Ain't It Cool News (www.aintitcool.com)
Movie News

AICN-Downunder: Bowling for Columbine; A Bullet in the Arse; Subsonic; Return of the King

Father Geek here, and its the weekend so its once again time for our report from the otherside of the world and our man downunder,Latauro...

I’m not into politics. I’m into survival.

AICN-DOWNUNDER

Arnie has a state. That kills me.

(Disclaimer: AICN-D reserves the right to make fun of California, right up until the moment we vote in Paul Hogan as Prime Minister and Yahoo Serious as Treasurer... which, given the current state of things, could be next Thursday.)

NEWS

* Johnny Bartlett, Nouveau Zealand Mega-Spy, has told us of some rumours circulating around the twin islands. It seems there’s a strong possibility that many of the LORD OF THE RINGS cast will return for additional filming next year. Why? Won’t RETURN OF THE KING have already been released? Seems the extra footage may be used in the DVD Extended Edition for ROTK. Could this be more footage for the ending that fans are beginning to sweat about? The scouring of the Shire? Or could it be for a larger LOTR box set, the Tom Bombadil sequence that Jackson said (pre-FOTR release) he’d love to go back and film? You don’t need prompting to begin rabid speculation – so get talkbacking!

* Abi Tucket (“The Secret Life Of Us”) will star in SUBSONIC, a ‘modern gothic romance’ written by Phillip Marzella (something called LOW-FAT ELEPHANTS)), with production design by Michelle McGahey (PETER PAN, STAR WARS III, M:I-2, THE MATRIX). It begins shooting soon in Melbourne’s underground. I’m guessing they’re not talking about Parliament Station...

* Supertoyslast has noticed a report up on the BBC Website. To quote Grant Naylor Productions: "Red Dwarf - The Movie may be shot in Australia. Preliminary design work is currently underway and shooting is slated for May 2004. Crewing up has not yet begun.” Given the amount of time they’ve spent talking and planning this film, we’re going to be standing in line with tickets in hand and still be skeptical about its filming chances. File under “maybe one day” for now.

AWARDS AND FESTIVALS

STIGES INTERNATIONAL FILM FESTIVAL

The makers of upcoming local flick A BULLET IN THE ARSE (named after a Robert Frost poem, I believe) have written in to let us know that the film will be playing at the afore-mentioned festival in Spain. If you’re one of AICN-Downunder’s many Spanish readers, you should begin the pilgrimage to Barcelona for the December 4 screening.

SCREEN PRODUCERS ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIA CONFERENCE

At Fed Square this November, delegates will have the pleasure of hearing words talked by Michael Donovan, producer of BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE. He will discuss the international potentials and successes of non-fiction filmmaking, as well as the stories behind the making of COLUMBINE.

BOX OFFICE

The White-Wash All-Stars took the top spot, proving that with a good marketing budget you can do just about anything. PIRATES is showing off a well-deserved power of stay, though it’s nothing (yet) compared to FINDING NEMO, which just refuses to move. More power to it.

Here's this week's winners...
  • 1. LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN
  • 2. PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: CURSE OF THE BLACK PEARL
  • 3. FINDING NEMO
  • 4. BAD BOYS II
  • 5. FREAKY FRIDAY

RELEASED THIS WEEK

British sleeper hits strike formula, Australia + crime = thank God nothing big’s being released this week, Sam Neill freaks out New Zealand women.

Here they arrrrrrrrrr...
  • CALENDER GIRLS
  • GETTIN’ SQUARE
  • PERFECT STRANGERS

UPCOMING BIOPICS

- Nicole Kidman will play Cate Blanchett playing Katherine Hepburn in a making of/science fiction film set behind the scenes of Scorsese’s upcoming THE AVIATOR, in THE AVIATRIX

- Universal have optioned the rights to the life story of a blonde overweight Japanese man who overcame his facial disfigurements to win a beauty pageant, with the hope of signing Tom Cruise

- Sylvester Stallone says he will give equal weight to “his rise to Governor, as well as the allegations of sexual harassment” when he plays Arnold Schwarzenegger in the TV movie PRESSING THE FLESH

Peace out,

Latauro

downunder@aintitcoolmail.com

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Your ego's writing checks your body can't cash, Brother!

  • Oct. 11, 2003, 6:20 p.m. CST

    Goddamnit! I'm so sick of hearing about Tom Bombadil! Get over

    by Brody Armstrong

    The Tom Bombadil part in the books was too fucking long and too fucking pointless. Well, not entirely pointless, but it wasn't needed in the movie AT ALL. You Lord of the Ring morons should bitch about something more important. Like the total rape of Gimli's character in TTT.

  • Oct. 11, 2003, 6:59 p.m. CST

    LOTR extended edition

    by mayaV

    I'm going to buy the extended edition. Why wait for an evan more expensive super extended edition? And yes, they did wrong with Gimli in TTT. He should've been a more serious character. Hope he will be in ROTK. LOTR doesn't need a "funny dwarf"

  • Oct. 11, 2003, 7:21 p.m. CST

    Too late Three_Oranges...

    by IFartOnYourGrave

    They are making a Charlie Chan movie and Lucy Lui is involved...

  • Oct. 11, 2003, 7:44 p.m. CST

    MayaV..I totally see where u are coming from with the funny dwar

    by TheAllSeeingEye

    I've been saying that about the dwarf for ages and i have never found someone who agreed. I hear ya!! The 'Nobody tosses a Dwarf' line in the FOTR was about as much humour as i needed really. But in TTT, Jackson turns gimli into a fucking clown. Not only are the jokes not really that funny but peter jackson saw fit to insert these scenes into all the decent action pieces of the movie. I just hope that in Return of the King, say during the pelanor fields battle, we don't have gimli appear halfway through to do his fucking Seinfeld routine and kill the moment. Here's hoping.

  • Oct. 11, 2003, 7:46 p.m. CST

    David Bowie as Bombadil, Julie Christy as Goldberry.

    by Fred

  • Oct. 11, 2003, 8:17 p.m. CST

    Minstrel in the Gallery

    by pipergates

    they should have Ian Anderson of the Jethro Tull play Tom Bombadil.hopping along with his flute....

  • Oct. 11, 2003, 10:26 p.m. CST

    Forget about Tom Bom - ain't gonna happen

    by crimsonelf

    These pickup shots aren't about redoing the movies- Jackson just needs some extra shots to connect scenes better. (And you can bet he won't build elaborate sets for them.) PJ would never mess with FOTR except perhaps to change Gollum's look. The Extended Cut is just how he wants it. Why change it?

  • Oct. 11, 2003, 11:39 p.m. CST

    Tom Bombadil

    by c4andmore

    was a dope smoking pedophile hippy. That's why he has such a fondness for the "little folk"

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 12:22 a.m. CST

    There will be no Bombadill!

    by MrCere

    His character is so out of place and wacko I just can't believe Jackson would try to fit this in his films. Further, this will be minor tweaking, just as reshoots for the previous films have been. The will be small character moments.

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 1:28 a.m. CST

    Envisioned and destroyed?

    by Lobanhaki

    I think you and people like you are too high-strung. I can understand and sometimes even agree with the criticism of certain element. But film has turned a corner, and Lucas's revisions are often quite sensible. He vastly improved the end battle of A New Hope, expanded the scope and size of Mos Eisley, and inserted a number of shots that while not completely necessary, did make the sequences more cohesive. They took a film that was dwarfed and outdated even in comparison to the two other OT films, and brought it at least up to their level. Whatever revisions he brings to the table with the conclusion of the series will have to be judged in that context, but I'm sure it won't be that harebrained. It's just, that if you distrust this filmmaker so much, why dwell on it. Find the filmmakers you do trust, and enjoy their movies instead. Or better yet, keep whatever remains of the old trilogy in your collection, and just make that your definitive version. Don't try to force those who've made up their mind otherwise to agree with you

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 1:38 a.m. CST

    More LOTR to watch!

    by emeraldluxury

    Hey, thanks for the news. Personally, I would love any new scenes that Jackson could develop for the LOTR series. I think a Bombadil sequence would be fantastic, but I would really love to see the scouring of the shire. Personally, I thought that the shire was what the whole film built up to for the hobbits. It proved that the "little guy" could band together and do the impossible on their own after learning their true strength as a force. Without the help of other people. I want to see Frodo and Sam at the end the way that they were in the book. But I will take whatever Peter Jackson decides to put in his movie with pleasure. Lots of fun guessing though.

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 2:01 a.m. CST

    Come on ! Tom Bombadil was much cool !

    by Judge Doom

    He was like a Middle earth Hippie or someting...My favorite caracther after Sauron. And CreepyThinMan, I THINK YOU SHOULD GET LAID, GO GET SOME HUBBA-HUBBA OK?

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 2:26 a.m. CST

    scouring of the shire

    by magyarman

    Personally, I'm glad that the Scouring of the Shire will not be shown in RotK. I don't think it should be.

  • Tolkien a liar and LOTR as allegory? Sorry but I just had to respond. Pipe down, nerdling, you have no clue what you are talking about.

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 5:40 a.m. CST

    Peter Jackson can do it... but if George lucas is going to do re

    by TheGinger Twit

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 5:46 a.m. CST

    People shouldn't use words they don't understand,

    by Conan_the_Humble

    If LOTR was an allegory the Ring WOULD have been used and Sauron overthrown. Trolls should try a bit harder, this argument only been around for 50 odd years. Cheers.

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 5:53 a.m. CST

    Off topic, but about george lucas and his re-visions...

    by TheGinger Twit

    I'm not in defence of Lucas at all, I think his special editions make the star wars films somewhat falwed, but there is something to be said about them... Firstly, the jabba scene wasn't exactly a new scene... it was written and filmed way back with all the other footage - but putting in a stop motion jabba was going too be too fake and too time consuming and too expensive. The vision was there. Even if Jabba does come accross as a bit of a pussy and the animation is a little cartoony, it did end with a shot of Bobba fett - and that for me made the whole damn thing worthwhile. I couldn't give a toss if han didn't shoot first, my problem with that scene is that it's so badly done. Only in slow motion can you actually see what Lucas was trying to do - and even then it's laughable and questions the mans creative integrity. As for the rest of the film... I must say I was disapointed by how much hadn't been changed. I went in hopeing to see that Death Star for the size it was meant to be. And I fucking hate ring ripple explosions. It's space, not water - the ripple would be circular! Just hang about, after the release of a big aussie time travel film, the creator is making a star wars'esk film the way it should be, with silent explosions and 'real' space travel!

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 7:07 a.m. CST

    Will "the Hobbit" be made by Peter Jackson?

    by Firerizer

    Is there any serious speculation that the Hobbit will be made by Peter Jackson and company? It would appear that everything is reasonably in place and could be made at a favorable price. Has anyone heard anything?

