?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Page | Next Page


So... yeah, the movie's still intruding a lot, in great part because we haven't gotten that far away from it, just added a bit here and there.

So yeah. We have the companions now already, and are already starting to see some of the stuff that's brought across in the movie - the Scarecrow not being as dumb as he wants to think (heh) he is, even without brains, and the Tin Woodsman not being without a heart. Although I'm not sure I like the direction it's going with the "well, if I had a heart then I wouldn't have to be as careful about things," which, I thought this was supposed to be without a moral? We shall see, I guess...

We also at least we get some of the companions' backstories as well. Although we still don't know just why the Scarecrow is sentient (his creators apparently didn't expect him to be), but I guess the answer in this case is "it's magic, and it's a kids' book." Which is unsatisfactory, but meh.

And is anyone else having trouble picturing the Cowardly Lion as, y'know, a Lion and not some blubbery guy in a bipedal Lion costume? Damnit.



The schedule!

Comments

( 10 Notes — Write a Footnote )
(Deleted comment)
stormfeather
Jan. 13th, 2011 05:09 am (UTC)
Yeah, I figured we won't get to find out the reasons behind a lot o the magic, but after reading the more grown-up type of fantasy so long, that's less satisfying than it would have been as a kid! (And even these days the kids' stuff, like Harry Potter for instance, tends to have more internal consistency and reasoning behind stuff.)

Interesting points of view on the companions, but I wonder how much if any of it Baum actually intended/thought about, and how much of it just can be fitted in coincidentally...
(Deleted comment)
stormfeather
Jan. 14th, 2011 04:07 am (UTC)
I probably wouldn't look for the explanations either, at least not as much, except when I just happen to start thinking about it, which closer readings like this lend themselves to. Then once I start thinking about it, it bugs me a bit. But yeah, fairy tale. Must... ignore!

houseboatonstyx
Jan. 16th, 2011 07:30 am (UTC)
What I saw was more sensory, less abstract. Hard stiff tin, soft weak straw, flesh lion whose body was both strong and flexible but who had psychological problems.
(Deleted comment)
(Deleted comment)
stormfeather
Jan. 13th, 2011 05:12 am (UTC)
I had never read that before. It is made of awesome. (And meat.)
stormfeather
Jan. 13th, 2011 05:12 am (UTC)
1. It especially seemed odd just after the Lion was trying to eat him and she was scolding him for it. "Why would you try to eat him? He's a cute little dog!" "Oh, I'm sorry, so what's he made of anyway?" "Oh, yummy meat!" (And I'm sure there's a hot dog joke in there somewhere.)

2. Good point! It's kind of a reverse Narnia, instead of the land coming to life and improving as they travel (after breaking the winter), it's getting worse instead. Of course, I'm sure many of, for instance, the plantations in the old South were nice, so just because things look physically good and well-kept doesn't mean that things weren't rotten in the state of Denmark.

3. Okay, granted, some points it was quite hard to envision him as the movie-lion, but then other times it would intrude!
houseboatonstyx
Jan. 16th, 2011 07:27 am (UTC)
Talk of 'meat people' was a running motif in the books. The other beings (Tin Man, Scarecrow, TicTok, Sawhorse/Woozy, etc etc) often spoke about how limited the 'meat people' were, always needing food and sleep etc. It started in the poppy field, whose poison only affected the meat people (including the Lion), so the tin and straw people had to rescue them. (Book, movie, dunno.)
( 10 Notes — Write a Footnote )