Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

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

I think they should make "Top Samurai" with Hulk Hogan as the ba by mbaker	Oct 11th, 2003 06:09:57 PM
Your ego's writing checks your body can't cash, Brother!
Goddamnit! I'm so sick of hearing about Tom Bombadil! Get over by Brody Armstrong	Oct 11th, 2003 06:20:06 PM
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.
LOTR extended edition by mayaV	Oct 11th, 2003 06:59:55 PM
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"
Too late Three_Oranges... by IFartOnYourGrave	Oct 11th, 2003 07:21:02 PM
They are making a Charlie Chan movie and Lucy Lui is involved...
MayaV..I totally see where u are coming from with the funny dwar by TheAllSeeingEye	Oct 11th, 2003 07:44:33 PM
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.
David Bowie as Bombadil, Julie Christy as Goldberry. by Fred	Oct 11th, 2003 07:46:01 PM

Minstrel in the Gallery by pipergates	Oct 11th, 2003 08:17:32 PM
they should have Ian Anderson of the Jethro Tull play Tom Bombadil.hopping along with his flute....
Forget about Tom Bom - ain't gonna happen by crimsonelf	Oct 11th, 2003 10:26:35 PM
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?
Tom Bombadil by c4andmore	Oct 11th, 2003 11:39:57 PM
was a dope smoking pedophile hippy. That's why he has such a fondness for the "little folk"
There will be no Bombadill! by MrCere	Oct 12th, 2003 12:22:11 AM
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.
Envisioned and destroyed? by Lobanhaki	Oct 12th, 2003 01:28:49 AM
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
More LOTR to watch! by emeraldluxury	Oct 12th, 2003 01:38:12 AM
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.
Come on ! Tom Bombadil was much cool ! by Judge Doom	Oct 12th, 2003 02:01:20 AM
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?
scouring of the shire by magyarman	Oct 12th, 2003 02:26:54 AM
Personally, I'm glad that the Scouring of the Shire will not be shown in RotK. I don't think it should be.
Scouring of the Shire is a VERY important chapter and don't spea by Saxster	Oct 12th, 2003 05:19:11 AM
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.
Peter Jackson can do it... but if George lucas is going to do re by TheGinger Twit	Oct 12th, 2003 05:40:15 AM