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 7:11 a.m. CST

    Extended footage on ROTR

    by Totem_NZ

    This has been the talk on set for quite some time now. The joke runs that we would be happy to carry on shooting, but can we have Xmas Day off, please? So it could occur any time between now and... early next year. I for one would be happy to keep on returning, as it pays the mortgage. Oh, for those worried about the Gimli jokes... there's a few more, and some of them were JRD's own ad-libs, not scripted.

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 8:19 a.m. CST

    CreepyThinMan...

    by Olorin_TLA

    Hisa comments about the scoruing just reminded me of this review: http://tolkien.cro.net/tolkien/cclark.html ^.^

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 10:09 a.m. CST

    LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN tops the Australian Box Office

    by godoffireinhell

    What? The? Fuck? How? Why?

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 10:09 a.m. CST

    Here's hoping it's SotS!

    by Miami Mofo

    Adding Scouring to the RotK SEV would be in keeping with P.J.'s master plan for these films -- make the theatrical releases for the general movie-going public and make the SEVs for the fans of the book. Doing this makes perfect sense to me. Thanks for the info, Lauturo.

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 10:10 a.m. CST

    More LOTR filming

    by Wistari

    i ahve already began to mourn the end of Pj's magnificent trilogy. i have followed the saga ( not just in the theatrical sense) with interest and admiration. Should PJ choose to shoot the scouring of the shire it would be perfect closure for all in Middle earth and this one too!

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 10:17 a.m. CST

    LOTR - 20th Anniversary Ultimate Hyper Orgasm Edition

    by godoffireinhell

    Includes a 70-hour version of the filmed Appendices!!! Filmed version of "On Hobbits". Audio commentary by an Tolkien impersonator!!! An ultra-extended version of the SOTS & TOM BOMBADIL scenes that were already gradually extended in the 5th, 10th and 15th Anniversary Editions. Scene specific audio commentary by a recently discovered Ent. Footage of Peter Jackson combing his beard on the set of the 217th reshoot!!!

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 10:36 a.m. CST

    Columbine

    by Govenor_CONAN

    Maybe they should just explain that first you need a fat homley guy who does amusing assinine skits of him blasting coperations with big checks and asking if they can change their own oil or format a disk and then picks a topic that is on everybodies mind and does the same thing only this time harrassing an old feable bastard like heston and your bound to get good press oh and ofcourse throw in some racist cartoon to get rid of any risidual white-guilt your still habouring.

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 11:08 a.m. CST

    Gimli's Character

    by somaobi

    i admit i was a little irritated at Gimli's character change as the comedic relief of TTT, but then I read the books again after seeing TTT nine times. Gimli is so peripheral in the books that he has no character beyond being a warrior. Granted, Tolkien certainly builds up the relationship between Legolas and Gimli, but that's the only place where either of the two characters are given any depth. Even then, their bond is only symbollic of the feelings between the races of Elves and Dwarfs. I came to terms with PJ's characterization of Gimli and even appreciate it because Gimli is someone in the books, not just some midget on the road with the Fellowship.

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 12:33 p.m. CST

    Paul Hogan as P.M? Yahoo Serious as Treasurer?

    by TheWoodMan

    Fine by me, as long as you send Claudia Black over here as Ambassador to the United States. And by the way, I can live without the dragging and depressing "Scouring of the Shire" (it's never affected me very deeply, since I'm not a Briton who lived through WWII), and I hope Bombadil isn't even CONSIDERED for inclusion.

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 12:45 p.m. CST

    ROTK on Kazaa

    by Allan

    So how many people are going to download Return Of The King from Kazaa only to find they've got the cartoon version? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA! :-)

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 1:08 p.m. CST

    all film versions available now with "cut it yourself"

    by mayaV

    May I politely ask for something like a "cut it yourself" version of all our favourite movies? An edition with every single scene ever produced. Imagiene ...

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 1:40 p.m. CST

    Jackson's Statement on Tom Bombadil and Re-Shooting

    by metacritic

    Have we forgotten AICN's August 30, 1998 interview with Peter Jackson: http://www.aint-it-cool-news.com/lordoftherings2.html? In that interview, Jackson says the following: "One idea I've got (if the trilogy is successful) would be to gather the cast together again and shoot another couple of hours worth of scenes to flesh out The Lord of the Rings as a more complete "Special Edition". In other words, we would write and shoot the Tom Bombadil stuff, or scenes involving Gandalf and Aragorn hunting Gollum, and his capture by Orcs ... and any number of other bits of business that we can't fit into the 6 hour version. That would be a really cool way of creating a "sequel" - expanding the existing The Lord of the Rings from 6 to 8 or 9 hours! It would be the first time that has ever been done (except for CE3K perhaps)." Of course, this was when the times were much shorter....

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 1:40 p.m. CST

    Creepy, you confuse allegory with "applicability"

    by daughter of time

    As you seem well-up on your subject, I will assume you've read Tolkien's own words about his inspiration, including the facts that parts of the "Scouring" were inspired by destruction from his (pre-WWI) childhood. Strictly speaking, allegory is where there is DIRECT one-to-one, intentional correspondence. (A character is named "Patience," the rose IS the Virgin Mary, Aslan IS Christ, etc.) But even though Tolkien was no doubt inspired by events he lived through, most of LOTR was written (and the Ring conceived) before he had any knowledge of the Bomb, and much of it when there was still hope the war might be averted. One might as well say that the Ring represents the ultimate biological weapon, and the lesser Rings scientic research that can either produce bountiful crops or plagues, depending on the wielder.... Tolkien saw the Ring as ultimate, corruptive Power that enslaves everything under it, but nothing so specific as you describe. Other cultures in other times might read LOTR and come up with entirely different interpretations than yours - hence, "applicability" (like much of Shakespeare) and not "allegory." ***And the importance of "Scouring of the Shire" is not whether or not it has to do with conditions in post-war Britain, but is a continuation of the idea that even with victory the world has suffered lasting consequences (even if Galadriel's dust brings healing). It is one of the things that sets LOTR apart from lesser fantasies, where evil is defeated, and the fireworks go off, and everyone cheers. Hard work still lies ahead.

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 1:43 p.m. CST

    Creepy, there is one flaw in your argument.

    by FluffyUnbound

    The Ring can't be a metaphor for the Bomb because when Tolkien started writing LOTR the Bomb DIDN'T EXIST YET. Did the Rosenbergs use Tolkien as a courier or something? And without that central element in place the allegory theory falls completely apart.

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 1:57 p.m. CST

    On Allegory

    by metacritic

    It is important to step back from one's opinion (even if you refer to it as "FACT!!!") and realized that it is bound by rules of perception. Allegorical analysis is one of many critical methods, and it--like the others--is never a definitive representation of authorial intention or reader interpretation. Sure, Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings can be looked at as an allegory, but that particular method is too limiting (and easy). Personally, I see the Scouring of the Shire like Daughter of Time's view. It's about learning to find the strength (and reserve) to fight your own battles. The moral themes are rounded out with the forgiveness that Frodo demonstrates and how Grima acts out against Saruman. Whether the Scouring of the Shire ending is a "let-down," "depressing," "anti-climactic," or "boring" is irrelevant because those are *extremely* superficial observations. I hope Jackson will keep this spirit in the film.

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 2:14 p.m. CST

    Are you people mad?

    by pandamaster83

    I strongly dount there will be any extra super-mamma-dvd for LOTR. I just dont think it'll happen. No way. Maybe a "boxed set" will come out in a couple of years, but it will consist of no more than the three special edition dvds packed together. Look at what we already have. The 1st extended dvd is being praised as the greatest dvd ever released because of the wealth of material (certainly the greatest in my collection). All I can imagine Jackson releasing at any point after the ROTK extended dvd is some sort of blooper material (if that isn't on the ROTK dvd anyway). People always say to me "I'm just gonna wait for the super deluxe boxed set, man." There aint gonna be a super deluxe boxed set. The ones we know about for sure (theatrical or extended) are the only ones we are going to get and Im thankful for it cos the extended dvds are more than enough to tide me over. Some blooper material wouldn't go amiss though...

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 2:26 p.m. CST

    LOTR Box Set

    by vincent_disilvio

    i really don't think there'll be a super-extended edition. while pj is just as likely to change his mind as any film director, he did say, in an interview, that the extended editions while be the LAST special editions he's going to make. although he did mention that he could see new line putting all 3 ee versions together in 1 box set.

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 3:02 p.m. CST

    Bloopers

    by Allan

    Do we really want to see LOTR cheapened in a "blooper reel"?

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 3:41 p.m. CST

    Listen...

    by Barron34

    Anything that Jackson does with LOTR from this point on is gravy. Tom Bombadil was left out of the films for good reason (the Bomabadil interlude would have been incongruous with the pace of Jackson's filmed version). The Scouring of the Shire (as much as I would like to see it onscreen) would merely be confusing to viewers who have not read Tolkein (they would be wondering why, if the heroes have won, is their home being destroyed; while the Scouring of the Shire makes sense in the novel, it would confuse viewers of the film who have not read the book, where it is a well-explained and well-understood event). These movies have just been great, more than we could ask for as Tolkien fans, and they have done wonderful things for filmmaking that will go on even beyond the three films. Any minor exceptions we might have with the films are quibbles (my quibbles: 1) Gimli is used too much as comic releif and not taken seriously enough, diminishing the role of the Dwarves in Middel-Earth 2) Orcs are not Cockneys and lower class Anglo types; they need to be speaking the guttural, corrrupted Black Speech and Orcish, and taken more seriously). But, FORGET these quibbles, and any others. These are phenomenal films, and are great adaptations of Tolkein by Jackson and Company. There are always bound to be points on which each Tolkein fan and Jackson would diverge. The point is, the books and the films are their own entities. Just as two different artists portrayals of Gandalf would differ, so any filmmakers own personal filmic version of Lord of the Rings is bound to not be EXACTLY as you or I would have done it. Jackson is more than entitled to make his own choices, and I believe that he has made overwhelmingly GREAT choices, and has exceeded beyond our wildest hopes. Well, if the Scouring of the Shire does not get done on film, it is certainly not the end of the world. Yes, maybe I would have liked a more serious interpretation of Gimli, but so what? The interpretation that Jackson has of Gimli is still a great interpretation regardless. You can't expect every detail of a filmed book adaptation to match what you imagined in your minds eye, anymore than one particular artists version of Gandalf might match your own ("well, gee, I thought Gandalf would be taller, with more of a twinkle in his eye", etc). The point is, we real Tolkein fans, WILL ALWAYS have the Middle-Earth of our own mind's-eye, as well as the myriad of art illustrations of the books, and now these wonderful films. and all of this is in addition to Tolkein's written work itself, which is the fountain of al these other art works. The films will stand as wonderful interpretations of a great work of literature, but the books themselves will always be there the original work, and will always be accessible, to old fans and new alike. So, if you wish Tom Bomabadil was in the films, there really is no reason to despair of it: Tom Bombadil will always exist in the pages of the book, in the myriad of illustrations and renderings of him done by so many talented artists, and, perhaps most importantly, in our own imaginations. Tolkein's wonderful work has always inspired many other artistic renderings based upon them, and these films are just another wonderful interpretation. (Now, if we could just get Peter to consider a film version of the Hobbit... The Road Goes Ever On....)

