Go? Don't go? I don't know.

The inept interpreter of one of my favorites books (aka Peter Jackson ak PJ: Primo Jerk) is directing The Hobbit Movie. My intestines are all cranky just thinking about how he and his screenplay writers are going to defile Tolkien's work. I made a decision not to go to the movie opening in 2012, because his interpretation of The Lord of the Rings was shameful. It's not what he got wrong, it's what he changed in the story to pander to Hollywood and viewers who may not have read LOTR.  As a matter of course, people who hadn't read LOTR had asked me what the big deal was all about. I tried to explain that the character subtleties and deep camaraderie that forged and maintained the fellowship were lost in the film, and that the subplot of the dangers of material pride over creation (which can be traced to Feanor in the Silmarillion, by the way) was lacking, so all one got was a movie about good vs. evil.

So why didn't people get it?  I suggest the cause is that script writing suffered at the expense of  creating a visual spectacle. Note to PJ: it's called dialogue, PJ...that's what moves the story - not your sweeping aerial shots of New Zealand and faux fight scenes and redaction of the text in pivotal parts. Loser. I understand that textual fidelity is difficult, but really PJ, Tolkien laid it out there, and all you had to do was follow it. Don't take my word for it, read the Guardian article; they're Brits, they take Tolkien seriously ... I hope. The article calls what PJ is doing with The Hobbit it 'tinkering' with the story; I call it tragic, in the Aristotelian sense that it evokes fear (I'm afraid to go) and pity (what gets done to Prof Tolkien's genius is truly pitiful). 

My mind was made up not to go and then, this rumour slips out by none other than Ian McKellan (Gandlaf).

If the delectable Mr Cumberbatch is the voice of Smaug, that is no reason to go...or is it?

What to do, what to do....