I'm confused by this statement, as it seems to be extrapolating or adding one and one and getting three, as it were. I guess I'm just missing the problem in the statement or supposed misquote. Or is there more to this discussion than this one thread?
So, is the issue that Mr. Smith misquoted Sir Ian McKellan?
Or is the issue that the statement attributed to Sir Ian McKellan is false?
If it's the first, then asking Peter Jackson won't help, because he would have no way of corroborating what Sir Ian McKellan did or did not say.
If it's the second, then asking Peter Jackson would confirm why he cast Christopher Lee, but it would not clear up the matter as to whether or not Mr. Smith properly quoted Sir Ian McKellan. I think asking Sir Ian McKellan what he said, instead of debating who took better notes, would probably be the best way to resolve this nonesense.
I guess I just don't see what was wrong with the statement, which seemed to express the opinion that Peter Jackson liked Christopher Lee's work enough to cast him in his film. Why would anyone be worried that that sentiment was accurate? Would you rather have Christopher Lee's co-star accurately quoted as saying something bad about him?
OK, I'm new, so maybe I just don't understand what's going on with this topic, so I'll go now and let someone enlighten me if they feel the need.
Quote:
I'm confused by this statement
Of course you are.
The issue was Ian Smith lying and making up stories, misquoting and speculating on how a film ends, then making it sound as if it were true.
Quote:
So, is the issue that Mr. Smith misquoted Sir Ian McKellan?
Or is the issue that the statement attributed to Sir Ian McKellan is false?
Both. Misquoted and also false. The first, Sir Ian has confirmed it himself in writing. The second question cannot be proved without anyone breaking any confidentiality agreements so it's best left as "speculation".
You'll know next December if the ending of Saruman is true or not. There are those who know different but it's due to the sources being reliable and not based on speculation. What you think the ending will be, it isn't and let's just leave it at that.
Yes, I found this all so confusing as well, I would have thought the answer was to go to Sir Ian in the first instance. Also, am I missing something extremely relevant, or have I missed Mr Lee being "knighted" - as far as I am aware he has not yet had the recognition he deserves and become Sir Christopher. Enlighten me if I am wrong.
Alison Gilbert
Quote:
Also, am I missing something extremely relevant, or have I missed Mr Lee being "knighted" - as far as I am aware he has not yet had the recognition he deserves and become Sir Christopher.
No, sadly Mr Lee has not been Knighted - yet!!
I agree that he deserves to become Sir Christopher Lee.
That's too funny!