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 4:58 p.m. CST

    regardind Creepythinman and my grandmother's ass

    by Judge Doom

    WOA, she's still alive, man, and would be happy to get a new bone. Besides, she was alive during the WW II, so she can make you understand why LOTR is not an alegory, since there was no BOMB when it was writen.

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 5:35 p.m. CST

    Peter Jackson is a river to his people

    by orson

    Hmmm, just finished reading through the last downunder TB. I enjoyed the comments of Audeh which pretty much reflect the reaction of Tolkien purists. I know where he's coming from though I certainly don't agree with him. The LOTR movies could have been a hell of a lot worse. In fact I fully expected them to be dumbed down, poorly-understood Hollywoodised adaptations - and was therefore pleasantly surprised when FOTR turned out to be quite a few notches above this. I would say, however, that TTT is a lot closer to what I feared Hollywood would produce - being a bit deficient in the screenplay department. Which reminds me: DoT said that turning LOTR into two movies instead of three would have been an abomination. Well, I have to disagree: PJ originally conceived the project as two movies and I'm very sure that would have worked. I believe that TTT's problems stem from the fact that PJ+FW+PB suddenly had to pad out their script to accommodate a third film. IMO, this is why there is a sharp drop in the quality of the writing in TTT compared to FOTR and why so many scenes feel like "filler". It also explains the somewhat garbled and illogical exposition (Gandalf's attempt to stop Theoden fleeing to Helm's Deep - the ONLY sensible option; Gandalf not remembering his name even after meeting Merry and Pippin, Theoden + Aragorn's bizarre argument on the battlements etc, etc). All of this, plus the choppy pacing, suggests that this movie has suffered the most from the decision to expand a tight two-movie project to three movies. I think that a lot of the material in TTT would not have suffered at all from being covered in a ten-minute prologue at the beginning of film 2. I think that the constraint of telling the story in two movies would have allowed PJ's great talent to shine - the scripts would have been sharper, more focused and I bet there would have been a lot less inappropriate dwarf humour - it would get cut out because of its lack of importance to the main story. Which is just as it should be.

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 6:50 p.m. CST

    Why I hate the Scouring.

    by Fitzcarraldo

    Tolkien wrote a great series of books and I love him for that. However, he was a right-wing reactionary typical of his time and place. He hated industrialisation even though it was thanks to all those industrial workers that he had the time and freedom to sit around thinking up imaginary languages and making quips in Latin while millions sweated their guts out on his behalf. His attitude to those of the "lower" classes is, in hindsight, pretty nauseating. He would rather the Shire stayed as a feudal society with the peasants tugging their forelocks to the idle aristos and middle-classes (notice that there is no indication that Bilbo or Frodo ever DO anything other than eat, drink, smoke and go for walks. Frodo retires to Rivendell. Retires from what, exactly?). When Frodo returns to the Shire he is aghast to find things being shared out as much as anything. Tolkien always denied that there was any allegory in LOTR but there clearly is, even if unconsciously. I believe the scouring of the Shire is a direct reference to the 1945 election of a Labour government in Britain. Socialists! Here in Merrie England! Why, they're practically communists! And the non-working classes in Britain were a damn sight more frightened of communism than they ever were of fascism. I can only imagine poor Tolkien's anguish as he watched industries nationalised and expanded and poor people receiving free medical care etc. That's why I hate the scouring. It's an ill-natured reactionary howl of outrage at a world changing for the better.

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 6:57 p.m. CST

    Actually Fitzie...

    by FluffyUnbound

    If it were possibly to bodily reduce the world to the technological and social level represented by the Shire, I would be tempted to do it. Naturally, a society at that economic level could only support a world population about 1/10th of what we have now, but that's not a problem for me if you let me pick the people to be dispensed with. Change for the better my ass. David Brin was right: if you like Tolkien, it is because on some level you hate modernity, hate democracy, hate industrialism, and hate our society. But is that necessarily a bad thing? [Author's note: It is possible that my post is satire. It is also possible that it is not. I have forgotten which it is.]

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 6:58 p.m. CST

    Correction.

    by Fitzcarraldo

    I mean of course Bilbo retired to Rivendell after a lifetime spent doing fuck-all, not Frodo. I must now wipe the foam of madness from my mouth and take my pills.

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 7:13 p.m. CST

    You may be right, Fluffy...

    by Fitzcarraldo

    A world where I can quaff ale and smoke dope and chase rosie-cheeked maidens round the maypole instead of going to a shitty office IS a pleasant fantasy. However I suspect it would lose its appeal pretty quick if I fell ill or got run over by a cart and had to have my legs amputated without anaethetics or something. There has never been a society as idyllic as the Shire in real-life because the hobbits don't have human natures. Where are the disgusting skin diseases, the incest, the backyard abortions, the drunken murders? And you can't stop technological progress. It's only a matter of time before someone has a bright idea and invents a new-fangled threshing machine or plough. No, I find the books enjoyable for the imagination expended, the characters and rich texture, not for Tolkien's pampered old fart politics. However everyone has their own opinion.

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 8:34 p.m. CST

    Thanks for the socioeconomic expose

    by GypsyTRobot

    How did the rich families of the Shire get rich? What kind of monetary system did the hobbits have? Inquiring minds want to know. BTW, and totally off topic, Oz is a communist dictatorship. Not the prison, the Land of Oz. You can't even have a living glass cat without getting your throat torn out by the Hungry Tiger, fer chrissakes.

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 8:56 p.m. CST

    by General_Patton

    I like the Scouring because it does poke socialists in the eye. Tolkien reveals in his letters that he was a fuedal anarchist. To answer your question, you get money by questing for treasure and slaying dragons and the like... well, at least if you're a bit Tookish. Otherwise, you could get rich by selling beer, cakes, and beef to all those fat hungry hobbits.

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 9:52 p.m. CST

    More to finish than 'scouring'

    by Messyjoe

    Re the superextended version, I'll take anything that Jackson wants to give me. Yes the scouring' is not necessary. It is basically a short term physical event, but of no lasting consequence. More important is to get the elves' fadeout just right, because it signals the change of the world. The sadness and pathos should be just right and fully include all characters, as per the book. Also, I see I'm not the only one who can't manage to type a couple of sentences without typos. Doesn't anybody proof what they wrote? (just bitching, never mind.)

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 10:04 p.m. CST

    An Excerpt from the Infamous Missing Tom Bombadil Scene from The

    by JAGUART

    They, the Hobbits, Frodo, Merry, Sam and Pippin stepped out of the Old Forest and found a wide sweep of grass welling up before them. The river, now small and swift, was leaping merrily down to meet them, glinting here and there in the light of the stars, which were already shinning the sky. The grass under their feet was smooth and short, as if it has been mown or shaven. The eaves of the Forest behind were clipped, and trim as a hedge. The path was now plain before them, well tended and bordered with stone. It wound up on top of a grassy knoll, now grey under the pale starry night; and there, still high above them on a further slope they saw the twinkling lights of a house. Down again the path went, and then up again, up a long smooth hillside of turf, towards the light. Suddenly a wide yellow beam flowed out brightly from a door that was open. There was Tom Bombadil's house before them, up, down, under hill. The hobbits stood and gazed when suddenly Frodo cried "The House of Tom Bombadil!" Merry and Pippin chimed in "Tom Bombadil's!" and Sam added wryly "Its only a model".....There was a moment of silence when Frodo announced "On second thought, let's not go to Tom Bombadil's. Tis a silly place."

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 10:16 p.m. CST

    Total Recall - or Not

    by daughter of time

    Orson, if you can show me the post where I said a two-movie LOTR would be an "abomination," I'll acknowledge it, but because I never thought it, I have a hard time believing I ever posted it - as opposed to something relative to being extremely thankful that in the end we were given three. I think you are misinterpreting. And I forgive you, because I don't remember exactly what anyone says, either. ***Creepy, the entire progress of LOTR is documented in excruciating detail in his letters, his son Christopher's biographical and editorial input, etc. Tolkien did not "think" about the book for 13 years and then write it and publish it, all in a rush. And you really do spend too much time shouting at us. Calm down. Why not just be content to read what you want into LOTR and allow other people (including the author) their more flexible interpretation?

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 10:20 p.m. CST

    Tolkien at a glance...

    by DNA

    He wrote good fantasy stories. Why does everyone have to screw that up and compare it to shit that didn't happen until after they were written? It's a timeless story of good Vs. evil. I read article after article and saw documentaries about Tolkien, which said time and time again his stories had nothing to do with the real wars of the real world. ok, with that said, I would like to see the scouring put in, I don't think it's anti-climactic and I happen to like hobbits. Lazy or not.

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 10:23 p.m. CST

    SotS could be it's own movie...

    by Alex Rogan

    ...but I don't think it would work out that way. If I was doing it (pay attention PJ, this is good) I would at some point soon after the wedding fade to an elderly Sam reading that part to his grandkids. He stops and closes the book but the kids plead for him to continue. He brushes them off saying he just doesn't have the heart to read the next part, they will have to read it themselves. He then says his goodbyes, visits Rosie's grave, and leaves for the West. Fade to black.

  • It was originally published in 37 or 38. As I understand it, Tolkien's work was something of an obsession: he'd been working on the world of Middle-Earth and its languages since sometime shortly after coming back from WWI (losing most of his friends). Again, I'd have to fall back on the "applicability" standpoint that's been mentioned before. But you've got so many FACTual errors (the Ballantine edition lists "copyright 1936, 37, and 66" JRR Tolkien, NOT 1942), that I wonder...

