the streamlining needed for movies and plays - I really do. But after forty odd years reading this book, I don't see how you can leave out the characters that stand for redemption, reconstruction and renewal. The PBS radio version did the same.

Comments

[fyrie.livejournal.com]

*headdesks* This is just moronic. How can you do it without the character?

[fileg.livejournal.com]

I really get the streamlining needed for movies and plays - I really do.

But after fourty odd years reading this book, I don't see how you can leave out the characters that stand for redemption, reconstruction and renewal. The PBS radio version did the same.

[stultiloquentia.livejournal.com]

*disdainful sniff*

[semyaza.livejournal.com]

I read a friend's plot summary of the stage version and failed to recognise it as LotR. They didn't just streamline it; they tore out the heart of the book. Whether streamlining it further will make it better or worse remains to be seen, but as they've already removed everything that matters, I don't see what they can do to improve it at this late date. Meh.

[laululintu.livejournal.com]

Despite having characters left out, I'd still love to see it, as my old kantele-teacher is part of the group who helped make the songs :)

[edrys.livejournal.com]

I don't see how you can leave out the characters that stand for redemption, reconstruction and renewal.

I still live for the day that someone gets it right - perhaps sometime before LotR's 100th anniversary, so we'll have a hope of being around to see it?

[kortirion.livejournal.com]

I was very dubious from the start when I heard it was going into pre-production [when they hoped to open in London]. The story-line, and it's lacks, hasn't really surprised me - I think you have to view this as 'inspired by...' not an 'interpretation of...'

Having said that, I shall go and see it if/when it transfers to London. I think the production values are very much in the vein of The Lion King - and that really was spectacular, as I think this will be on stage.
And a friend of mine wrote the Old English lyrics they use for the Nazgul - I've already told her, if she gets tickets for the premiere - I'm going too! ;p

[gookachu.livejournal.com]

i saw about 1/2 hour of clips from a preliminary production.

it is BAD!! i mean, soooooo bad as to make you want to start sticking pencils in your eyeballs because that would be less painful.

the score is a rip-off of _les miz_, a musical i don't like to begin with. it's that over-orchestrated, rock/opera musical like shonberg and webber made popular in the 80's and 90's. the singing is _horrible_, the acting is OK, at least for the hobbits.

it has over-the-top visuals, especially the stilts. totally detracts from the actual story. the woman they have playing arwen is a fat, ugly, old blond chick. not to be critical about looks in theatre, but, there are at least some things they should have had deference to. i hope to god that it never comes to the US, cos it SUCKS.