Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 8/6/2002 8:54:08 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/6/2002 8:55:17 PM EDT by DScottHewitt]
WHAT A RIP-OFF!!!!! Takes them until almost time for the second movie to put out the DVD (TWO DISC SET), and one of the things on Disc Two is a preview of the "Special Edition" DVD. Thirty minutes longer than what I bought, and the two disc set doesn't even have the deleted scenes on it...... Scott
Link Posted: 8/6/2002 9:14:24 PM EDT
goto a kia dealership, test drive a KIA (Killed In Action) car, get a free coupon for LOTR:Fellowship, call the number on the back and give them the code on the back. 4-6 weeks and you get your DVD. check out [url]www.kia.com[/url]
Link Posted: 8/6/2002 9:19:42 PM EDT
Just got through watching it with my wife. The special effects are the only thing that kept me watching. The wide-eyed boy hobbit just made me cringe to no end. Every time danger comes near...he has that deer in the headlights look. Too idiotic of a hero...too weak to be believable. Not sure what all the hype was about...too long, too many crises to survive and the hero is a kid wimp with no will. Maybe I'm too old, [b][blue]NAKED[/blue][/b]
Link Posted: 8/6/2002 9:57:10 PM EDT
Originally Posted By NAKED-GUNMAN: Not sure what all the hype was about...too long, too many crises to survive and the hero is a kid wimp with no will. Maybe I'm too old, [b][blue]NAKED[/blue][/b]
View Quote
The person carrying the ring that nobody else has the will to touch is a wimp with no will?
Link Posted: 8/6/2002 10:01:06 PM EDT
Take a little time to read (on the internet no less) about the DVD sets and then make an informed, intelligent decision about your purchase. [;)] To recap the first release is the DVD with the theatrical version. The second release will be the longer "directors cut". Oh and to prevent this ranting again, a little FYI, the first release of BHD had some special features but another release with additional features is due out in Oct.
Link Posted: 8/6/2002 10:13:56 PM EDT
Also the November release will be a 4 disc set.
Link Posted: 8/6/2002 10:15:38 PM EDT
Originally Posted By NAKED-GUNMAN: ... too many crises to survive and the hero is a kid wimp with no will. Maybe I'm too old, NAKED
View Quote
Actually, the kid is 33 [:)]
Link Posted: 8/6/2002 10:26:33 PM EDT
The decision to make Frodo non-studly in the conventional sense was intentional. Tolkien was displaying heroism of a different sort. (Tolkien, a Catholic, used some characters and situations as an extended riff on Christianity.)
Link Posted: 8/6/2002 11:25:08 PM EDT
Originally Posted By pdxshooter: Take a little time to read (on the internet no less) about the DVD sets and then make an informed, intelligent decision about your purchase. [;)] To recap the first release is the DVD with the theatrical version. The second release will be the longer "directors cut". Oh and to prevent this ranting again, a little FYI, the first release of BHD had some special features but another release with additional features is due out in Oct.
View Quote
That just pisses me off when they do that. I am refusing to buy BHD until the directors cut comes out and now I see I have to wait for LOTRs.
Link Posted: 8/6/2002 11:36:52 PM EDT
I'm waiting for the complete LOTR Box set, about two and a half years from now. The rest is just filler to fill some studio's accounting errors.
Link Posted: 8/7/2002 12:56:45 AM EDT
the 2 disc LOTR also has no DTS on it, DD only :( The 4 disc set out in Nov will have DTS ES 6.1 :) I bought the first version of BHD, but am anxiously awaiting the SE, (Superbit I hope) release.
