>second, LOTR was a more-or-less faithful adaptation of a book.
> so blame any white supremacy there on Tolkien (and see my
>post above about that). i think it would have been great to
>see Jackson update it and include some folks of color, but
>there would have been a huge backlash to that as well.

We are in agreement here. Peter Jackson made a more or less faithful adaptation of the book. I do blame white supremacy on Tolkein. However, this does not let Jackson off the hook. Peter Jackson did absolutley nothing to challenge the racist undertones that we both agree exist in the book. In my opinion, the LOTR films are not the definitive triumphs of filmmaking that they are praised as. I see Jackson's work as an empty text. His own unique voice and style appear NOWHERE. In an age where Tarantino is criticized for plagarism, how does Jackson get a free pass? Jackson more or less plagarized another man's work over the course of 9 hours without ever attempting to challenge the racism that exists in the author's text. Jackson is not a groundbreaking filmmaker, but a man who treats his art as product and is doing his best to cash in. If you don't believe me, then go to your local Burger King and get a King Kong double whopper.