Lord of the Rings

[ebd1]

Just for the sake of saying anything, does anybody here like Lord of the Rings?

[ShiroiHikari]

Yepyep. Good stuff, it is. I've read the books and seen the movies...it took me a while to get into the books though. My favorite is The Two Towers, that goes for both the movie and the book :D I need to read it again, I notice something new everytime...

[Technomancer]

I've loved the series ever since I read when I was in the 3rd grade. My favourite of the series has got to be "The Fellowship of the Ring", in both the books and the movies. Say, has anyone else seen the old, animated LOTR?

[Gypsy]

Oh, same here. I'm one of the pre-movie hype fans (although, I think they did an excellent job on the films). I cannot tell you how many times I watched the Bass and Rankin animations of the Hobbit and the LotR. My parents got very, very tired of them. Have you ever listened to the BBC audio drama they did back in the 70s (perhaps early 80s)? Great stuff.

[ebd1]

Did you know that LOTR is supposedly a Christian allagory? :grin:That's one of the reasons I like it so much.:thumb:

[ebd1]

(raises his hand) Who thinks that either Aragorn or Gandalf is supposed to be Jesus Christ?

[Technomancer]

While there's a lot of Christian symbolism in LOTR, Tolkien very definately didn't mean it to be allegory. In a 1971 BBC interview with, he very specifically denied that it was, saying that " I detested allegory whenever I smell it". He does admit that it could be taken as an allegory for the human race though. Please note I've been trying (and failing) to find a transcript of this interview, although you can really just type in "Tolkien", "allegory", and "Lord of the Rings", and get about a million sites that reiterate this. One link in particular:

http://www.tolkienonline.com/docs/5258.html

The Rankin Bass hobbit's great. Sometimes we used to annoy everyone in earshot by singing "The Greatest Adventure" heheh. Never heard the radio play though.

Of course, he also draws heavily from the Old Norse myths (I've no problem with this, being of Swedish extraction after all)

/*edit: Sorry about the debate stuff, I'm just too easy to get torqued up today...

[ShiroiHikari]

Oiiii...I take too long to post >_< Posted too late again!

Anyway, what I was gonna say was, if one of them was meant to be used as an allegorical reference thingy to Jesus....I'd say it was probably Gandalf. Since he died and came back and such.

[MasterDias]

Man, I still haven't seen The Two Towers.
*starts banging head against wall*

[Ashley]

I cut a conversation about Tolkien and his possible allegory in LoTR off early on another thread, and I won't hesitate to do it again if this gets ugly. Because this is about LoTR, it's alright to DISCUSS Tolkien, but do not turn this into a debate, or it will be locked. End of story. *turns off harsh admin mode* But, carry on...just don't bash each other, okay?

[ebd1]

(running back with handful of grapes and a glass of Pepsi) Good reply guys. What you said there ShiroiHikari I think is quite true. I also think that Aragorn is symbolising because we all know he'll be the king at the end.

[ebd1]

ASHLEY WHOA!!!:o This wasn't an argument. (shrugs) This was just a conversation about what we thought about LOTR and it's symbolism. There was no fight intended.:)

[Shinja]

gimli is the man

[Gypsy]

Originally posted by Technomancer
Sometimes we used to annoy everyone in earshot by singing "The Greatest Adventure" heheh.

Yeah, my family had to put up with that too ...

[ebd1]

Gimli has to be one of the funniest and one of the best characters in the movies. The movie was excellent.:thumb:

[ebd1]

I'm planning to make a new part to Evangelion, but this time it will involve Christian based things and beliefs conflicting with problems in the world today:). What cha guys think? To move to another subject.

[Technomancer]

It could be interesting, although I think you might be better off starting from scratch (ie. choosing the elements from Eva that you like and interweaving it with Christian ideas). It would probably be easier to pull off and you wouldn't have to deal with continuity issues.

[ebd1]

Gotta study for final exams, so talk to you guys later. Thanks for the reply Techno.:thumb:

[andyroo]

I have read all the books and saw both the movies. and theirr great! I am a pretty big fan. I have downloaded the elvish language fonts. wait. :eyebrow:
Yep, yep, good stuff. The alegory thing I am not too sure about.

[Lightbringer]

well to be honest, i thought the tolken books were boreing..... His plots and charicters i loved, his presentation made me want to sleep. it was a while ago when i read them, maby id like them now..... dunno. But i Loved the movies and plan on watching the return of the kind when it comes out (hopefully opening day)

Lightbringer // Aaron

[Ashley]

okay mod-step in here. *Ahem* two things to address:
1. We have spoiler buttons for a reason. Even if you think it's minimal spoilage (like in Eb's case), please be considerate. The code is [_spoiler="spoiler!"] insert spoiler here; no apostrophes [_/spoiler] without the _. Be warned: if we feel that there is a spoiler, we will put it in tags and pm you about it.
2. Tangents are okay, but outright changing the subject to a completely different one--i.e. Evangelion in a LoTR post, is not okay. See the difference?
Okay, back to talking about the movies/books.