People shouldn't use words they don't understand, by Conan_the_Humble	Oct 12th, 2003 05:46:41 AM
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.
Off topic, but about george lucas and his re-visions... by TheGinger Twit	Oct 12th, 2003 05:53:28 AM
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!
Will "the Hobbit" be made by Peter Jackson? by Firerizer	Oct 12th, 2003 07:07:20 AM
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?
Extended footage on ROTR by Totem_NZ	Oct 12th, 2003 07:11:43 AM
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.
CreepyThinMan... by Olorin_TLA	Oct 12th, 2003 08:19:10 AM
Hisa comments about the scoruing just reminded me of this review: http://tolkien.cro.net/tolkien /cclark.html ^.^
LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN tops the Australian Box Office by godoffireinhell	Oct 12th, 2003 10:09:40 AM
What? The? Fuck? How? Why?
Here's hoping it's SotS! by Miami Mofo	Oct 12th, 2003 10:09:44 AM
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.
More LOTR filming by Wistari	Oct 12th, 2003 10:10:25 AM
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!
LOTR - 20th Anniversary Ultimate Hyper Orgasm Edition by godoffireinhell	Oct 12th, 2003 10:17:26 AM
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!!!
Columbine by Govenor_CONAN	Oct 12th, 2003 10:36:53 AM
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.
Gimli's Character by somaobi	Oct 12th, 2003 11:08:33 AM
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.
Paul Hogan as P.M? Yahoo Serious as Treasurer? by TheWoodMan	Oct 12th, 2003 12:33:40 PM
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.
ROTK on Kazaa by Allan	Oct 12th, 2003 12:45:13 PM
So how many people are going to download Return Of The King from Kazaa only to find they've got the cartoon version? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA! :-)
all film versions available now with "cut it yourself" by mayaV	Oct 12th, 2003 01:08:59 PM
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 ...
Jackson's Statement on Tom Bombadil and Re-Shooting by metacritic	Oct 12th, 2003 01:40:02 PM
Have we forgotten AICN's August 30, 1998 interview with Peter Jackson: http://www.aint-it-cool-news.c om/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....
Creepy, you confuse allegory with "applicability" by daughter of time	Oct 12th, 2003 01:40:34 PM
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.
Creepy, there is one flaw in your argument. by FluffyUnbound	Oct 12th, 2003 01:43:03 PM
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.
On Allegory by metacritic	Oct 12th, 2003 01:57:50 PM
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.
Are you people mad? by pandamaster83	Oct 12th, 2003 02:14:33 PM
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...
LOTR Box Set by vincent_disilvio	Oct 12th, 2003 02:26:52 PM
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.
Bloopers by Allan	Oct 12th, 2003 03:02:05 PM
Do we really want to see LOTR cheapened in a "blooper reel"?
Listen... by Barron34	Oct 12th, 2003 03:41:07 PM
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....)
regardind Creepythinman and my grandmother's ass by Judge Doom	Oct 12th, 2003 04:58:30 PM
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.
Peter Jackson is a river to his people by orson	Oct 12th, 2003 05:35:41 PM
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.
Why I hate the Scouring. by Fitzcarraldo	Oct 12th, 2003 06:50:13 PM
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.
Actually Fitzie... by FluffyUnbound	Oct 12th, 2003 06:57:03 PM
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.]
Correction. by Fitzcarraldo	Oct 12th, 2003 06:58:36 PM
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.
You may be right, Fluffy... by Fitzcarraldo	Oct 12th, 2003 07:13:57 PM
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.
Thanks for the socioeconomic expose by GypsyTRobot	Oct 12th, 2003 08:34:28 PM
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.
by General_Patton	Oct 12th, 2003 08:56:35 PM
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.
More to finish than 'scouring' by Messyjoe	Oct 12th, 2003 09:52:49 PM
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.)
An Excerpt from the Infamous Missing Tom Bombadil Scene from The by JAGUART	Oct 12th, 2003 10:04:16 PM
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."
Total Recall - or Not by daughter of time	Oct 12th, 2003 10:16:09 PM
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?
Tolkien at a glance... by DNA	Oct 12th, 2003 10:20:12 PM
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.
SotS could be it's own movie... by Alex Rogan	Oct 12th, 2003 10:23:26 PM
...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.
CreepyThinMan is pissing me off (and I kinda think he's supposed by JTylor	Oct 12th, 2003 10:38:35 PM
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...
DVD boxset.. by MaulRat	Oct 12th, 2003 10:58:58 PM
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
This is a little off-topic, but... by daughter of time	Oct 13th, 2003 02:12:27 AM
...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.
i wish the matrix sequels would stay closer to their novelisatio by Trinity's Gusset	Oct 13th, 2003 03:51:34 AM
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.
You know the strange thing about fucking virgins... by Trinity's Gusset	Oct 13th, 2003 04:07:25 AM
...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.
Bodicia by pammybabe	Oct 13th, 2003 04:34:37 AM
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.
Let's face it. by DannyOcean01	Oct 13th, 2003 04:52:08 AM
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.
CreepyThinMan, you are wrong. by raw_bean	Oct 13th, 2003 05:28:56 AM
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.
The end of the '30s, though, obviously. by raw_bean	Oct 13th, 2003 05:32:15 AM
Just to clarify.
Whoops, sorry, DoT by orson	Oct 13th, 2003 08:11:56 AM
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.
Just wanted to say by mayaV	Oct 13th, 2003 08:58:53 AM
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.
CreepyThinMan was ALMOST right. by morGoth	Oct 13th, 2003 10:02:07 AM
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:
Boadica! Boadica! (sounds like "Bootycall! Bootycall!") by GypsyTRobot	Oct 13th, 2003 10:06:13 AM
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.
Decimated? Celtic DNA reduced by 10% ? ... by irritable	Oct 13th, 2003 10:17:25 AM
... more like 90% - except in Wales and Ireland. (You did invite corrections)
Allegory!!? !!FACT!! LIAR??? by irritable	Oct 13th, 2003 10:25:34 AM
... 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 -
Hey Creepy by Conan_the_Humble	Oct 13th, 2003 10:42:11 AM
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.
And now by morGoth	Oct 13th, 2003 10:42:28 AM
But first, thank
Well researched MorG, by raw_bean	Oct 13th, 2003 10:49:00 AM
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.
cutestofborg, irritable and Conan: by morGoth	Oct 13th, 2003 11:00:49 AM
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
Not picking on you MorG, but... by raw_bean	Oct 13th, 2003 11:04:00 AM
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. :)
raw_bean by morGoth	Oct 13th, 2003 11:12:31 AM

speaking of 'dream memories' .. by irritable	Oct 13th, 2003 11:22:57 AM
... 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!
Raw_bean Part II by morGoth	Oct 13th, 2003 11:27:03 AM