  • Oct. 12, 2003, 10:58 p.m. CST

    DVD boxset..

    by MaulRat

    I always thought it would be kinda cool to cut the end credits from FOTR and TTT and just have on big long story of a movie and have it roll directly from the end of FOTR, take out the credits, straight into TTT and then into ROTK.. I know it would be super long and you wouldn't be able to fit it all on one DVD without losing quality and all that crap.. I just think it would have been kinda cool.. take a whole day out of life watching the whole story.. like some of us did with the books.. Oh and PJ can do what he likes with the films, I have very few complaints thus far and most of them fairly picky (I notice that noone thinks that Legolas shield boarding down the steps of Helms Deep is crappy and new fashioned).. Anyway PJ can do whatever he likes to the movies because I trust his judgment at present.. but for that matter.. so can Lucas.. he can do whatever he likes to the original trilogy.. He doesn't have enough money to buy my originals off me.. he can take our lives but he'll never take our stock! *BAMF*

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 2:12 a.m. CST

    This is a little off-topic, but...

    by daughter of time

    ...did anyone else see the appalling "Warrior Queen" (aka "Boudica") on PBS? I can drag in a Tolkien reference merely by quoting a critic from IMDB: "This was like Lord of the Rings done on home video with a cast off the street." And I think it's also the definitive answer to anyone who still thinks the BBC could have done a better (i.e., more likely to satisfy the purists) LOTR. Only if you would have preferred it with TRULY dumbed-down dialogue, greyed-out photography, a cast of tens, a bit of cheesy hocus-pocus, and an utter absence of dramatic tension. I used to be devoted to Masterpiece Theatre, but if this is their current standard, I haven't missed much in recent years. Oh, and what's with the ubiquitous wailing soundtrack these days? Every made-for-television pseudo-epic has to have a voice wailing atonaly in the background. Anyway, it was a dismal 90 minutes, calculated to make me appreciate all the more deeply the talent of Jackson, Shore, and every single actor and artist involved with LOTR.

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 3:51 a.m. CST

    i wish the matrix sequels would stay closer to their novelisatio

    by Trinity's Gusset

    Hey kids! the more time PJ spends dicking around with his already close to perfect movies, the less time he has to make zombie-nazi movies. its a question of priorities. And a super-extended edition will consist of three hours of minor characters singing ballads.

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 4:07 a.m. CST

    You know the strange thing about fucking virgins...

    by Trinity's Gusset

    ...nope, can't think of a punchline. you do know, donknotts, that the LOTR fanbase has a very high proportion of women? lots of slightly lunatic women wearing pointy ears and talking bollocks, oh that's some good lovin'! being an LOTR fan is practically a pussy passport.

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 4:34 a.m. CST

    Bodicia

    by pammybabe

    Sorry to be one of these anal pedants "daughter of time" but in their defence the BBC didn't make the awful Bodicia (or what ever it was called). It was made by ITV - the other main TV channel in Britain. It did have a hilariously bad script though. Got a love a script where the Roman Emperor describes dealing with Bodicia as "a whole new ball game". Priceless.

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 4:52 a.m. CST

    Let's face it.

    by DannyOcean01

    The dialogue can seem so arch in the LOTR films that sometimes you need the humour to break it up. Though I'll admit there should be no wise cracks during the Pellennor Fields showdown.

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 5:28 a.m. CST

    CreepyThinMan, you are wrong.

    by raw_bean

    Read the History of Middle-Earth, Tolkien DID spend years writing (and rewriting) LOTR. He DID start not very long after the Hobbit. Whilst it did not imediately have the significance it came to, the Ring was taking shape and reaching it's eventual form through the '30s. I'm sorry fella, but you are wrong, no matter how many exclamation marks you use or how much of your text is capitalised. Fact.

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 5:32 a.m. CST

    The end of the '30s, though, obviously.

    by raw_bean

    Just to clarify.

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 8:11 a.m. CST

    Whoops, sorry, DoT

    by orson

    Apologies for mis-quoting you. You said something to this effect in the last downunder TB. I think I've run away with myself by using the word "abomination". What you probably said was something like, "Thank God PJ got to make three films instead of two". I'm not saying that it shouldn't have been made as three movies - but the fact that it was conceived as two movies - and then expanded to three, has caused PJ's adaptation to go a bit wobbly.

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 8:58 a.m. CST

    Just wanted to say

    by mayaV

    As far as I know it took Tolkien about 20 yars to finish LOTR. But the general conception he made in the 1930s. Most of the plot he took from nordic mythology. In fact there existes a magic ring in those legends. Fom what he's said in interviews on the LOTR there's no referrence to the bomb. But he has said, that the hard journey of the fellowship and Frodo&Sam finding their way through Mordor bases on what he had to go through in WWI. And as the LOTR-legens itself sais, the novel came into existence because Tolkien's invented all those languages of Middle-Earth. Enough history! Just a word on Gimli again. I think his character is way better portrayed in the novel than for example Legolas'. I always wondered why all the people seem to like the way he was drawn in TTT. Also those guys stayed silent, who are really into dwarf-culture and would never-ever allow any disrespect about Gimli. What's the deal? Did the pure fact of PJ actually doing LOTR force them into zombies? I'm not that much a dwarf-fan, but for me it felt like all those scenes making fun of/with Gimli didn't fit. Just wanted to tell this.

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 10:02 a.m. CST

    CreepyThinMan was ALMOST right.

    by morGoth

    My usual method is to read the TB subject, post and then read others opinions in the TB before responding. However, when my Sooty glance happened over the following:

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 10:06 a.m. CST

    Boadica! Boadica! (sounds like "Bootycall! Bootycall!")

    by GypsyTRobot

    Watched it last night. I had high hopes but the script was pretty cheesy and the way it ended was LAME. Fast forward from hopeless battle to modern day London as if Boadica's Celts were the pure forerunners of today's English? After the Romans piled on the Celts, there were the Anglo-Saxons and the Vikings/Norsemen, there might be Celtic DNA left in the average Englishman but the culture was completely decimated. (If I'm wrong somebody correct me here). Anywho, I did enjoy seeing the ER woman slash the hell out of the poncey Roman soldiers, and it was funny to see little kids playing with decapitated heads. I thought the whole thing seemed like an extended Cranberries video, the little kids were straight out of "Zombie" and the wailer sure sounded like the Cranberries singer.

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 10:17 a.m. CST

    Decimated? Celtic DNA reduced by 10% ? ...

    by irritable

    ... more like 90% - except in Wales and Ireland. (You did invite corrections)

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 10:25 a.m. CST

    Allegory!!? !!FACT!! LIAR???

    by irritable

    ... why bother morG, the kid hasn't even bothered to find out what 'allegory' means, let alone taken the time to check the period (easily confirmed in any bookshop or on the Net) during which JRRT wrote LotR. As for the "privileged old right wing fart" stuff - <falls asleep>

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 10:42 a.m. CST

    Hey Creepy

    by Conan_the_Humble

    Everyone else has had a good go at you, so I'm not gonna. I just want to say, "where have you gone?" To check your 'facts' perhaps? Don't bother reading 'letters' just read Tolkien's foreward, it deals with your (although that's hardly true many [more] intelligent people than you have tried to claim LOTR is an allegory) assertation. Tolkien deals more succintly and elquoently with this than anyone hereabouts could, (not meaning any disrepect to those hereabouts mind you...) If you're just trolling fine, at least try and be original, if you're serious, please seek help, you're just embarassing otherwise. Cheers.

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 10:42 a.m. CST

    And now

    by morGoth

    But first, thank

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 10:49 a.m. CST

    Well researched MorG,

    by raw_bean

    Couple of points though. "all of the *LOTR* that has been completed", doesn't mean that the book was finished, it means that all the chapters of it that WERE finished SO FAR were sent to his son. It could have referred to just the first chapter, if that was all that had been completed. It was quite far in though, I think I remember reading in the preface to LOTR Second edition that Tolkien was sending his son passages of Frodo & Sam's journey through Mordor. The fact is though, in the History of Middle-Earth vol VII, you can see the Ring evolving from Bilbo's simple magic Ring to the Ruling Ring of Sauron in succesive drafts, reaching it's finished state by 1939.

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 11 a.m. CST

    cutestofborg, irritable and Conan:

    by morGoth

    cob, hey man, anybody can pick up a book and look things up via the Index. But thanks anyhoo and I find it great fun to use Tolkien

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 11:04 a.m. CST

    Not picking on you MorG, but...

    by raw_bean

    I don't think it's fair to say that PJ doesn't think the Scouring of the Shire is important, just that it wouldn't work in a film. I mean, to do it justice it would have to be 20 minutes long at least, I can't see a film winding down that slowly and still working. Like AI, when watching that film (which I quite liked), I just wished it would pick and ending and just FINISH! With the climactic battle and the Ring and all, then the Eagles, then the wedding and coronation, then the scouring (which as I say would have to be quite long to do it justice), THEN the Grey Havens, the film would go on too long after it's climax, you'd lose the elation. It needs to quickly move from the sheer joy and exhilaration of the climax, allow you to calm and breathe for a bit, then transfer your feelings into the bittersweet sorrow of the Grey Havens sequence. The Scouring in the book is about putting the Hobbits back in the same place they started, so we can see how they've grown, see the contrast and I love it in the book. But I think the difference in them will be quite obvious in the film anyway, all the physical changes will be evident visually to remind us, and a shortened homecoming sequence can reinforce this, but I'd much rather the film take me from the elation of the climax to the sorrow of the Grey Havens, and have THAT as the emotional epilogue to the film. Having said that, as long as it all finishes with Sam in Bag End I'll be happy. :)

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 11:12 a.m. CST

    raw_bean

    by morGoth

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 11:22 a.m. CST

    speaking of 'dream memories' ..

    by irritable

    ... the giant wave towering over the hills and green fields that Tolkien occasionally dreamed of found its way into the story of the Downfall of Numenor. Thank you, chronic sleep apnoea, for providing that startling image.***As for Elves in Spandex playing Iron Butterfly covers in a room full of half-nekkid balrogettes ("man shaped maybe, yet greater") JESUS WEPT!

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 11:27 a.m. CST

    Raw_bean Part II

    by morGoth

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 11:30 a.m. CST

    PJ and

    by irritable

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 11:43 a.m. CST

    PJ and Scouring

    by irritable

    (Oops, premature articulation a minute ago!) *** PJ said somwhere words to the effect that the story arc in a movie requried climax/catharsis, then a release of tension moving smoothly to the credits. The Scouring would have involved setting up a second, smaller climax then moving to the Grey Havens. In terms of classic Hollywood moviemaking, the Scouring doesn't comply with the iron-clad rules of Screenwriting 101. ****For that matter, I doubt that the Scouring (in the book) conformed with coventional ideas of literary structure. I think JRRT just hated to let go. (I know it can be justified as a demonstration of the newly acquired maturity of the hobbits). However, as Tolkien said in the 1966 preface, he agreed with those who thought the book was too short. I agree. I could happily read a few more hundred pages of that glorious stuff :}

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 12:05 p.m. CST

    'somwhere' ? 'requried '? 'coventional' ?

    by irritable

    Spelling errors, Moi? UNPOSSIBLE! ... <okay, I'll shut up now>

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 12:10 p.m. CST

    morG, my point about 'completed' was...

    by raw_bean

    that the quote you reproduced meant the work went only so far, he had not not written it through to the end, not that the story went to the end but was not in it's final form. It said he sent all of it that was completed, ie. every chapter that went through to the end, not the later chapters which were not yet written, or only in draft or sketch form. Even those chapters would of course be revised further, but the ones he sent were the ones written fully from beginning to end, which did not yet constitute the full book. ----------- As for PJ, maybe he did say that about not liking th SotS, I don't know. I thought he just didn't think it would work. As for Hobbit-centric, that's why it should finish the exact same way as the book - Sam in Bag End. "Right, I'm home." (I think). ----- Irritable, it happens to lots of guys, don't feel bad. ;)

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 12:17 p.m. CST

    Bored of the Rings

    by Eorache

    "Toke a lid! Smoke a lid! Pop the mescalino! Stash the hash! Gonna crash! Make mine methadrino! Hop a hill! Pop a pill! For Tim Benzedrino!" God, I love that National Lampoon parody. When PJ's movies were announced, I pulled it out of my attic and laughed my way through the whole thing again. I think Jerry Garcia would have been perfect as Tom Bombadil. And perhaps Gwyneth Paltrow as Hashberry--er, Goldberry...