Link Posted: 8/7/2002 9:10:10 AM EDT
Originally Posted By NAKED-GUNMAN: Just got through watching it with my wife. The special effects are the only thing that kept me watching. The wide-eyed boy hobbit just made me cringe to no end. Every time danger comes near...he has that deer in the headlights look. Too idiotic of a hero...too weak to be believable. Not sure what all the hype was about...too long, too many crises to survive and the hero is a kid wimp with no will. Maybe I'm too old, [b][blue]NAKED[/blue][/b]
View Quote
Not too old, but it's obvious you never read the book. The central characters of LOTR (Frodo and Samwise) were intentionally written as very, very regular people placed in an extraordinary circumstance. One of the things that makes their kind so resistant to the Ring is the fact that they have, as a group, very little desire for power and dominion outside of their own group. Elves and Humans have a long history of such behavior. Desire for dominion is what makes the One Ring so dangerous and why it trapped Boromir even by its proximity to him. LOTR is a VERY complex story involving Powers that have been contending for since literally the dawn of creation. Some of the players have been active participants in that conflict since the very beginning and others since nearly that time. (Elrond and Galadriel are really, really old). The movie actually cuts out A LOT of the activity that takes place in the book (Fellowship of the Ring), condenses characters, and glosses over a few things. But considering the limitations of the media, does a very good job of translating the book to the screen. As a sidenote. Tolkien was a very devout Catholic throughout his life, and while he denies any conscious effort towards allegory, subconsciously he cannot help it. The early history of Middle Earth is filled with mythopoetic stories influenced by catholicism, judaism, and the myths and legends of northern european cultures including celts, and scandanavian cultures. Tolkien was primarily a linguist, fluent in a bunch of languages including a handful of dead northern european dialects such as Old Finnish and Anglo-Saxon Old English. In many respects the whole Middle Earth concept came about as an experiment in linguistics and what language reveals about the culture that spawned it. Tolkien developed several fully functioning languages for Middle Earth including the Sindarin and Quenya dialects of Elvish, Orkish and Numernorean. Tolkien's translation of "Beowulf" has long been considered one of the best ever produced. As far as Frodo's reactions to danger, consider the fact that Frodo was raised in a protected enclave. The Shire was under constant watch by the Dunedain (Rangers)and the Elves of Elrond's people and those of Cirdan the shipwright at the Grey Havens. Gandalf has also made it his special mission to protect the Shire for over 100 years. The folk of the Shire just didn't have a lot of exposure to real danger, much like modern Americans, so the reactions of a small people to threats by evils far larger and greater than themselves is pretty understandable. The true mettle of the hobbits is tested in the later books. I am really looking forward the the Two Towers.
Link Posted: 8/7/2002 9:54:04 AM EDT
Originally Posted By mcgredo: The decision to make Frodo non-studly in the conventional sense was intentional. Tolkien was displaying heroism of a different sort. (Tolkien, a Catholic, used some characters and situations as an extended riff on Christianity.)
View Quote
Yepper, And one of his best friends was C.S. Lewis.
Link Posted: 8/7/2002 3:06:03 PM EDT
Seems that just about every DVD that i buy, later has a "Director cut/Special edition" variant that come out later. Dont buy the first release (rent), or just sell the first edition off and buy the special one. I dont like throwing away money either and did not know that they were going to do this with LoTR, but it did'nt really surprise me. If they are going to add 30 minutes to the new release then it should reflect the novel even more...hopefully. I like Tolkien enough to buy it again, but i may pass the BHD DVD unless they truly add something to it besides some lame makeings of or 5 minutes of BS deleted scenes that wont amount to much. The new release of BHD should add more character development and events from the book (which i have yet to read). lib
Link Posted: 8/7/2002 3:11:17 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DScottHewitt: WHAT A RIP-OFF!!!!! Takes them until almost time for the second movie to put out the DVD (TWO DISC SET), and one of the things on Disc Two is a preview of the "Special Edition" DVD. Thirty minutes longer than what I bought, and the two disc set doesn't even have the deleted scenes on it...... Scott
View Quote
The Dungeons and Dragons Geek crowd will gladly pay. I can't stand that Genre of movie anyhow.
Link Posted: 8/7/2002 3:20:50 PM EDT
"WHAT A RIP-OFF!!!!! Takes them until almost time for the second movie to put out the DVD (TWO DISC SET), and one of the things on Disc Two is a preview of the "Special Edition" DVD. Thirty minutes longer than what I bought, and the two disc set doesn't even have the deleted scenes on it......" hmm, looks like someone hasnt heard of windowing, once a movie is released to the big screen it goes into stages aka windows, before it plays on broadcast tv, there are set standards for each and time limits. Of course it took almost till the next release of the trilogoy, it supposed to. First window, domestic theaters, second window, foreign theaters, third window pay perview and DVD/VHS, fourth windows, cable tv and so on .... IF they released it on video soon after the showings at the theater why would people bother to go to the theater? They would lose tons of money. Thats why EVERY video that starts in window one goes through these stages. As far as special editions and so on, again its to sell more copies and give viewers a reason to buy this edition ala extra footage. If the reason you buy DVDs is because of the extra footage TRY READING THE BACK before purchase, it never mention any extra movie footage and lists what added features are on it. Personally i buy DVDs only for the superior audio and video quality, if there is bonus footage, thats just whatit is, a bonus.