PJ and by irritable	Oct 13th, 2003 11:30:04 AM

PJ and Scouring by irritable	Oct 13th, 2003 11:43:48 AM
(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 :}
'somwhere' ? 'requried '? 'coventional' ? by irritable	Oct 13th, 2003 12:05:51 PM
Spelling errors, Moi? UNPOSSIBLE! ...
morG, my point about 'completed' was... by raw_bean	Oct 13th, 2003 12:10:10 PM
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. ;)
Bored of the Rings by Eorache	Oct 13th, 2003 12:17:53 PM
"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...
Scouring by GypsyTRobot	Oct 13th, 2003 12:33:51 PM
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.
Sorry for the slip, Pammybabe by daughter of time	Oct 13th, 2003 12:49:53 PM
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....
Witchking's Helm in ROTK by Vanyar	Oct 13th, 2003 02:10:25 PM
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.
So why is the WitchKing of Angmar titled thusly by GypsyTRobot	Oct 13th, 2003 02:15:52 PM
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).
Wouldn by the swede	Oct 13th, 2003 02:47:11 PM
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!
This day we Fight! by orson	Oct 13th, 2003 03:03:34 PM
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!
Yup, looks like the witchking all right.... by orson	Oct 13th, 2003 03:17:39 PM
..and a fearsome hombre he looks to be.
Finally!!! ROYALTIES!!!!!! aka Forget Tom Bombadil by Miami Mofo	Oct 13th, 2003 03:29:15 PM
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.
How unfair by Miami Mofo	Oct 13th, 2003 06:37:09 PM
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.
FACT!!! by daughter of time	Oct 13th, 2003 06:48:34 PM
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....
by pipergates	Oct 13th, 2003 08:00:13 PM
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!
Well done Vanyar! by morGoth	Oct 13th, 2003 08:01:47 PM
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.
Oops, sorry folks, we thought that a day out might in CreepyThin by hildebrand	Oct 13th, 2003 08:03:05 PM
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!
ban creepy now by pipergates	Oct 13th, 2003 08:04:31 PM

Still here for a couple more days.... by daughter of time	Oct 13th, 2003 08:15:17 PM
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.
The Scouring by publicusrex	Oct 13th, 2003 11:28:21 PM
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.
Well I was right, by Conan_the_Humble	Oct 14th, 2003 12:00:35 AM
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.
Calisuri has seen 20 minutes of ROTK by daughter of time	Oct 14th, 2003 01:34:04 AM
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!
Spiked Helm by irritable	Oct 14th, 2003 02:15:08 AM
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!
Philosopher King by irritable	Oct 14th, 2003 02:37:56 AM
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!
Hey, did that cockroach just fart again? by irritable	Oct 14th, 2003 03:27:41 AM