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 12:33 p.m. CST

    Scouring

    by GypsyTRobot

    I love that bit - the realistic touch to the fantasy cycle. While the heroes are away, the homeland gets invaded by thugs; so much for happily ever after. I love it when Tolkien throws the traditional fairy tale structure out the window. You can leave it out of the movie for drama's sake, but it's a great moment in the book. As a kid this type of thing opened my eyes a bit (also the pettiness and insular attitudes of the Shire). Cynicism = good.

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 12:49 p.m. CST

    Sorry for the slip, Pammybabe

    by daughter of time

    I do know that not all British television is made by the BBC (there's not only ITV, there's Grampian). Reading the comments on IMDB, it seems the show was equally abhorred by viewers on both sides of the Atlantic. And Andrew Davies is supposed to be a highly-regarded writer, with lines like (quoted above), "It's a whole new ball-game"? He also had the Emperor Claudius say something like "I'm a broad-strokes kind of guy." Surprised Boudicca didn't tell her Iceni that they needed to "think outside the box"! I learned more about her rebellion reading the viewers comments....

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 2:10 p.m. CST

    Witchking's Helm in ROTK

    by Vanyar

    Hi y'all. I know, I know, I haven't been on the talkback scene in forever, but better late than nev...ok, no cliches. Anyway, I just had to post because I just emailed TORN with a cool tidbit I found at the offical site. Here is what I just emailed TORN: *** Dear TORNadoes, I thought y'all might be interested in this if it hasn't already been brought to your attention. Over at the official movie site I was reading the written interview in the "Aragorn's Destiny" featurette when I came across a clickable on the right that said "Read Aragorn's Character Bio." So, I went there and read it. Off to the right was a dropdown for "Select another character." When I went there one of the choices was "Witchking." I clicked on it. In addition to a nice little summary about the former lord of Angmar, was a nifty little image that looks like the first ever shot to be seen of the Witchking wearing his battle of the Pelennor Fields helm (see attached). Looks like he may be astride his fell beast. What do y'all think? *** Well, that is my tidbit. Head on over to the official site and check it out. Then let me know what your opinion is. Namarie, mellyn.

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 2:15 p.m. CST

    So why is the WitchKing of Angmar titled thusly

    by GypsyTRobot

    when there are no witches in Middle Earth? Or did I miss a mention of witches buried in the Silmarillion? (thanks for the tip BTW).

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 2:47 p.m. CST

    Wouldn

    by the swede

    And also how Lothlorien was attacked several times by the orchs (unsuccessfully) and then how the elves marched to Dol Guldur and Galadriel did her magic? THAT, Peter Jackson, would indeed be a nice little addition to your masterpiece!

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 3:03 p.m. CST

    This day we Fight!

    by orson

    I would be mightily surprised if PJ ever dissed the SOTS as part of the book - though of course it's well known that he thinks it has no place in his movie. I have never before heard that anyone thought SOTS didn't work in the book - it's a briliant conclusion to the story. ****** BTW, as I have been absent for a while, let me take this opportunity to say, "YOWZA!" and "WOOOOOOO-HOOOOOO!" to the ROTK trailer. Absolutely jaw-dropping. And if this trailer is anything to go by, the writing seems to have returned to the high standard of FOTR - Aragorn's speech sounds magnificent and I love Gandalf's "the board is set; the pieces are moving" line. This is the best trailer I have ever seen and is a piece of quality entertainment all by itself. In fact....it is so good that there is no way in hell the actual movie can live up to it! I must admit that I live in mortal fear of more weepy speeches from Sam - and the thought of the story's inherent pathos being drowned in mawkishness keeps me awake at night. The rumored three-and-a-half hour running time also seems like a step too far. Will PJ be able to excersise restraint and pull the whole thing together? only two months till we find out! The anticipation is killing me!

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 3:17 p.m. CST

    Yup, looks like the witchking all right....

    by orson

    ..and a fearsome hombre he looks to be.

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 3:29 p.m. CST

    Finally!!! ROYALTIES!!!!!! aka Forget Tom Bombadil

    by Miami Mofo

    Yes me hearties -- now it can be revealed that P.J. has agreed to film MY version of Frodo's Bath Song. I can't tell you how psyched I am!!! [Hey P.J., please mail those royalty checks to JD1866 at Club Angband -- they go straight to paying off my bar tab.] So everyone, lets all raise a pint ("They come in pints?"), on me of course (put it on my tab, JD) and sing: "Sing hey! for the bath at close of day; That washes the weary mud away. A loon is he that will not sing: O! Water Hot is a noble thing. / Now Goldberry would have bathed with me; That lovely young wife of old Tommy B. But time constraints and PG-13; Made sure this was something that would never be seen. / And Galadriel -- she's so far away; I'll take a bath with her another day. So Arwen won't you be a dear; Just slip in this bath and wash my rear. / Yes! Wash my back and I'll wash yours; And pretty soon we'll be on all fours. Who cares if Aragorn will one day be King; For Water Hot is a noble thing." ***I wonder if there's any truth to the rumour that P.J. will also be filming an alternate ending, wherein Gollum successfully pops Frodo's zit.

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 6:37 p.m. CST

    How unfair

    by Miami Mofo

    TORn posts Vanyar's pic of the Witch-king but doesn't give him credit for the discovery. ***I honestly can't tell if it's a shot from the movie or just artwork of the character. ***I still wish that the Fell Beast scenes were filmed in Smell-O-Vision: "The great shadow descended like a falling cloud. And behold! it was a winged creature: if bird then greater than all other birds, and it was naked, and neither quill nor feather did it bear, and its vast pinions were as webs of hide between horned fingers; and it stank." ***I imagine that Shelob would have a pretty pungent odor also.

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 6:48 p.m. CST

    FACT!!!

    by daughter of time

    Creepy, you just lost all credibility and showed yourself a troll who hasn't even bothered to pay attention to previous posts. If you had, you'd know how many on this site are happily married or in otherwise satisfying relationships (where do you think MorGy's Morgettes come from?) and lead lives that include many more interests than Tolkien. Can you even get your head around the fact that people could take pleasure in a discussion of mutual interest? At the very least, we have better things to do than purposelessly insult each other. You have once and for all demonstrated that you are not worth our responses. Anyway, I'll be off the board for the next couple of weeks, since I'm leaving for 12 days on the Amalfi Coast on Thursday. Oh, I forgot, I have no life....

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 8 p.m. CST

    by pipergates

    hey hey,i thought there was supposed to be some quality control on this talback!this creepythinman is way out of line!discussion is fine, hateful insultins are not!keep this guy out of here!"Blatant abuse, personal attacks, OFF-TOPIC BS, cross-posting, blatant advertising, and hate speech are all fodder for deletion. In other words, being a jerkwad loser will get you banned."so ban him already!

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 8:01 p.m. CST

    Well done Vanyar!

    by morGoth

    I see that TORN has now given you credit! Welcome back mellon. Man, that's some helmet he's wearing, to say the least. Heh, guess he won't be pulling a hood over that noe will we see it floating...I...erm, oh, nevermind. ** GypsyTRobot, I don't recall seeing any witches in Silmarillion and I've always wondered what the heck he was talking about. Huh? King of which witches? **Yes CreePee, you've now plumbed our depths. My, what a class act you are. Thanks for your efforts DoT and enjoy your trip. That's right, I've come to bat at least twice! Yay me {[:^) ** r_b, yes, I know what you mean but I think the good Mr.T had settled on the Ring gambit by then. Must you make me drag out my HOME volumes and trace the date when he first hit upon the idea? Wait, I have it! You are hereby tasked with finding that time frame. Now, now...don't whine.

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 8:03 p.m. CST

    Oops, sorry folks, we thought that a day out might in CreepyThin

    by hildebrand

    Sadly not. He has been diagnosed with post-traumatic permanent regressive disorder. It's really quite a shame, but ever since he was cut by his cross-country team, and kicked out of the junior Checkers club he began to exhibit the most peculiar behavior. Nonetheless, not unlike those with Tourette's synodrome, he really cannot be held accountable for his words, they just spill out unbidden at the most inopportune times (not unlike his sexual problems, but we shan't get into that!). We are confident that with continued therapy and heavy anti-psychotics he will one day return to the place where he was (9th grade is such a wretched time to take ill, most often one's perceived friends vanish in a flash at the first sign of such problems, like severe acne, only without the benefit of actually growing out of it). Back to the ward Creepythinman (his real name left unrevealed just in case he makes a daring recovery, and of course, we, his primary care physicians and psychiatrists will make a mint on the book and movie rights, oops, don't let him know), The Wiggles are on, and we know just how much you hate to miss your favorite show. No, no, we will not mention that rather ugly problem from last week. Not to be concerned citizens, he will have forgotten all about this by next week, his memory has been shot to hell with the amount of trial drugs we have injected into him. Remember Creepythinman, we are here to take care of you!

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 8:04 p.m. CST

    ban creepy now

    by pipergates

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 8:15 p.m. CST

    Still here for a couple more days....

    by daughter of time

    And if you think Creepy's lost it here, you should check out his string of abuse on the Peter Pan talkback. Five posts in a row, with no content whatsoever. Seems to be just gibbering to himself.... And that's the last notice I'm giving him, except for a word in Harry's ear.

