Beofulf on Film, Nickolas Haydock
ForumWorld Reading Circle
Melde dich bei LibraryThing an, um Nachrichten zu schreiben.
Dieses Thema ruht momentan. Die letzte Nachricht liegt mehr als 90 Tage zurück. Du kannst es wieder aufgreifen, indem du eine neue Antwort schreibst.
1mirrani
I really can't express how disappointed I was with this book. I got it because I assumed it would be a thorough comparison with the epic poem and the various film versions. I expected critiquing, I expected highlights, I didn't expect to have the plots of each movie recited to me over and over again to the point where I practically knew the plot of the movie by heart.
The whole point of the book is that Beowulf is written in such a way that if people ignore what Hollywood requires and make a film straight from the text, you've got a perfect representation that should be overwhelmingly popular. Yet, it also points out that Hollywood doesn't work that way. Talk in circles much? How about saying you're not going to talk about Lord of the Rings, but then talk about Lord of the Rings in just about every chapter/section?
The whole thing comes across as two people who wrote essays and decided they could make money off of it by selling them as a book. This is exactly what they accuse hollywood of doing, by the way. They also use the image from the most popular, biggest money earner for the cover, even though it's the version the authors hate the most. Why? Because that image is going to sell more books... Which is exactly what they accuse Hollywood of doing to Beowulf. A little more conversation and comparison would have been nice... Or maybe... Any at all. Even a smattering of comparison would have been better than what came out.
I thought page 136-137 could be a nice retelling of Dragonheart in the way these movies are a retelling of Beowulf. Shame it totally ignores Dragonheart as an example of dragons. And as you go along you start to notice more and more words seem to go missing from the text, or mistakes are made. I couldn't help wondering if the editor had to force themself to read it the way I did. At least the book can get credit for also including Voyager and Xena versions of Beowulf... Something most books about "film" would not do.
My review for this book will probably be almost identical to what you read here, but I'll include it anyway, just to keep with the spirit of repeating ourselves about every damned thing.
The whole point of the book is that Beowulf is written in such a way that if people ignore what Hollywood requires and make a film straight from the text, you've got a perfect representation that should be overwhelmingly popular. Yet, it also points out that Hollywood doesn't work that way. Talk in circles much? How about saying you're not going to talk about Lord of the Rings, but then talk about Lord of the Rings in just about every chapter/section?
The whole thing comes across as two people who wrote essays and decided they could make money off of it by selling them as a book. This is exactly what they accuse hollywood of doing, by the way. They also use the image from the most popular, biggest money earner for the cover, even though it's the version the authors hate the most. Why? Because that image is going to sell more books... Which is exactly what they accuse Hollywood of doing to Beowulf. A little more conversation and comparison would have been nice... Or maybe... Any at all. Even a smattering of comparison would have been better than what came out.
I thought page 136-137 could be a nice retelling of Dragonheart in the way these movies are a retelling of Beowulf. Shame it totally ignores Dragonheart as an example of dragons. And as you go along you start to notice more and more words seem to go missing from the text, or mistakes are made. I couldn't help wondering if the editor had to force themself to read it the way I did. At least the book can get credit for also including Voyager and Xena versions of Beowulf... Something most books about "film" would not do.
My review for this book will probably be almost identical to what you read here, but I'll include it anyway, just to keep with the spirit of repeating ourselves about every damned thing.