Link Posted: 8/7/2002 6:33:25 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Test_Tickle: The Dungeons and Dragons Geek crowd will gladly pay. I can't stand that Genre of movie anyhow.
View Quote
Then why comment on the whole thread?
Link Posted: 8/7/2002 6:48:28 PM EDT
both LOTR dvd sets will have different extras, some will be the same. but each will have unique ones, according to amazon.com anyhow. im waiting in the directors cut. until the i will enjoy my dvd quality version i have had for...oh about 6 months. thats all that ill say.. the president doesnt want me to say that he.... oops almost let the cat out of the bag!
Link Posted: 8/7/2002 6:56:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/7/2002 6:58:40 PM EDT by NOVA5]
Originally Posted By Guntoting_Spartan: " If the reason you buy DVDs is because of the extra footage TRY READING THE BACK before purchase, it never mention any extra movie footage and lists what added features are on it.
View Quote
try reading the back yourself silly human. a few of my DVDs HAVE added footage IN the movie. AND the claim it is ADDED. Terminator 2 as Theatrical, Directors, Special Edition. extra scenes are added in Directors, those are carried over to the special where even a few more are added. Stargate(orignal movie) has addtional scenes. ID4 has Theatrical / Special Edition. the special has added scenes. Need i go on?
Link Posted: 8/7/2002 7:06:09 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Test_Tickle:
Originally Posted By DScottHewitt: WHAT A RIP-OFF!!!!! Takes them until almost time for the second movie to put out the DVD (TWO DISC SET), and one of the things on Disc Two is a preview of the "Special Edition" DVD. Thirty minutes longer than what I bought, and the two disc set doesn't even have the deleted scenes on it...... Scott
View Quote
The Dungeons and Dragons Geek crowd will gladly pay. I can't stand that Genre of movie anyhow.
View Quote
Dungeons and Dragons Geek's with AR-15's and AK's. To each his own. If you dont like Medieval fantasy, then fine. I guess its ok to call people names if they dont like the same things you do. I like calling sports fans names too, but only in jest. spell slinging lib
Link Posted: 8/7/2002 7:26:53 PM EDT
The Dungeons and Dragons Geek crowd will gladly pay. I can't stand that Genre of movie anyhow.
View Quote
The Dungeons and Dragons crowd read Tolkien, didn't really "get it" but ran with the imagery. It is [b]extremely[/b] unfair to judge Tolkien by the rest of the stuff in the genre. When I saw Saving Private Ryan, I couldn't help but feel - boy, this is something every American should see - but cringing at the same time about everything that would follow because some two bit director saw SPR and thought - hey you can get away with that on screen now!!!! Tolkien vs all other DnD fantasy type stuff is much like that - but more so. (Incidently, I feel the [u]plot[/u] for SPR was actually a little weak, but it really doesn't matter - as it was really a [u]character study[/u], and the story was just the backdrop on which the characters could be contrasted. (That ought to be good for a 1500 words or so english paper.)
Link Posted: 8/7/2002 7:41:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/7/2002 7:41:52 PM EDT by raven]
Originally Posted By Magic: [b][blue]NAKED[/blue] The person carrying the ring that nobody else has the will to touch is a wimp with no will? [/b]
View Quote
They let Frodo take it because Hobbits are such pissants, even if they are corrupted by the ring they'll just end up like Gollum. If someone powerful carries the ring, you'd get a corrupted evil person wielding great power, much greater power they had before the ring. That's why Frodo's the ringbearer, why Gandalf and the Forest Elf queen didn't want it (although tempted), and why Sauraman and Boromir sought it for themselves.