  • Oct. 13, 2003, 11:28 p.m. CST

    The Scouring

    by publicusrex

    All ya all dissin' the Scouring of the Shire need to remember that this is where we segue into the Ending of the Story, to cut this out ruins the movie. How else are we to experience the real message in the so called allegory (after all, if you are unwilling to accept the myths as aesthetic writings about the history of Angeland, then you should be worried about the deep symbolism of the scouring). Also adding Tom Bombadil, while a nice thought for some, is irrelevant, that part was cut and the things that happen there are taken care of elsewhere in the movie, so PJ (sorry for using the abbriviation) Would be wasting time to include Tom. And people, what we should look at is the possibility of making The Hobbit and all of the other stories into film. JRR Tolkien wrote so much about the history of Angeland, that if you were to read it, you would learn of how The First, Second and Third Ages fit into the history of the mysterious Isle.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, midnight CST

    Well I was right,

    by Conan_the_Humble

    Creepy couldn't hold together an argument, and revealed himself for the troll he is. What's more pathetic creepy, hanging around an internet site waiting to abuse people or taking part in a civilised intelligent discussion? You have demonstrated your lack of intelligence, why don't you head back to the Star Wars Tb's where you'll be able to "match it" with people on your own level... And if you find this gratifying, "I do pity you." Your certainly just about the most moronic retard I have ever seen o these here boards. Harrylluvatar I beseech thee! Ban this fool. Oh and thanks MorGy, I feel like mixing it up with the SW freaks every now and then, they give it to us enough... Cheers.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 1:34 a.m. CST

    Calisuri has seen 20 minutes of ROTK

    by daughter of time

    The description is over on TORN - in non-spoilerific form. Says it's worse than having a few bites of Thanksgiving turkey and then having to wait hours for the grandparents to show up!

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 2:15 a.m. CST

    Spiked Helm

    by irritable

    The new picture of the Witch King wearing a helm with a large spike is consistent with the appearance of the Nazgul at Minas Morgul in the RotK trailer - noticed by raw_bean. Check it out at about 1.24!

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 2:37 a.m. CST

    Philosopher King

    by irritable

    Apparently, ever since that cockroach kid posted his "Okay "DIPSHITS" listen up!" post broadcasting his mistakes about Tolkien's composition of LotR, all posters here have been "tested" about the "depths" which would be plumbed in correcting his error. Now he reveals (in his sophisticated way) that he hasn't read Tolkien. So all subsequent posters are onanists, catamites etc. Jeez, he's made quite a point there!

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 3:27 a.m. CST

    Hey, did that cockroach just fart again?

    by irritable

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 5:53 a.m. CST

    GypsyTRobot, it seems the "Witch King" was not the king of the W

    by irritable

    ... but a King who was a sorcerer. He was originally a man. He first appears in the Second Age in about 2,251 when the Nazgul emerge - roughly 750 years after Sauron's forging of the 9 rings and nearly 4,160 years before the events in LotR. When Sauron was destroyed in the battle of the Last Alliance, in the year II 3,341, the Nazgul 'went into the shadows'. Thirteen hundred years elapsed until the Witch King re-emerged to found the Kingdom of Angmar in the northern reaches of the Misty Mountains near Carn Dum (remember Pippin's dream in the Barrow Down?) during the Third Age. He waged war on Arthedain, the northerly part of the former Kingdom of Arnor founded by Isildur's heirs. After his defeat by Earnur of Gondor in III 1,975 at the battle of Fornost, after a reign of 675 years, he was chased into the Ettenmoors and vanished from the North. He reappeared in Mordor five years later and gathered the rest of the Nazgul. In III 2,000 the Nagul beseiged Minis Ithil and captured it 2 years later, after which it was known as Minas Morgul. He had his revenge on Earnur in II 2,043 when Earnur unwisely responded to a challenge and went to Minas Morgul, never to be seen again. We see his final destruction in III 3,019. He was referred to (by Eowyn during the Battle of the Pellenor Fields) as a "foul Dwimmerlaik" which seems to be derived from the Old English words gedwimer ('sorcery') and l

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 6:05 a.m. CST

    Hang on, Merry dreamed about the men of Carn Dum ,,,

    by irritable

    ... not Pippin.

  • I just took a look into the appendix, where it reads 'witch-king of Angmar'. (It's the german translation, so I don't know if the names match.) It also says that this witch-king is the Morgul-Lord, meaning he's the first nazgul and head of Minas Morgul. Referring to the book, he's the one to be destroyed by Eowyn. Wasn't he the first human king to get a ring from Sauron? * I saw the new trailer this weekend and ... wow, I'm deeply impressed. I can't wait till december! I'll have to go and get tickets for the first night! * One question: why's that creepy-guy here again? Did they throw him out of that mental institution?

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 9:13 a.m. CST

    Why JRRT used the term Witchking

    by Vanyar

    I believe from some of my reading in JRRT's other works ("Letters" maybe?) it is mentioned that Tolkien used "witch" in the broad generic sense. He was simply meaning the baseline concept of "sorcerer" or "wizard." In essence, one who uses magic, and more specifically what we would probably term the "dark arts." Eowyn's use of "dwimmerlaik" (sorcerous being, specter of sorcery, sorcerous undead) is quite apt. So, the Lord of the Nine was the "Sorceror King," the head necromancer under old Gorthaur the Cruel (Sauron). Hope all that made sense. And thank y'all for the kind words. Anar kaluva tielyanna.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 9:16 a.m. CST

    Much ado about nothing; aka Forget Scouring.

    by Miami Mofo

    Just read this at TORn's link to the Stuff.NZ site: "Filming for 'The Return of the King' continues, six weeks out from its world premiere in Wellington. But executive producer Mark Ordesky of New Line Cinema says the film is on schedule for its December 1st debut. Last night Mr. Ordesky said miniatures and visual effects were still being shot and added to the movie, which is being edited in Britian. Filming of principal actors was complete. Shooting would continue next year for the extended DVD version, which is expected to be out for November 2004. It was unlikely principal actors would return for more filming, though the cast could be recalled to record dialogue for the DVD." ***So that last sentence sure makes it seem that 'noone' will be returning to film SotS, which is a shame. Oh well, I guess I'll just have to READ that chapter -- something I always enjoy doing.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 10:20 a.m. CST

    Hi all,

    by raw_bean

    Look at this, I spend a few days away and Creepythinman starts foaming at the mouth and gibbering like a madman, the poor bastard. --- morG, it's ok, I believe you that the Ring gambit had been finished at the point in time we were discussing, I was just trying to clarify the meaning of the quote you presented. ---- Irritable, thanx for the mention, do you think the picture looks like it might actually be from the same time as the shot in the trailer? Like maybe just after the shot of him on the rearing Fell Beast, it cuts to a close up?

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 10:24 a.m. CST

    Sorcerer = Witch

    by irritable

    Vanyar, in "The Peoples of Middle-Earth" it appears that in the first drafts of the Appendices, the Witch King, chief of the Ringwraiths is called the Sorcerer King. Perhaps "Witch King" just ultimately sounded sexier to Tolkien.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 10:38 a.m. CST

    G'day raw ...

    by irritable

    The new picture at TORN is so lo-fi and cropped that it's hard to be sure whether its art work or a c.g.i. video capture. The foreground might be the neck of a fell beast and the Nazgul looks like he could be riding. The lighting (or lack of it) is consistent with the scene in the trailer. All guesswork.****At least that cockroach has reached the "wavering bravado" stage. Who knows haughty simulations of rapprochment may follow.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 10:42 a.m. CST

    Granted it's a strange shot and in full should portray,

    by Conan_the_Humble

    the scariness of the Witch-King, but it looks a bit funny to me. The Witch-King's helmet looks a bit like a scarecrow or something. I haven't figured it out yet but it does remind me of something. Anyhoo still here eh Creepy? I guess we'll just have to live with each other than eh? Don't take any remarks of mine too seriously, I certainly don't with you. You haven't sown much confusion or chaos yet though. I really fail to see how you could on an anonymous internet talkback, but anyway, you know your own business best, I guess. Do you find anything interesting in LOTR? Be honest now, I'm just asking you a simple question. And please don't taunt me with your terrible abuse, I really can't stand any more. Calling me such rude names over at the Peter Pan tb wounds me deeply. I have a rather thin epidermis you know. Cheers.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 10:59 a.m. CST

    G'day Irritable.

    by raw_bean

    Or maybe Creepy will just go away and find something more fulfilling to do. Yeah, right. --- As for the picture, low quality as it is, it still worries me slightly. Is it going to be obvious that the Witch King is invisible? I have this image in my mind of the crown/helm being supported by apparently nothing, but perhaps just a suggestion of his eyes floating in the middle of where his face should be.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 11:03 a.m. CST

    Actually, looking at that pic...

    by raw_bean

    reminds me that I read that PJ redid the Witch King in the reshoots, because he looked too much like Prologue Sauron. Rampant speculation, but do you suppose this picture is of the original WK? It looks quite Sauron-like to me.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 11:40 a.m. CST

    Hmmm, I can only see "eye-holes" in the visor, raw...

    by irritable

    ... on my screen. I remember PJ said somewhere that he wanted to avoid the cliche of "red gleaming eyes" for the Nazgul.****Just had a look at the Peter Pan TB, Conan. That cockroach kid's been guzzling the Red cordial or something! Talk about scary, humiliating, public meltdowns!

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 11:44 a.m. CST

    How many times...

    by Skyway Moaters

    ...am I going to have to say: "IT AIN'T A MOTHERF*&^%ING TRILOGY YOU STUPID NIMRODS!!!" Oh yes, they come on here thinking theyre clevver flinging the cursed T-word about willy nilly an expect noone to say nuffing! To bad Fister got bannit because he wouldve had some some serious lashings for these barsets! I aint hevvy enuff to weild TATOW parperly... Oh well, KNOCK IT OFF ye nincompoops!... (Dont get offendit this is an old joaky amongst tailenders...)

