Skip to main content

What if Philip K. Dick had directed LOTR?

Why did LOTR drop off the critical radar at decade's end? Methinks it's due to that perennial, fundamental disrespect of the fantasy and science fiction genre, the same reason "sci-fi" literature was/is ghettoized and consigned to the bring-your-own-blacklight section of your local bookstore. See Ellison, Harlan, or King, Stephen. Or better, Dick, Philip, K. (while he was alive). "Fantasy" is just not as critic- or award-friendly as, say, our annual dose of Clint Eastwood directed melodramatic "relevant" Oscar fodder.

[. . .]

There are a lot of "fantasy" films that fully deserve critical scorn, and audience disdain. As the great fantasist Theodore Sturgeon opined, "90% of everything is crap."

But that 10 percent that isn't should be allowed to keep winning the race against "Seabiscuit." (Erik Nelson, “Fantasy still can’t get no respect,” Salon, 6 Jan. 2010)

What if Philip K. Dick had directed Lord of the Rings?

Harlan Ellison? Theodore Sturgeon? Philip K. Dick? If we mixed all these authors into a brew, are we sure we wouldn't be more likely to end up serving out some Synecdoche New York than Jackson's LOTR? How are hobbitans supposed to get respect, when their defenders seem near as much to have escaped the shire for the civitas as any urbane who complains of their smelly feet and rank stupidity?

Closer to Jackson's LOTR is David Eddings and Piers Anthony. It is the friendliness, the family, in LOTR, that matters, not its passed-over erudition, its overlooked sophistication.

(Care to say anything nice about these two authors, about those who like these authors, Eric? You won't look as cool to film "snobs" who can appreciate a return to the warmth of the ring, with their cool Blade Runner guard well up, or with some reference to the likes of Fredric Jameson and commercial culture -- as Matt Zoller Seitz made sure to do, to adjudicate / circumscribe his applause of Michael Bay. You'd very quickly find yourself outside the "fantasist" section, the imaginative and cerebral -- and near Marquez, and well redeemable -- and back munching bags of chippies with all the dorks in fantasy / sci fi. How prepared are you to jump up and down on couches, and scream out the love of your life?)

Link: Fantasy still can’t get no respect (Salon)


Popular posts from this blog

Full conversation about "Bringing Up Baby" at the NewYorker Movie Facebook Club

Richard Brody shared a link.Moderator · November 20 at 3:38pm I'm obsessed with Bringing Up Baby, which is on TCM at 6 PM (ET). It's the first film by Howard Hawks that I ever saw, and it opened up several universes to me, cinematic and otherwise. Here's the story. I was seventeen or eighteen; I had never heard of Hawks until I read Godard's enthusiastic mention of him in one of the early critical pieces in "Godard on Godard"—he called Hawks "the greatest American artist," and this piqued my curiosity. So, the next time I was in town (I… I was out of town at college for the most part), I went to see the first Hawks film playing in a revival house, which turned out to be "Bringing Up Baby." I certainly laughed a lot (and, at a few bits, uncontrollably), but that's not all there was to it. I had never read Freud, but I had heard of Freud, and when I saw "Bringing Up Baby," its realm of symbolism made instant sense; it was obviou…

"The Zookeeper's Wife" as historical romance

A Polish zoologist and his wife maintain a zoo which is utopia, realized. The people who work there are blissfully satisfied and happy. The caged animals aren't distraught but rather, very satisfied. These animals have been very well attended to, and have developed so healthily for it that they almost seem proud to display what is distinctively excellent about them for viewers to enjoy. But there is a shadow coming--Nazis! The Nazis literally blow apart much of this happy configuration. Many of the animals die. But the zookeeper's wife is a prize any Nazi officer would covet, and the Nazi's chief zoologist is interested in claiming her for his own. So if there can be some pretence that would allow for her and her husband to keep their zoo in piece rather than be destroyed for war supplies, he's willing to concede it.

The zookeeper and his wife want to try and use their zoo to house as many Jews as they can. They approach the stately quarters of Hitler's zoologist …