[andyroo]

I thought that the Silmarillion was really boring book my self. The history of the Elves is nice and all, but it gets to tedious to me. I heard that it is an unfinished work; he died before he could finnish it.
<edit>oh yeah ash, I hope this is sticking along with the subject enough. This is a continuation of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Sort of, maybe more of a prequil like the Hobit is.</edit>

[Straylight]

I read much of the books (Including Silmarillion) and enjoyed them a lot... this was before the movie came out. The movies were pretty cool too.

[Gypsy]

I also enjoyed the Silmarillion, although it would have been easier to read if it was put in another format - as in, one with direct quotes instead of a monologue record of the whole thing. But that's Tolkien for you, and that's part of his charm. Anyone read any of his other books, other than the Hobbit, LotR, and the Silmarillion? I think he has something like the lost book of tales and something about Sir Gawain. I haven't read either (obviously since I can't even think of the titles) but just curious to see if anyone else knew about/read them.

[Technomancer]

The Silmarillion's good, but its written in a very mythic style, that at times makes it hard to read. I've The Hobbit too of course, also if you can find it "The Tolkien Reader" is an interesting book. It contains a few poems, some short stories (non-middle eart related), and his essay "On Fairy Stories". He's also supposed to have written translations of "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight" and "Beowulf". They're both great stories, but I just haven't been able to find his versions anywhere.

Also, you can probably find various volumes of "The Book of Lost Tales" around, these are largely versions of tales found in the Silmarillion (changed during editing).

There's also a letter of his floating around the internet about the Eucharist (it's to his son Christopher, a Catholic priest). It's more or less specifically Catholic, of course, but of interest in understanding his beliefs if nothing else.

[Gypsy]

Cool. Thanks!

[ebd1]

Thanks Techno.:)

[uc pseudonym]

If Tolkien were to rewrite the books today, I think he would do them in a different format. The Silmarillion wasn't ever really a single work (though he might have intended it to be so) it was just compiled from his notes after his death. Maybe that's what his storyline ideas look like.

In the movies, Gimli served mainly for the purpose of comic relief. This was fine, and he was somewhat funny, but does anyone else feel this is significantly different from the books? I mean, Gimli was as serious and noble and Legolas. I'm not really condemning the change, just noticing it.

[ebd1]

I guess so UC. What do you guys think about the ring itself? do you guys think it kind of resembles temptation in life, for example, absolute power?

[uc pseudonym]

If the movies did nothing else, they did do a good job of showing the temptation the ring brings with it. I'd say it resembles using any means to get to an end more than absolute power (though it could go there). Most of the powerful good guys understand that if they used the ring, even for good, it would be an act of evil (that would eventually destroy them).

Whatever your position on the allegory thing (and please don't state it), I think this is something that comes from Tolkien's Christian worldview. And it is a good lesson for us.

Plus, I like how in the first movie, the ring slides off Bilbo's hand, as if it wants to stay!

[ebd1]

That made me scared, as if the ring was alive, which it was I think. By the way, cool thinking UC.:thumb: and to all you guys as well. Great conversation.:grin:

[uc pseudonym]

Getting just a bit off topic, do any of you remember the part where Isulder first gets the ring? As he's holding it and the light on it fades, it shrinks down to the size of his finger (since Sauron's is bigger). Easy to miss, but very nice.

[Technomancer]

If I rember rightly, there are several times where the ring is described as "having a will" of its own. It left Gollum after "deciding" that he was of little use, for example. It's not surprising really, since Sauron was supposed to have put part of his own being into the ring when he made it

[uc pseudonym]

Ah yes... Gollum. Truly a masterpiece of CGI. In my humble opinion, this is still the best computer generated character ever to appear in a movie (I mean, all the Agent Smiths were cool, but they didn't display the emotion of Gollum).

Anyone else agree with me?

[Gypsy]

I was also very impressed by Gollum. And I think they got his voice down almost perfectly.

[Stephen]

Now that is a fight I would pay to see.

"Mr....Gollum"
"AHHHHH" Gollum jumping as agent smiths try to pig pile on him.

[Technomancer]

Every time I think of the movie Gollum, I keep seeing "Nobby" from the Harry Potter movie.:eyebrow:

[ShiroiHikari]

Originally posted by uc pseudonym
Getting just a bit off topic, do any of you remember the part where Isulder first gets the ring? As he's holding it and the light on it fades, it shrinks down to the size of his finger (since Sauron's is bigger). Easy to miss, but very nice.

Yes! I noticed ^_^ I thought it was really cool.

And yeah, they did a really good job with Gollum. One of the best CGs I've seen...