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 11:45 a.m. CST

    CHUD has details on the 20 min ROTK

    by Elerosse

    For those interested of course. Saw it over at TORn.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 11:54 a.m. CST

    CreepyBrainDeadThinMan...

    by Pontsing Barset

    ...quit shouting dude we can read your lame ass posts just fine without the caps lock... sheesh. TSOTS shouldn't have been written?! It's clear that the novel went right over your pointy little head if that's really what you think.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 11:55 a.m. CST

    Yeah but Irritable,

    by raw_bean

    I still think that shot looks very Sauron-like, the long cheekguards extending downwards that gave Sauron'e helmet in the Prologue that look of a horse's skull, and then the spikes on top. I think this image is of the the original WK, and that he's been changed to make him more distinctive (maybe just wishful thinking). Glowing red eyes would be cheesy, but I'm thinking more of a suggestion, a hazy darkness where his eyes would be, and his crown apparently floating above the neck of his armour. Besides, how many times has PJ done stuff in these films that on paper, sounds really cheesy, but have ended up working? I think PJ has a good sense of when something is inherently tacky, and when something was originally a good idea that has become watered down and cliched through overuse, but can still be effective if you go back to the original idea. Not sure if I'm making much sense here.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 12:20 p.m. CST

    Let's wait for a better image, raw_bean.

    by irritable

    The single spike on top of the visor looks consistent with the Trailer. I accept that the image from the official site might be an early version of the Witchking design.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 12:35 p.m. CST

    CreepyThinMan speaks the truth...

    by MisterGrimloch

    and the LOTR lifers (yes, you know to whom i refer) are seriously offering the Star Trek nerds a challenge for the title of "most pathetic humans on the planet" award. the funny thing is, most fanbases have their share of crybabies and pompous assholes, but none quite compare with the crop of LOTR (film) fans, who offer the delightful new twist that if you don't like the films, and God forbid if you don't worship Peter Jackson's every decision, then you must somehow be of inferior intelligence. now, the Matrix fan base has its share of comedians who claim that if you don't like the films, then clearly you must not have been able to understand the "depth" of the story. Star Wars fans have had to be on the defensive the past few years (through no fault of the efforts of Lucas, who's prequels are perfectly fine entertainment) and the result is a serious inferiority complex, which plays into the hands of, you guessed it, the LOTR fans, easily the worst of the lot, since they inhabit that special place that only the solitary nerd at the lunchtable can inhabit. you know, that loser who thinks he has some special level of understanding because he feels that a series of books that had interesting maps instead of interesting characters (ya know, that thing Tolkien did with his "works of art") grants he/she (often hard to differentiate) a higher level of consciousness and an enlightenment of all things "important". the problem becomes apparent when these individuals open their mouths, because they immediately betray the fact that they are unwilling (or unable) to accept the fact that no work is beyond reproach. LOTR fans usually have two divisions; those who worship Tolkien and read the material at least once a year, needing to brush up on the senseless reference to a blade of grass in chapter 12, and the newer "trendy" fan, who worship the ass hairs on Peter Jackson (indistinguishable from his beard) and are currently pretending to read the books. the rule from both camps is very simple; dislike LOTR, and you're simply wrong. like i said, the Trek fans have met their match.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 12:38 p.m. CST

    Gaffer discerns blind folk near Derndingle!

    by morGoth

    Lummee but if that pic looks ANYTHING like Sauron from the Last Alliance scene then my precious Gothmog looks like Dorothy from the Wizard of Oz! Dang r_b, yer not one o' them folks that read braile are ya? Heh, I'm not trying to pic a fight but that helm looks nothing like Saurons. OK, I can see where the sweeping cheek guards (though I'd say it's more like just the bottom of Saurons helmet)? could remotely be compared but the single "horn" coming up from the WK's helmet knocks any comparison out the wondow, ter me. No doubt, this is the WK we'll be seeing in Return. It reminds me of something out of a Bosch or Brueghel (possible spelling errors) painting. Definetly creepy!

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 12:44 p.m. CST

    Aw...look what the toilet bowl flushed up.

    by morGoth

    Tell ya what MouthyGumlock, since it is selfish of me to deny you my essence, as in the last TB where I refused to acknowledge your worthless presence, I hereby proclaim that you will be allowed to snif my bum once, BUT ONLY ONCE, per Talk Back. Oooo! Warm that nose up next time sport! ** Oh yeah, long live Peter Jackson, the greatest movie producer of Tolkien stories that ever lived! Eglerio!

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 12:47 p.m. CST

    Speaking of pompous,opinionated jerks ...

    by irritable

    ...with fragile self-esteem ...

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 1:04 p.m. CST

    I guess this means more steaming piles of faux-psychology ...

    by irritable

    ...from some bitter goth-metal also-ran. Stuff that, time to party.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 1:05 p.m. CST

    Grimloch

    by hildebrand

    Must be a slow day at the old cubicle. I suppose blasting anonymous folks posting to the internet is better then slopping through another day of middle-managment hell, enduring the same old jokes from your fellow rats in the maze about how Dilbert has once again described your life perfectly. Whacking people with your club-like wit is probably the highlight of the day. We know how it is, you go to work before the sun is really up, you trudge through the day making sure that your underlings are doing the real work, reporting to the bosses who get the real money, and hoping against all hope that the next round of downsizing won't take you out. You drive home in the late model sedan that you tell yourself is much cooler then it really is, and find your cookie cutter house in some nameless burb. Dinner is up to you tonight, as the spouse and kids have gone off to do something interesting (happens more often then you would like to admit). You warm up last night's chicken and rice dish, and flop in the barcalounger and hope that the news isn't over your head. (Gave up watching the News Hour with Jim Lehrer, too many difficult concepts to grasp.) But its all worth it, because you made yourself feel superior to a bunch of people who you couldn't pick out of a line up if your life depended on it. But, God Damn, you feel good. Pity no one really cares in your real life.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 1:12 p.m. CST

    hildebrand...

    by MisterGrimloch

    am i to assume you disagree with me?

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 1:23 p.m. CST

    reasonably cute borg dude.....

    by MisterGrimloch

    i too have met Mister Doohan, and whilst i retain my useless self important opinion regarding TOS, i thought Doohan was a colossal asshole, who felt it was necessary to point out to me, twice, that he does not sign "comments" on the silly pictures of him that were being sold (which, moronically, i purchased while at this "event") and would only sign his name. foolishly, i refrained from asking him to thus sign it "stupid asshole hack", and simply gave him a sour look (incredibly, not my usual expression, despite the assurances from the official LOTR trogladyte who lurks here in the shadows). as for Trek geeks, sorry, but you simply don't qualify, since you have the appalling capability to realize that not everything spun from Roddenberry's original is worth watching.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 2:03 p.m. CST

    Morgoth...

    by MisterGrimloch

    why do you always post that you ignore me on "other talkbacks"? if you are ignoring me, or refusing to acknowledge me, why do you feel it necessary to actually state this in the first place? it would be a pleasant surprise if you would just sit back, and grip those 800 billion sided dice violently, like a good little frightened retard who is remembering the days when the "big kids" dumped him into the garbage bin behind the school.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 2:07 p.m. CST

    Wait!

    by morGoth

    That's not the Witch King! It-it's Tevildo, Prince of Pointy Headed Cats! Man, I amaze myself sometimes!

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 5:08 p.m. CST

    Get your fix yet Grimmy dear?

    by Skyway Moaters

    ... or do you need a few more people to take notice before your ego feels sufficiently boosted for the day? If so count this post; wouldn't want to be accused of depriving someone as needy as you... geeeez, what an asswipe. *** I'm with you morG, the picture of the purported Witch King I'm looking at don't look NOTHIN' like Sauron in the prologue.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 5:13 p.m. CST

    Skyway Moaters....

    by MisterGrimloch

    yes, thank you. i'm on my way to pick up a copy of Black Sunday on dvd. if i take a shit later tonight, i will be thinking of you while i am wiping my ass.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 5:45 p.m. CST

    Hey borgofthecutest...

    by morGoth

    ...jist curious, you mentioned yer from the East Coast...'zactly where, iffen ya don't mind my asking? ** Latauro, you still here? Got any more droolable bits like this? Keep 'em coming!

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 5:47 p.m. CST

    Ooooh! Ya got me Grimmypuss!

    by Skyway Moaters

    What was I THINKING trying to match wits with Grimloch the Gruesome?! I must be out of my mind to think that I could match your scathing intellect! Such ORIGINAL potty humour! Who KNEW you were so clever?! UNCLE! Let me up! I've had enough! MOMMY! PLEASE don't taunt me anymore Mr. Grimasaurus! I, I, I can't take it! Heck, I might even cry...

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 6:34 p.m. CST

    Here's a tissue Moaters...

    by morGoth

    ...I guess we should just stop posting since we've ALL been so thoroughly humiliated. Y'know, it's a good thing I've become so, well, Golden Hearted of late, yes? Time was I'd open the lava floodgates but today

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 7:49 p.m. CST

    What did I tell you about THE SHOUTING...

    by Pontsing Barset

    ... Creepy? Are you deaf as well as nuts? Can you possibly be as stupid as your posts indicate you are? Nice insults though. Keep working on the vocabulary genius boy, you're well on your way to being the biggest foul mouthed blithering imbecil the talk backs have ever seen. Bravo. Here's a one finger salute just for you...

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 7:50 p.m. CST

    CreepyThinMan speaks with crazy emotion...

    by MisterGrimloch

    but he speaks the truth (albeit laced with anger and annoyance at the LOTR lifers). Creepy, you cannot let asshats like Morgoth, or Moaters get the better of you with their pretend intellect. Morgoth has been sucking my ass for the past 6 months, ever since i crushed him down with the revelation that not everyone on the planet (or even the talkback) thought Jackson created "genius" with his directorial decisions. Morgoth couldnt take it, and has spent the last several months trying to "get the better of me", with a series of endless preachings about how he "ignores my tiresome rants". only problem is, he won't get off my balls about the whole issue. the kid would not talk this shit in person with a single soul on the planet, because the memories of high school, and getting the shit beat out of his ass on a regular basis would come sweeping back to him, as he lay on the street crying for mommy (or Gandalf, whichever image he masturbated to the previous evening).

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 8:03 p.m. CST

    Creepy + Grimmy. I guess misery loves company huh?

    by Skyway Moaters

    Birds of a feather eh? Let's see, how many more cliches can I come up with? ... Nah, what would be the point? Have fun kids, hope you get banned soon.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 8:20 p.m. CST

    No, we do not want them banned.

    by hildebrand

    Don't ban them, pity them. They seek our approval, that is why they continue to post as they do. It speaks of pure jealousy, that they want what they simply cannot have, or even fathom. Of course we are smarter then you Grimloch, of course we are more gifted at everything then you, Creepythinman. There is not a soul left in this talkback that does not understand that you are inferior to our intellect, our beauty, our wit, our bank accounts, our connections with the power elite, our lives. You are the ones who sweep up after we have gone home for the day. The ones who clean the toilets we use. The people who make sure we have fresh coffee in the morning. You two are the prime example of those who live in Tornado parks so that we can breeze through our days without a care in the world, because all of the menial work that is so clearly beneath our station is taken care of. We step over you and your heating grate existance as we while away the hours in our ivory towers. You wash our car windows at street corners, and we stiff you because you really should offer the services to us for free because we deserve such service. And yet you try to alert us to the woeful state of your lives with your vulgar humor and scatalogical references, and what do we do in response? We chuckle at such over-reaching. We laugh, and we walk away, knowing that the sun is to the moon in the gift of granting light to the earth, as we are to you. Pale reflections, generating nothing of your own. No, do not send them away, they provide far too much sport.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 8:43 p.m. CST

    I guess you're right Hilde...

    by Skyway Moaters

    ... kind of shameful to admit, but it IS a guilty pleasure baiting them as we do. We really ought not garner amusement from the misfortunes of those less fortunate though... it's just that they're such easy targets! You're right, I take it back. I don't want 'em banned either...