Link Posted: 8/7/2002 7:46:00 PM EDT
Originally Posted By NAKED-GUNMAN: Just got through watching it with my wife. The special effects are the only thing that kept me watching. The wide-eyed boy hobbit just made me cringe to no end. Every time danger comes near...he has that deer in the headlights look. Too idiotic of a hero...too weak to be believable. Not sure what all the hype was about...too long, too many crises to survive and the hero is a kid wimp with no will. Maybe I'm too old, [b][blue]NAKED[/blue][/b]
View Quote
Mr. Naked, fans of this book have been waiting for someone to do a good job of making a movie out of this material. This is what we had to settle for before these movies were made: [url]http://download.consumptionjunction.com/multimedia/cj_11225.wmv[/url]
Link Posted: 8/7/2002 7:59:46 PM EDT
The DVD release is mostly a money thing. People just have to be more patient since more movies are being released on DVD quicker now that the medium has become more available. Excellent post iceman. I read the book (it is really one book released in three volumes) once a year. Frodo is no whimp if you understand what he's doing.
Link Posted: 8/7/2002 8:02:35 PM EDT
Dungeons & Dragons geek crowd... all this coming from someone posting on an INTERNET CHAT BOARD?! I take it you are far better than they are... captain cool? Seriously though, I don't think it's very wise to call fans of LOTR the same as the D&D geek crowd; D&D may have arisen out of the framework laid down by Tolkien, but that in no way detracts for the literary greatness of the LOTR. Besides, there's a lot that AR/AK fans have in common with the LOTR. I mean, epic journey, armed to the teeth with FANTASTIC weaponry... I mean c'mon! Tolkien had a weapons obsession far beyond any of us! Orcrist, the Goblin Cleaver; Glamdring, The Foe Hammer, Narsil, Sting- A sword the Glows with lust for killing it's enemies! Mithril (bullet proof) vests! I wish my AR would glow blue when the commies came near! LOTR is a hard-core epic tale born out of ancient viking and old english legends; hardly geek stuff. I would tend to think of geeks as people who are willing to pay $200 bucks for a pair of basketball shoes just because they have Michael Jordan's endorsement.
Link Posted: 8/7/2002 8:10:50 PM EDT
Originally Posted By raven: They let Frodo take it because Hobbits are such pissants, even if they are corrupted by the ring they'll just end up like Gollum. If someone powerful carries the ring, you'd get a corrupted evil person wielding great power, much greater power they had before the ring. That's why Frodo's the ringbearer, why Gandalf and the Forest Elf queen didn't want it (although tempted), and why Sauraman and Boromir sought it for themselves.
View Quote
Hobbits are not "pissants" as you put it. Actually they are a major wildcard in Middle Earth. They were part of Eru (the One God's) plan that He didn't reveal to the Ainu (angels and archangels which included Melkor/Morgoth, the first Dark Lord/satanic character and his servant Sauron). Because they were an unrevealed portion of the plan, Sauron had no idea they even existed until something happened to bring them to his attention. Since they were also created by the will of Eru alone rather than with the influence of the Valar (the archangelic order of Ainu spirits) there was no possibility of their essence being corrupted by the efforts of Melkor (a Vala) or even the other faithful Valar. Eru put a number of other wildcards into the mix as well including Tom Bombadil (removed from the movie for brevity). Tom was utterly unaffected by the Ring, but likewise had no respect for it and would have proved a very poor keeper. Hobbits were created far tougher in the mind and body than they would appear precisely so that they would be easily overlooked and underestimated by the Powers of the world. They were made to hold fast to their course no matter where it led, and though they do not seek adventure, they actually do well in it because they keep their hearts and minds fixed on what is really important rather than grasping at things they cannot encompass. Elves and Men are not so good at that and the history of Middle Earth is cram packed with stories of ambition and pride turned to evil including the doom of the Noldor (a group of elves) whose pride induced them to take a rebellious oath that ultimately brought about the virtual destruction of their entire people. Galadriel is one of the last of the Noldor. Galadriel and Gandalf are FAR more powerful than the movie or that book of the trilogy let on. Galadriel is many thousands of years old. She was one of the firstborn elves who travelled to Valinor (the land of the Vala) in the time when the world was lit by the light of the Two Trees rather than by the less brilliant Sun and Moon. She is WELL over 10,000 years old and far older than Elrond. She may well be one of the six oldest people in Middle Earth along with Sauron, Gandalf, Radagast, Saruman and Cirdan the Shipwright. The richness of Middle Earth is only glimpsed by the LOTR books and movies. Even the Silmarilion only goes over the history of Middle Earth in general rather than addressing all the detail Tolkien built into it. Knowing that back story adds tremendous richness to the whole story as a whole and highlights the fact that Tolkien was a literary and linguistic genius.