[Ashley]

I've always been very partial to Pixar's CGs, but yes, Gollum was absolutely incredible. Especially his eyes. You know the first time he appeared...I'll keep this vague for the few who haven't seen the Two Towers...I jumped out of my seat. :red:
Was it just me, or was the Two Towers more confusing than the Fellowship? (again, try to keep it spoil free in replies)

[ebd1]

I understood it, but I'm not going to tell anybody (heh...heh). About the ring shrinking, that was good. About Gollum, none of my words can explain the A++ (extra + for charater emotion) for the excellent job they did:thumb: . Imagine, it's took them THREE YEARS just to find and map Serkis' face muscles:wow!:

[Technomancer]

They departed more from the books in the second movie, and added some stuff that I thought crowded the plot unnecessarily. Of course, they need to keep moving back and forth between the two plot lines

[ebd1]

Well, I don't think they would want to plagerise or forge J.R.R.'s work unless his son Christopher said it was o.k., but to actually put the movie based on the entire book, you would actually get maybe a 5 to 10 hour movie with the two towers itself....whoa, that's to long for me, but maybe interesting.

[Technomancer]

Taking stuff out I can understand, it was putting stuff in that seemed odd

[ShiroiHikari]

They put in stuff? The only thing I noticed was that they made...gah. I dunno if this would be considered a spoiler or not so I'll just shut up now...::walks out of thread::

[ebd1]

*runs to Shiroi* hey, wait no come back here!

[uc pseudonym]

Well, I think that they added some content for various reasons. Some times when they took things out, the altered what remained to keep the plot flowing smoothly. Other times I think they just wanted added drama and stuff that sells.

But one thing they have done is made the plot that is there very smooth. You don't need to have read the books to get it. Though yes, The Two Towers was a wee bit more confusing than Fellowship of the Ring, though I thought it was not overly so.

[ebd1]

Just wait for "The Return of the King", coming out this Christ-mas (I like saying it that way).

[uc pseudonym]

Yes indeed, that's going to be good. Plus, they made some events from book two wait until the third movie (you know, minor things like Shelob). The last one should be pretty good.

I wonder though, are they going to put in the Scouring of the Shire? My thought is no, because it's quite anti-climactic.

[EireWolf]

What oldphilosopher and I are upset about is the fact that they left out ... uh, i don't think this is a spoiler, but just in case... Tom Bombadill . He was an interesting character in the book. In any case, the movies were done very well, and I think they remained as faithful to the books as could be expected from Hollywood. The settings were just about perfect, and most of the characters were very well chosen.

Although... when we were sitting in the theatre watching the first movie, and Elrond showed up and said his first line, I could not resist turning to oldphilosopher and saying, "Mister Anderson " in Agent Smith's evil voice. He and the people in front of us were cracking up. :grin:

[Mithrandir]

Originally posted by uc pseudonym
Some times when they took things out, they altered what remained to keep the plot flowing smoothly.

Yeah, like my favorite part:
* Bye Bill.
* Don't worry about old Bill, he can find his way home.
<mst3k>
Tom Servo: "Yeah. He found his way here didn't he? I mean, WE didn't bring him."
Crow T. Robot: "Hey, he was with us in the mountains for almost 20% of the shots!"
Tom: "OK, but what about when we had to hide under those rock or the birds would see us?"
Crow: "He was clearly visible hiding under the rocks with us."
Tom: "OK, what about when Frodo got pricked by the shadow blade? Huh?"
Crow: "Clearly he wasn't needed in that shot. We just didn't want to have to pay him for that day"
Mike: "Hey guys, be quiet, I'm trying to watch the thread..."
</mst3k>

Sorry, I'll shut up now.

[uc pseudonym]

Hello, Mr. Anderson. I thought exactly the same thing. One of these days, when I get the time, I'm gonna edit one of his clips so he does say that.

Well, some people like Tom a lot, but I'm not a big fan of him. He didn't really connect with much of the rest of the story. Of course, that's why he was taken out.

Did you notice they replaced Glorfindel with Arwen? This is picky, but I liked Glorfindel. I suppose they wanted to make each character they used more developed.

[Technomancer]

I don't really disagree with the writer's decisions on those two. Both Glorfindel and Tom Bombadil represent ideas in Tolkien's world that would have been difficult to communicate while keeping the film at an acceptable length. They could have been introduced of course, but with virtually no explanation of their nature or purpose, thus causing a much more disjointed story than would have otherwise been the case.

As an OT aside, that's been one of my complaints about the X-men movies; they're simply too crowded. There are too many characters, resulting in some that are poorly developed or entirely superfluous to the story.

[uc pseudonym]

Just to make sure everyone's clear, I agree with what Technomancer said. They needed to take things out to make it a good movie. But I did like Glorfindel...

[LostChild]

glorfindel was awesome! from the book, he was my second favorite character. i really wish that he was in the movies in some way or other.

[ShiroiHikari]

what the heck is this thread doing in General...moved to In the Spotlight.