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 8:52 p.m. CST

    I tell ya what Creepy,

    by Conan_the_Humble

    You're lucky Jay and Silent Bob aren't monitoring this talkback because they'd be straight round to your trailer. And as for you Grimloch, why would would be surprised that not everyone on the planet liked LOTR? Not everyone on the planet liked Titanic and that (unfortunately) is the biggest movie of all time, both financially and according to critical acclaim. LOTR (regretably) did not achieve this level of public support and I for one could not care less. You SW freaks rant and rave when someone "disses" YOUR beloved franchise, you can at least have the decency to admit that WE are slightly more tolerant than the other franchises. Not once has any tailender ever abused another talkback member with the sort of diatribe that is hurled against us. And it's an interesting state of affairs when morons like creepy feel some sort of need to insult people with the sort of low brow rubbi that he has brought into this tb. We're not even on the front page anymore. What sort of thrill does this give you creepy, honestly? We're here minding our own business having an interesting (to us and often many others at any rate, just go back a TB or 2 and see the amount of lurkers who showed up when called upon ) discussion about a movie. That what this site exists for. If you can't live with that, please do us a favour and terminate your miserable existence. I'm siding with MorGy and Moaters, I don't think the Witch-Kings helmet resembles Sauron, it looks like something though, I just can't put my finger on it yet... Cheers

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 9:20 p.m. CST

    Oh, 1 more thing,

    by Conan_the_Humble

    Welcome back Vanyar, I believe it is this sort of nonsense (what with the trolls and all) that made you stay away in the frist place, but I hope you stick around for a while. Cheers.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 9:37 p.m. CST

    I see mayaV and cutestofborg and daughter of time and raw_bean a

    by Devil'sOwn

    Hi. I understand the point about Gimli's characterization, but it didn't really bother me all that much. Creepy, I hope you learn to WATCH YOUR DAMN MOUTH! FACT!!! Shoulda known this pathetic douche was gonna lose it when he accused me of some kind of Oedipal necrophilia in another talkback. And Mr. Rimjob, is there a word for what's wrong with you? Perhaps you need to ease off on the blanket statements about LotR fans, you sorry s.o.b. I've seen Hell. You aren't it, boy. You aren't worth the time and effort morGoth wastes on you. Okay! I think everybody who has EVER been to the talkbacks knows what you think of Lord of the Rings. You REALLY don't like Lord of the Rings!! Okay?! WE GET IT!! Good for you! Know something? You aren't even in the same damn hemisphere as right for putting people down who do like it. Got that, numbnuts? Stop bangin' on your highchair.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 9:54 p.m. CST

    maya, borg, dot, bean, morGy...

    by Devil'sOwn

    I love you all. Seriously. Lets all move to Amsterdam and make this happen.

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 10:05 p.m. CST

    cutestofborg

    by morGoth

    Cool bro! You live only minutes from both Moaters and me! Yup, he lives across the HR tunnel in Newport News and I

  • Oct. 14, 2003, 10:12 p.m. CST

    It's a deal Devil'sOwn...

    by morGoth

    ...as long as we can bring the rest of the TE's with us. Poor, poor elanor-lass, all that work and no Talk Backing makes a hairy footed lass all mopey. What am I saying?!! She'll be seeing RoTK before any of us. You are right though, it is a big waste of time and I may as well be talking to a concrete post {[:^)

  • Oct. 15, 2003, 2:46 a.m. CST

    Shore is doing a two-hour LOTR symphony!

    by daughter of time

    Hurrah! Details on TORN (though not many, unfortunately). Still, he's going to record it; that's the main thing. ***I keep hoping we can civilize this talkback again by sheer force of numbers. Unfortunately, I only have one more day to contribute, before I'm off to Italy, starting with five nights at the Palazzo Sasso in Ravello. They have a web-site; look it up and drool! Still, I'll miss the company here, with a couple of obvious exceptions. (Hildrebrand, your last posts were brilliant! And a wave to Devil's Own.)

  • Oct. 15, 2003, 6:12 a.m. CST

    Thanks Devils_Own, and nice idea Daughter_of_Time,

    by raw_bean

    I was seriously beginning to dispair of this TB; it's descended into a slagging match. My bit to restore sanity: The symphony would be cool, but I don't want to have to go down to London to see it, it was bad enough having to go there to see the LOTR Exhibition at the London Science Museum (well worth it, though). Here's hoping for some other UK venues! --------- As for the WK, I don't think it 'looks like Sauron', just 'enough' like him for PJ to want to do him differently. I guess I'm grasping at straws because I don't like the look of that picture. Oh well, all we can really do is wait for the film, so it doesn't really matter anyway.

  • Oct. 15, 2003, 6:29 a.m. CST

    Incidentally,

    by raw_bean

    since we were (sort of) talking about it anyway, and as I just mentioned I've seen the LOTR Exhibition, can I just say that Sauron's armour is the most imposingly beautiful piece of craftsmanship I've ever seen.

  • Oct. 15, 2003, 7:48 a.m. CST

    The more, the merrier 'Goth.

    by Devil'sOwn

    Hey, that's right. We haven't heard from elanor in a while now. Hope we get some feedback soon. Ah well, I know I should try to sympathize with Grim, or at the very least ignore it. But hard as try, I'm rrreeeaalllly disliking the dude. I do my best to exorcise that bad mojo from here. You all are the best, and don't deserve to be subjected to that. If he's trying to make a point, he does a pisspoor job of it with the comparisons to other franchises, and generalizations about genre fans. C'mon. Nobody can be that thick, right? Sure our love for movies makes us fannish, but I'm pretty sure most of us have more going on than that. If he's going to put himself in some position of authority, he needs to choose his words a little more carefully. Some folk here might not lie down for that nonsense... {BLUSH!} 'Kay. I'm gonna skedaddle now. d.o.t. waved at me!! Later on, Tailenders.

  • Oct. 15, 2003, 9:40 a.m. CST

    After careful examination...

    by Skyway Moaters

    ... of the "Witch King Bust" photo I have come to a couple of conclusions (some of them not 100% earnest mind you (read: 'comic speculation')). 1. This shot of TWOA, (The Witch King of Angmar), does indeed show the nasssty old sorcerer astride his fell beast. (Perhaps a close-up following the shot from the trailer where wraith and mount alight atop a Minas Morgul battlement(?)) 2. The helmet-crown he is wearing has long cheek guards and 'eye holes' (perhaps to avoid the 'cheesy red glowing eyes' PJ has said he is wary of). The helmet-crown also features spikes sticking out in a circle around a tall central "spike" to form the "crown look". Could the tall spike at the apex of the helmet be (now don't laugh, and I hope I'm wrong because it would be a rather ill conceived design/plot device IMO) some kind of "antenna"?! Note it's resemblance to the tall "obelisk tower" emanating blue green "energy spirals" that we see in the trailer? - The signal from Barad-d

  • Oct. 15, 2003, 12:11 p.m. CST

    Since it seems I don't post enough to warrant a name calling fro

    by mortsleam

    I'll respond...to Moaterses('es'es's?) post. I don't like the supposed Witch King's supposed helmet. You're right, one can just imagine flashing blue lights sparking back and forth from the "antennae" to the giant flashing Red Eye on Barad-Dur (or as I like to call it, Sauron's Flaming Slit--sorry.) I guess I always imagined it somewhat more like the crowns that were briefly seen when Frodo went into the shadow world on Weathertop. Tall and wickedly spiked, but not obvious helmets, and no whacky spiked fringes along the top. Sigh. Nevertheless, I understand PJ's motivations for avoiding the dreaded "silly floating crown: syndrome and I trust that he'll pull it off. Afterall, perusing the character galleries, one can see earlier versions of the Uruk-Hai which look nastier and more imposing than the design the settled on, yet I think we all agree they're suitably scary. Yes? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Grimloch?

  • Oct. 15, 2003, 3:52 p.m. CST

    Arrivaderci!

    by daughter of time

    It's all too tempting to keep monitoring for the rest of the day, but I think I'll sign off now, pack my suitcase, and wish you all happy talkbacking in my absence. (And I hope I return to a nice, civilized discussion, and can find you all, if you've moved by then.) Just don't make the posts too long, or I'll never catch up! Ciao bella....

  • Oct. 16, 2003, 5:11 a.m. CST

    Mortsleam,

    by raw_bean

    I'm with you on the helmet, fella, a tall crown would have been beter. I still think the idea of a tall, spiny crown (yeah, just like in FOTR in wraithworld) atop an invisible head witha kind of hazy, smoky darkness wafting out of where his eyes should be would look cool. Maybe that's just me.

  • Oct. 16, 2003, 5:12 a.m. CST

    Enjoy the holiday, d_o_t.

    by raw_bean

    Bring me something back

  • Oct. 16, 2003, 4:39 p.m. CST

    i believe....

    by MisterGrimloch

    that a large stack of flaming pancakes would be best. seriously.

  • Oct. 16, 2003, 5:39 p.m. CST

    ?

    by raw_bean

    ??

  • Oct. 16, 2003, 6:43 p.m. CST

    thanks

    by Elwenaur

    I haven't been posting on here but I came across it today. After reading all of the post(which used up all of my homework time) I'd just like to say thanks to all of you fellow lotr fans for sticking up for lotr, and doing a whole bunch of research too. I can't really have an objective opinion, i'm one of those people who had never even heard of lotr untill they saw the movie(sorry for my ignorance), but i love lotr now that i've read it and the movies may have some parts not everyone like but they are some of the greatest pictures you'll ever see. I have to also try to help out the SW fans some here, I like SW (not as much as lotr) and even though some newer movies might not be satisfactory, no one needs to insult everyone else. No matter wether you are a LotR fan (they're the best!) that's no reason to insult other franchises, they can be okay too. Everyone has their own opion. Well, that wasn't very coherent. Anyways since you guys know so much more about lotr then me, you might already know about this site, but i found it and though it was really cool. go to www.elendor.net it's a really cool middle earth mush. If I was anywhere near figuring out how to entirly use it, i'd be playing everyday. My post didn't come out how it was in my head, so don't take offense if i said something stupid. File me under LotR freak.

  • Oct. 17, 2003, 5:03 a.m. CST

    Nice to see the battle's done

    by mayaV

    Are the wardogs silent again? Had some minor computer trouble so I couldn't post. Nice to see you coming back to real discussion! Aren't those creepys and grimmys entertaining? Never ban them, they seem to need the TBs to keep their sanity. * Going to Amsterdam? Best idea for ages, DO! Never been there, but people tell things worth a fairy tale. * Back to LOTR.