Link Posted: 8/7/2002 8:16:17 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/7/2002 8:17:44 PM EDT by Guntoting_Spartan]
NOVA, i dont see your point in yer post. they HAVe extra footage in the movie and CLAIM it on the back. Yes, it says it on the back. WHats yer point? I was talking about the guy who was complaining that the DVD DIDNT have extra footage and if he read the back it DIDNT claim to have any. I was talking only about the DVD he was talking about Lord Of the RIngs not ALL DVDs. When it DOES claim to have it like the movies you listed it DOES say it on the back. So whats your point? you post a message calling me a silly human when your post doesnt oppose my view and you dont understand it.
Link Posted: 8/7/2002 8:23:15 PM EDT
The new scenes in the extended version look like a longer introduction to the Shire, the encounter with the elves leaving to the west and passing through the Shire, and a longer leave-taking at Galadriel's. Probably some battle scenes as well. Jackson was explicit that this wasn't the movie he'd have released to the theaters. That movie needed to move the story along at a good clip to keep a wider audience's attention, while a DVD version aimed at fans can afford to be a bit more slow. The difference between Tolkien and most of the copycats is that Tolkien can write.
Link Posted: 8/7/2002 8:29:44 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/7/2002 8:40:06 PM EDT by byron2112]
Hey iceman, Nice posts,very entertaining to read.You have an uncommon recall and knowledge of the subject.The Hobbit was the first real "book"I ever read on my own for pleasure as a kid,and the Trilogy is a wonderfull read.Tolkien had a way of writing that made the characters and situations very vivid and visual ,at least to my mind.Like you said ,he's got a planet ready made with ancient ,tangled legends and history.Very thorough.Very enjoyable to read,although all those legends and their connections can be confusing at times.Still thats what makes it so exciting when the light comes on and it all pulls together.A very "rich"world indeed. I did enjoy the movie,but it did pack an awfull lot of "stuff" into three hours.Was sorta difficult for me to follow,can't imagine how the uninitiated digested it? Its unfortunate that the story couldn't have been givin the true time it deserves to do justice to the detail of the books. Perhaps it would have been better served in an HBO type format where they coulda done six hours on each book in a miniseries type of situation,say Tolkien ala Easy Company?
Link Posted: 8/7/2002 9:05:08 PM EDT
Iceman, Ditto on Byron's posts, you know your stuff. I read the Silmarillion a while ago and I've been meaning to read the book of lost tales for some time now. Good stuff, huh? BTW, what did you think of the film? It far exceeded even my wildest expectations, easily becoming one of the best films I've ever seen. I'm patiently waiting for the arrival of TTT.
Link Posted: 8/7/2002 9:36:17 PM EDT
It seems that people are pissed that their is going to be another version released. Understandable...I'm unhappy when studios release a second version (or a special version) later on without any real notice. However, in the LOTR's case, it was known pretty much since the beginning. Studios are finding out that there is a market for people that just want the copy that they saw in the theaters...no special crap, no flair, no hitting play and you going to a cutscene where it takes a minute to actually get to the movie, just the movie. Probably the same people that are buying Fullscreen DVD's (although the thought of Fullscreen DVD's just doesn't seem right). It'd be preferable if they'd release both versions at the same time so people can choose, its annoying to buy something and then find out the version you'd preferred will be coming out a couple months later... Realistically though since sequels usually aren't released until 2 or 3 years after the first one the waiting a year for the movie doesn't sound too farfetched though...the way they did LOTR where they film it all at once really isn't done much. This might be the first for all I knwo...
Link Posted: 8/8/2002 11:33:33 AM EDT
The Apocolypse Now Redux version adds almost an hour to the movie. In that hour our heros meet a group of French land owners along the river, have dinner with them, argue and in the case of Cpt. Willard have sex. This totaly blows away the momentum and feeling of the movie. There's no way to edit out those extra sections. The new transfer is very good and the soundtrack is a lot cleaner but to get them you have to endure the French connection. I hope LOTR avoids this common error. In this case less is more.
Link Posted: 8/14/2002 7:42:40 AM EDT
Originally Posted By blackrazor: Iceman, Ditto on Byron's posts, you know your stuff. I read the Silmarillion a while ago and I've been meaning to read the book of lost tales for some time now. Good stuff, huh? BTW, what did you think of the film? It far exceeded even my wildest expectations, easily becoming one of the best films I've ever seen. I'm patiently waiting for the arrival of TTT.
