This film is a total rip off of the Lampton Worm legend that has been told in the north of england for centuries!
-
roclad6000 — 18 years ago(April 10, 2007 05:16 AM)
bram stoker wrote the book that ken russel made into a filmbram added his own brand (lol) of vampires to the already exising legend of - you said it, the lampton worm, which was actually known as the lampton Varm - which was another word for dragon! Imagine that, the lamton worm is actually a dragon legend. Funny hey.
-
TOBoy — 18 years ago(May 18, 2007 06:38 AM)
The word "wyrm" is not usually translated as "dragon" or wasn't the last time i looked at my old anglo-saxon primer. As a neighbouring family of the Lambtons for the last umpteen hundred years i would like to point out that "wyrm" is usually translated as "snake" so perhaps Stoker had it right.
The idea that that the "Lambton Worm" was a dragon likely to owe its origins to Victorian Myth Makers/Rewriters.
Perhaps I am wrong and I am willing to stand corrected in that case. The ambiguity of many Anglo-saxon nouns is well known, due mainly to the paucity of Anglo-saxon literature but also due to the existence of many regional dialects, especially after The Conquest. -
Cemetarygirl — 18 years ago(July 16, 2007 10:54 PM)
What a silly thing to say. All writers get their inspiration from somewhere. Where do you thing kernels of ideas come from. Oh yes out of the ether, which is actually free-floating thought. Do you think Disney made up Cinderella or did it come from folk tales re-told? And Arthur the movie is that not a re-working of the tales of Arthur? Think!