Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

LOTR Jumps the Shark 247

eggoeater writes "The latest incarnation of The Lord of the Rings is here in the form of musical theater and, as reported by Yahoo News, the reviews are not good. The Toronto production puts less emphasis on plot, character, and music, and concentrates more on hi-tech theatrics. The production uses a 40-ton, computer controlled stage with 17 elevators and the cast of 55 goes through 500 costumes in the 3 hour performance. Despite this, the same critics say it will be a big money-maker."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

LOTR Jumps the Shark

Comments Filter:
  • Re:High tech stage? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Ucklak ( 755284 ) on Monday March 27, 2006 @11:47AM (#15003161)
    Chitty Chitty Bang Bang from what I hear is a pretty successful translation to the stage. Being a musical helps I'm sure.

    When Spider-man first came out (2002), someone put together a stage version that was US only.
    http://www.techtite.com/Reviews/Parks/2003/Spiderm .html [techtite.com]
    http://www.eagletribune.com/news/stories/20021031/ LI_002.htm [eagletribune.com]
  • Pffft. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by rehtonAesoohC ( 954490 ) on Monday March 27, 2006 @11:53AM (#15003217) Journal
    Lord of the Rings did not jump the shark. Let's be specific here... the Toronto playhouse's vision of LOTR is what is lacking here... JRR Tolkien wrote a masterpiece of literature, and any interpretation of that literature is what should be examined, not the literature itself.
  • Re:Yeah well... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Coryoth ( 254751 ) on Monday March 27, 2006 @02:04PM (#15004240) Homepage Journal
    if the eagles could snatch the heroes off the top of Mt. Doom after all this noise, why couldn't they have simply sent the eagles to drop in the ring?

    The long answer (in the sense that it requires all the extra backstory of the creation of Middle Earth, its Gods etc) is that the eagles are servants of Manwe and do his bidding, and essentially the Valar (Gods of Middle Earth, of which Manwe is one) have a policy of non-involvement (the bulk of the Silmarillion is about the woes of the elves who leave the Valar and go back to Middle Earth and have to struggle alone - it is only resolved when a half-elf manages to navigate the seas back to the Valar and plead the elves case). The eagles are not about to step in and help just because the elves, humans, or dwarves want them to. The Valar are not completely uninvolved mind - they sent Gandalf to come and guide things where necessary. The point, however, is that he is just that: his job is to spur the people of Middle Earth to stand up and resolve the problem themselves, providing occasional help along the way when absolutely necessary.

    The short answer is that the eagles serve the Gods, and the Gods, from their longer term perspective, view the whole thing as a good character building exercise: they'll provide a little help when absolutely needed provided the people of Middle Earth actually stand up and do most of the work themselves.

    Jedidiah.
  • Re:High tech stage? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by WesternActor ( 300755 ) on Monday March 27, 2006 @03:34PM (#15004972) Homepage
    It's not a question of "Slashdot's chosen spin," but the review consenus. Many major media outlets--including The New York Times, the Toronto Star, Variety, theatre websites Broadway.com and TheaterMania.com, and a number of others I don't have time to look up right now were simply not thrilled with the adaptation. Yes, there were some that did enjoy it, and the show's press office fastidiously sent out those clips within hours of the show's opening. But overall, the reviews stated that the show was too long (at nearly three hours and 45 minutes) and that the technology dwarfed (sorry) the story. It's not exactly coincidental that much the same thing was said about the movie versions, but even they had over nine hours of time. The stage version, by its very nature, had to be painted in broad strokes, and doing so didn't allow the creators time to realize their grander vision for the material. It's sad, but likely true (I have yet to see the show); some top theatre professionals were working on this, but it's probably a job too big for anyone to do in three and a half hours of stage time. The "best" way to do it would probably be as an all-day event, along the lines of Trevor Nunn's early-80s adaptation of Dickens' The Life and Adventures of Nicholas Nickleby, which famously ran eight hours. (And, though I didn't see it, they were apparently eight glorious hours.) When you scale down the story of something like this, and scale up the spectacle, how can the results be anything BUT disappointing?

An Ada exception is when a routine gets in trouble and says 'Beam me up, Scotty'.

Working...