View Quote
I loved the movie and thought Jackson did a pretty good job. Some of his choices for cutting made decent sense...cutting out Bombadil was good thinking since even Tolkien wasn't so sure Bombadil was a good idea. That whole sequence reflected the origins of the book as a child's story-sequel to the Hobbit. But as it evolved it got real grown up, real fast. Some things I didn't like: The fact that they failed to reforge Narsil/Anduril before the Fellowship set out. That's an important story element in the books and I fear that it will be used as an excuse to reintroduce Arwen into the story stream in a more heroic line. It is plain however, that the sword must be reintroduced. They compressed the timeline of the Siege of Mordor in the opening narrative. Isildur and GilGalad had Sauron penned in at Barad Dur for 7 years before the final confrontation in which Isildur and GilGalad were killed as THEY defeated Sauron. Isildur merely cut the Ring off Sauron's hand (At least that's my reading of the episode). Frodo is also much older than the movie portrays. In the books he is in his early fifties, about the same age as Bilbo was when he departed in his quest. Aragorn is about 87 BTW and Arwen is a couple thousand and change. Galadriel is the oldest and most powerful of the Eldar remaining in Middle Earth, A Noldor born in the East, who travelled west to Valinor and then returned in the exhile of the Noldor following Feanor's Oath. I think the male elves were a bit mono-chromatic. All the same hairstyle and coloring. A little more variation would have been nice. The weapons Aragorn gives to the Hobbits at Weathertop were originally gotten from a barrow in the Barrow Downs, south of the Old Forest. Those Barrows were the graves of Numenorean men corrupted to evil in the old days. This was not explained in the movie though as an alternative to the Bombadil story, it is reasonable for Aragorn to be carrying such weapons as relics of his people. The last spoken line of the movie comes from Gimli and it is too modern. "let's hunt some orcs" or whatever, is just too modern. The Moria sequence was extraordinary and very faithful in most regards. The fighting was more explicit than Tolkien wrote, but you have to engage the audience after all. I also didn't like the explicit depiction of Saruman directing the weather and events that were obstructing the Fellowship's passage over the Redhorn Pass. There was nothing so explicit in the books, rather the implication was that an ill-spirit in the mountain itself was trying to destroy them. Saruman did NOT create the Uruk Hai, but he did use them in preference to the conventional breeds. Sauron explicitly DOES have a physical form in the books. Smeagol/Gollum mentions that while Sauron only has nine fingers, they are enough (to inflict horrible torture). The movie indicates that Sauron only exists as a disembodied eye. Rivendell was perfect BTW. I have some other nits to pick, but none of them are all that serious. I am very much looking forward to the Two Towers.
Link Posted: 8/14/2002 8:48:51 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/14/2002 8:49:27 AM EDT by ORM-D]
Good points from iceman. I would have liked for the barrow downs to have been in there, except I think Jackson would have descended into traditional horror supernatural stuff, and Tolkien is a cut above that - so in a way, I'm glad he resisted making TFOTR into Night of the Living Dead part 17. Bombadil could have been done without making it into The Music Man as well - just a short scene for the overnight stay and showing that the ring had no effect on him - coulda been done in about 5 minutes, plus the barrow downs. The bar scene changed Frodo's use of the ring somewhat, but I didn't really feel it detracted from the story. My only real beef with TFOTR as done in the movie, is that I think they gave way too much information about the Uruk Hai. The characters are still figuring this stuff out halfway through TTT.