GypsyTRobot, it seems the "Witch King" was not the king of the W by irritable	Oct 14th, 2003 05:53:26 AM
... 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
Hang on, Merry dreamed about the men of Carn Dum ,,, by irritable	Oct 14th, 2003 06:05:33 AM
... not Pippin.
In the book it reads like you said, witch-king not king of the w by mayaV	Oct 14th, 2003 08:52:39 AM
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?
Why JRRT used the term Witchking by Vanyar	Oct 14th, 2003 09:13:16 AM
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.
Much ado about nothing; aka Forget Scouring. by Miami Mofo	Oct 14th, 2003 09:16:16 AM
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.
Hi all, by raw_bean	Oct 14th, 2003 10:20:39 AM
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?
Sorcerer = Witch by irritable	Oct 14th, 2003 10:24:51 AM
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.
G'day raw ... by irritable	Oct 14th, 2003 10:38:06 AM
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.
Granted it's a strange shot and in full should portray, by Conan_the_Humble	Oct 14th, 2003 10:42:25 AM
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.
G'day Irritable. by raw_bean	Oct 14th, 2003 10:59:11 AM
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.
Actually, looking at that pic... by raw_bean	Oct 14th, 2003 11:03:24 AM
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.
Hmmm, I can only see "eye-holes" in the visor, raw... by irritable	Oct 14th, 2003 11:40:37 AM
... 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!
How many times... by Skyway Moaters	Oct 14th, 2003 11:44:37 AM
...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...)
CHUD has details on the 20 min ROTK by Elerosse	Oct 14th, 2003 11:45:31 AM
For those interested of course. Saw it over at TORn.
CreepyBrainDeadThinMan... by Pontsing Barset	Oct 14th, 2003 11:54:42 AM
...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.
Yeah but Irritable, by raw_bean	Oct 14th, 2003 11:55:18 AM
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.
Let's wait for a better image, raw_bean. by irritable	Oct 14th, 2003 12:20:00 PM
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.
CreepyThinMan speaks the truth... by MisterGrimloch	Oct 14th, 2003 12:35:15 PM
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.
Gaffer discerns blind folk near Derndingle! by morGoth	Oct 14th, 2003 12:38:13 PM
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!
Aw...look what the toilet bowl flushed up. by morGoth	Oct 14th, 2003 12:44:10 PM
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!
Speaking of pompous,opinionated jerks ... by irritable	Oct 14th, 2003 12:47:52 PM
...with fragile self-esteem ...
I guess this means more steaming piles of faux-psychology ... by irritable	Oct 14th, 2003 01:04:09 PM
...from some bitter goth-metal also-ran. Stuff that, time to party.
Grimloch by hildebrand	Oct 14th, 2003 01:05:52 PM
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.
hildebrand... by MisterGrimloch	Oct 14th, 2003 01:12:44 PM
am i to assume you disagree with me?
reasonably cute borg dude..... by MisterGrimloch	Oct 14th, 2003 01:23:17 PM
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.
Morgoth... by MisterGrimloch	Oct 14th, 2003 02:03:54 PM
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.
Wait! by morGoth	Oct 14th, 2003 02:07:39 PM
That's not the Witch King! It-it's Tevildo, Prince of Pointy Headed Cats! Man, I amaze myself sometimes!
Get your fix yet Grimmy dear? by Skyway Moaters	Oct 14th, 2003 05:08:00 PM
... 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.
Skyway Moaters.... by MisterGrimloch	Oct 14th, 2003 05:13:58 PM
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.
Hey borgofthecutest... by morGoth	Oct 14th, 2003 05:45:04 PM
...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!
Ooooh! Ya got me Grimmypuss! by Skyway Moaters	Oct 14th, 2003 05:47:11 PM
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...
Here's a tissue Moaters... by morGoth	Oct 14th, 2003 06:34:14 PM
...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
What did I tell you about THE SHOUTING... by Pontsing Barset	Oct 14th, 2003 07:49:54 PM
... 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...
CreepyThinMan speaks with crazy emotion... by MisterGrimloch	Oct 14th, 2003 07:50:42 PM
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).
Creepy + Grimmy. I guess misery loves company huh? by Skyway Moaters	Oct 14th, 2003 08:03:16 PM
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.
No, we do not want them banned. by hildebrand	Oct 14th, 2003 08:20:46 PM
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.
I guess you're right Hilde... by Skyway Moaters	Oct 14th, 2003 08:43:17 PM
... 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...
I tell ya what Creepy, by Conan_the_Humble	Oct 14th, 2003 08:52:34 PM
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
Oh, 1 more thing, by Conan_the_Humble	Oct 14th, 2003 09:20:46 PM
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.
I see mayaV and cutestofborg and daughter of time and raw_bean a by Devil'sOwn	Oct 14th, 2003 09:37:35 PM
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.
maya, borg, dot, bean, morGy... by Devil'sOwn	Oct 14th, 2003 09:54:44 PM
I love you all. Seriously. Lets all move to Amsterdam and make this happen.
cutestofborg by morGoth	Oct 14th, 2003 10:05:17 PM
Cool bro! You live only minutes from both Moaters and me! Yup, he lives across the HR tunnel in Newport News and I
It's a deal Devil'sOwn... by morGoth	Oct 14th, 2003 10:12:31 PM
...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 {[:^)
Shore is doing a two-hour LOTR symphony! by daughter of time	Oct 15th, 2003 02:46:52 AM
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.)
Thanks Devils_Own, and nice idea Daughter_of_Time, by raw_bean	Oct 15th, 2003 06:12:35 AM
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.
Incidentally, by raw_bean	Oct 15th, 2003 06:29:24 AM
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.
The more, the merrier 'Goth. by Devil'sOwn	Oct 15th, 2003 07:48:54 AM
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.
After careful examination... by Skyway Moaters	Oct 15th, 2003 09:40:32 AM
... 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
Since it seems I don't post enough to warrant a name calling fro by mortsleam	Oct 15th, 2003 12:11:23 PM
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?
Arrivaderci! by daughter of time	Oct 15th, 2003 03:52:25 PM
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....
Mortsleam, by raw_bean	Oct 16th, 2003 05:11:21 AM
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.
Enjoy the holiday, d_o_t. by raw_bean	Oct 16th, 2003 05:12:37 AM
Bring me something back
i believe.... by MisterGrimloch	Oct 16th, 2003 04:39:24 PM
that a large stack of flaming pancakes would be best. seriously.
? by raw_bean	Oct 16th, 2003 05:39:34 PM
??
thanks by Elwenaur	Oct 16th, 2003 06:43:02 PM
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.
Nice to see the battle's done by mayaV	Oct 17th, 2003 05:03:05 AM
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.

Talkbacks

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