Discussion in 'Community' started by -Courtney-, Nov 25, 2006.
Some nice videos summarizing the Silmarillion, for anyone interested or needing a refresher:
Thoughts on pros and cons for the new Amazon series:
It was mentioned earlier in here that Ian McKellen would be interested in appearing in the new series; apparently John Rhys-Davies does not share that interest:
So essentially the people who are against it have already made up their minds that it's going to be terrible well before the script has been typed up and the cast has been hired. Jeez LOTR fans, I could think of something worse: how about nothing?
hahah poor sam is stuck as the pack mule.
Another video series on the history of Arda, plus the fates of the surviving Dwarves from the Hobbit:
Not sure who you're referring to here, but people are just voicing their concerns or their reasons for not being excited about the series (and even then, a lot of the reaction is of the "wait and see" variety). And liking LOTR does not automatically mean people should therefore want to see more of it... they could prefer for it to be left alone as is, just like some fans of the books preferred those over the movies.
Many, including me, have posted this in here before. If I recall correctly, there are some pretty thought out refutations to the general point being made, but I don't really remember what they are. I recall one had to do with the eagles choosing how and when they help. Another said that the eagles would avoid flying into a situation where they could be shot at, but the ending battle scenes of ROTK and TBOTFA do kind of go against that.
I have the original animated "Hobbit" film from the late 70s; and it shows how Gandalf not only had a long rapport with the eagles, but he even speaks directly with the leader of them. I don't remember if that's how the relationship was portrayed in the Tokkein novels.
Am I the only one that wants to see a full movie or novel of the war of wrath?
Forget Bard and Smaug; I want to see Earendil vs Ancalagon.
I want to see it a lot as well.
Gandalf is their friend, but they won't do just anything even for him. Their help always had explicit limits. Aside from that a mission for the elves is far different than a personal favor for Gandalf.
Also Nazgul would wreck them if they ever approached Mordor when forces weren't distracted.
Is Ancalagon really that much larger than Smaug?
Yeah, that was my thought as well when I saw the chart below (from earlier in this thread):
But the eagles seemed to fare pretty well against them here. Granted, there were ground forces there as well, but the Nazgul pretty much had their hands full with the eagles once they arrived. It looks like one of them even gets knocked off his fell beast.
When Ancalagon fell from the sky, mountain ranges broke.
You know it's kind of weird to me that "why didn't they just take the eagles?" became a meme when "one does not simply walk into Mordor" also did. Two hobbits with a terrific (albeit treacherous) guide didn't even manage to avoid getting captured.
Also while attempting to see if one of my pet theories had textual backing by checking the books, it only just now after dozens of rereads occurred to me that "The eagles are coming!" in RotK is a deliberate callback to the same moment in The Hobbit.
"But flying is totally different from walking DUH!"
I finally got around to reading (listening on Audible) to The Hobbit a few weeks ago. I gotta say, it was a very enjoyable experience. I'm making my way through The Fellowship of the Ring right now. which I am also greatly enjoying. Never read it before but wow, there is a lot the film didn't cover. I don't mean that in a bad way at all, but there's so much fascinating stuff I would've liked to see on the silver screen.
I definitely missed seeing the Crickhollow bath song.
They just trimmed the Fatty right out of the movie.
That seems an interesting topic: What's the one scene from the books you would add to the movies?
It's hard for me to decide, but I'm curious to what other people would include.
There are two things I wish were in, one of which would be simple, and the other not.
First of all, I would love to have Saruman the Many-Coloured, with the perspective that brings to his character and philosophy. That would be rather easy to put in.
But realistically it has to be the Scouring of the Shire. There's really no contest. I agree that it would completely mess up the pacing of the ending (which many people- not me, but many others- already think drags). It makes no sense to put it in in the context of the story the way the film has told it, and things would have to be significantly reworked to pull it off effectively. But the theme of the war coming to the Shire, of no place being safe, is one of Tolkien's most important themes in the book. It's the all-important capstone to his work, which can be partially described as a painting of the horrors and hardships of war (while also considering them necessary at times). Thematically, it is an essential sequence, yet it has no real parallel in the movies aside from some shots in the Mirror of Galadriel. It also is important because this final obstacle is dealt with entirely by the Hobbits themselves, after a thousand pages of outside help where they (for the most part) did not get the in-universe recognition they deserved. Some of them were already heroes, but now Hobbits as a group get to show off heroism, and on their own and of their own accord. Considering they're a stand-in for the common folk, it's another important touchstone for much of Tolkien's thoughts on the heroism of those "average, everyday people", mostly represented through Sam throughout the narrative but now broadened to showcase the character of the entire race. That's an important message.
So to see those chapters come to life, to see the Shire in ruins, the Hobbits enslaved, taken over by evil Men and with the totem of evil industry himself, Saruman, still at large, and the final obstacle after everything else has finished, would be incredibly powerful to watch. Plus more Christopher Lee is always a good thing. And then watching the Hobbits, simple as they are, surrounded by the wide world of the Big Folk, rising up to meet that obstacle... well, what more can I say but I know I would cry watching it.
I understand why it wasn't done that way. And I love the final scene at Orthanc and am not sorry that we have it. But it does not have the same power and impact that the Scouring of the Shire does.
Hell, if only Lee were still alive I would consider trying to contact PJ asking if there was any way they could arrange a shoot for a 20-30 minute sequence to put on future release features. I know it wouldn't have any real chance of being done; even if cast and crew were interested, and I think some could be brought on to the idea (I'll bet the four Hobbits would entertain the idea, at least, and you might be able to get Philippa Boyens on board), it couldn't really be justified financially. But one can dream.
Also, put Imrahil in the movies. Because he's awesome, and because it would be nice to have a different kind of Gondorian perspective and culture shown.
^ Totally agree with all of that. And, yeah, if I lived in Middle-earth, I'd totally be one of the swan knights of Dol Amroth with Imrahil.
I can't recall if this is from Fellowship or Two Towers, but it's when the Uruk-hai are taking the Hobbits to Isengard and these regular Orcs show up. The Uruks are like "who the **** are you?" and they're like "we're uh, evil and stuff, and we wanna come with you" and the Uruks are like "okay whatever". But in the movie there's just suddenly Orcs with the Uruks by the time they reach Fangorn.
It worked as yet another example of Tolkien random weirdness and preteen me found it hilarious, especially all the drama it caused between the Uruks and Orcs and how it inevitably screwed Saruman over.
Also Tom Bombadil, because he's mother****ing Tom Bombadil.