Link Posted: 8/14/2002 1:41:33 PM EDT
Written by TEST-TICKLE: The Dungeons and Dragons Geek crowd will gladly pay. I can't stand that Genre of movie anyhow. 1: I am that geek you speak of. 2: If you can't stand it why read this post.(Or comment for that matter?) Just wondering
Link Posted: 8/14/2002 2:53:34 PM EDT
@icemanat95 I've become more accustomed to TSR fantasy. In D&D halfling/hobbits live for about 150 years. how long do they live in middle earth? Elves are as they should be in middle earth. i dont understand why D&D elves live for only a century defying gravity and such (skin wrinkles), but then all of a sudden age. Elves to me are supernatural beings. But then D&D is a game and needs a mechanic. When i was reading TTT i noticed they referred to legolas as being a Wood elf. In D&D there are racial variations. Such as High/moon/silver elf, wild elves, wood elves, grey/sun/gold elves, sea elves and of course Drow. Are there some of these in Tolkiens work or was the mention of wood elf simply a matter of topography for Legolas's home. Four eyed pocket protector wearing geek lib
Link Posted: 8/14/2002 3:22:55 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Libertoon: @icemanat95 I've become more accustomed to TSR fantasy. In D&D halfling/hobbits live for about 150 years. how long do they live in middle earth? Elves are as they should be in middle earth. i dont understand why D&D elves live for only a century defying gravity and such (skin wrinkles), but then all of a sudden age. Elves to me are supernatural beings. But then D&D is a game and needs a mechanic. When i was reading TTT i noticed they referred to legolas as being a Wood elf. In D&D there are racial variations. Such as High/moon/silver elf, wild elves, wood elves, grey/sun/gold elves, sea elves and of course Drow. Are there some of these in Tolkiens work or was the mention of wood elf simply a matter of topography for Legolas's home. Four eyed pocket protector wearing geek lib
View Quote
There is also racial variation in elves in Tolkien's novels. Something I don't think was really shown. You can see a slight physical difference between Galadriel and the elves of Lorien and Elrond and his daughter Arwen (difference in skin tone and hair color), but I always envisioned the differences to be far more telling. Here's a great resource for those who don't get the depth and genius of Tolkien's imagined Middle Earth: [url]http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm[/url] Sadly, I haven't been able to find linguistic guides to Elvish and some of the other languages, but they are all mentioned on the site.
Link Posted: 8/14/2002 3:57:44 PM EDT
No, I didn't read the back of the DVD box. We had this jewel of fantasy movie-making in the warehouse for almost [b]TWO WEEKS[/b] before we could sell/buy it. I got off work at one A.M. and bought it. I will probably be buying it again (if the price is reasonable). My rant aside, Jackson did a very good job of capturing Tolkien's vision of Middle Earth. I just want to see the parts that were left out..... Scott
Link Posted: 8/14/2002 4:09:45 PM EDT
Originally Posted By DScottHewitt: No, I didn't read the back of the DVD box. We had this jewel of fantasy movie-making in the warehouse for almost [b]TWO WEEKS[/b] before we could sell/buy it. I got off work at one A.M. and bought it. I will probably be buying it again (if the price is reasonable). My rant aside, Jackson did a very good job of capturing Tolkien's vision of Middle Earth. I just want to see the parts that were left out..... Scott
View Quote
It should be done as a FOTR-quality (in terms of acting and special effects) miniseries. Hell, you could make a full TV series out of the novels and back stories (actually, you could make a couple of TV series). No movie that is less than a 20 hour epic would ever really show LOTR as vividly as described in the book.
Link Posted: 8/14/2002 5:18:48 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Guntoting_Spartan: NOVA, i dont see your point in yer post. ....
View Quote
Originally Posted By Guntoting_Spartan: If the reason you buy DVDs is because of the extra footage TRY READING THE BACK before purchase, it never mention any extra movie footage and lists what added features are on it.
View Quote
that read as they dont tell you if there is any extra footage.
Link Posted: 8/14/2002 7:03:00 PM EDT
uh Nova, can you try that explaination again, this time in english please. It DIDNT say there was extra footage, WHY? because there isnt! Common sense, if it doesnt say something on it, assume it doesnt include it. It like picking up a box of ammo and expecting a magazine to be in the box too, Did it say there was a magazine in the box, NO? Then dont expect one.
Link Posted: 8/14/2002 10:09:08 PM EDT
Lord of the Rings today: Bilbo: Here you go Frodo, my sword, Sting! Frodo: Thanks, I can't wait t... *ATF man appears out of nowhere* ATF: Sorry Bilbo, that looks like an assault sword, short one too... how long's the blade... let's see... uh-oh looks like it's under the 16" limit, we'll need to get a class 3 dealer to carry out the transfer, and you'll have to pay the 200 gold piece transfer tax. Oh, and I see it's magic... can't have that unless it was manufactured before 1132 of the second age. Only pre-ban swords can have a double edge *and* be magic, you'll have to grind off one of the edges to make it legal. Frodo: When can I pick it up after filling out the paper work and paying the transfer fees? ATF: Well, my sources tell me that Aragorn gave you a different sword earlier, so under our new "one sword a month" laws, you'll need to wait about 4 weeks to pick it up. Frodo: OK, after paying the transfer tax and going through the waiting period, I can take it with me into Mordor? ATF: Woah there! Not so fast! You never said anything about actually *carrying* it! You'll need to apply and qualify for a CCW permit first, and if you can demonstrate good cause you might be issued one in 4 to 6 months. Then you'll need to check with the local authorities is Mordor to see if they will honor your Rivendell CCW. Bilbo: Well Frodo, for the time being, at least you can try on this Mithril mail shirt, made by th.... ATF: Whoah-ho! Body armor! I don't know about that... you'll need more permits... etc, etc...
Link Posted: 8/14/2002 11:11:48 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/15/2002 1:48:11 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/15/2002 1:49:15 AM EDT by Uhlek]
I wish my AR would glow blue when the commies came near
View Quote
Well if mine did that here, it would never stop glowing. You might as well talk to CAVARMS and just get a blue reciever, that way you won't have shimmering messing with your sight picture.
Link Posted: 8/15/2002 6:36:46 AM EDT
Originally Posted By DrFrige: A year ago if you were to tell me about the Lord of the Rings I would just say.... HUH? Not only I have gotten into the movie but reading the book(s) as well... (almost finished with the Two Towers. The chapter on the Council of Elrond THOROUGHLY confused the heck out of me that I had to read it over and over again. this one is the son of that one and his one is the heir to the other one... I got so pissed but REFUSED to see the movie until I finished the first book. Glad I did...saw the movie about a week before they finished showing it in the theaters. Here is the weird part. EVERY time I watched the DVD, there was another part that I did not catch. little tid bits of information that makes the story clearer. Anyone else notice that? Oh and reading the Hobbit first put LOTR in better persoective I must admit
View Quote
The geneologies are very complex. Elrond is called the half-elven, because both his parents had human blood. But he is also descended from Melian the Maia, the only member of the Ainu to breed with the Children of Illuvatar (another name for Tolkien's one god). That bloodline makes Elrond and his descendants pretty special. He and his brother were given the right to choose which kindred they would be counted under. Elrond chose the "Firstborne" (elves), while his brother Elros chose mankind and mortality. Elros founded Numenor and Aragorn is his descendant through many, many generations. So Aragorn and Arwen are related by blood, but at many generations distance. The inclusion of Maia and elven blood in Aragorn's line explains why they are as powerful, resistant to illness and long-lived as they are. Elrond, because he chose the elvenkind, also passed the choice along to his children. Arwen must choose between the elvenkind and eventual departure from Middle Earth to return into the Uttermost West, or she can choose mortality and remain with Aragorn in Middle Earth. But once she makes that decision, she has made it for her descendants as well, for in making that decision she becomes mortal in reality and passes that mortality to her children. Arwen is the granddaughter of Galadriel and Celeborn of Lorien. Thus she is of at least two different elven races: The Sindar ( or Gray Elves ) through Celeborn and Elrond as well as the Noldor (through Galadriel)But she also has human blood and Maia blood through Elrond. Her dark coloring is unusual and is often remarked upon as being of the same order, but in the opposite of Luthien's beauty. While Luthien was the Daystar, Arwen is the Evenstar. Arwen is a descendant of Luthien through Elrond. She is also a descendant of the human hero Beren, who alone of all the Children of Illuvatar (both human and elven) died and then returned from death to live again in the world. The love story of Beren and Luthien Tinuviel is one of the great back-story legends and romances of Middle Earth. The connections are extensive. The richness Tolkien built behind the scenes is one reason why his creations have so much life in them, because they have a detailed history of sorrow, strife and glory that informs their perspectives. Tolkien's elves are living at the end of their days in Middle Earth. Their Glory is long behind them and the time grows short before the last of them leave Middle Earth forever. In that regard, The Lord of the Rings is a sad story, because it marks the end of the ages of wonder and magic.
Link Posted: 8/15/2002 10:00:42 AM EDT
LOL UHLEK! I didn't know anywhere in WA was that bad, but being down here in LA I'm sure I can relate.
Link Posted: 8/15/2002 1:49:26 PM EDT
I'd rather my AR-15 to glow red [:D][:D]
Top Top