Login | Register
 
Message Board | Latest Posts | Your Recent Posts | Rules

Thread: Lets talk directors vision

Is this discussion interesting? Share it on Twitter!

Bottom of Page    Message Board > The Hobbit (Movie) > Lets talk directors vision   << [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] >>
Sufficient I agree, likely sadly not. If you look at the track record of instances in the LoTR films where the script extrapolated from a small thing in the book; the cave troll in Moria, from a stab in the foot to a fifteen minute fight, Pippin dropping a stone down a well to dumping a whole skeleton down it, the oliphaunts on the Pelennor becoming a huge charging horde, and those are just the cases where they only extrapolated, there are many more where the script devaites entirely and they just made their own stuff up- on this track record my money is on 2 interwoven story lines, with a joint climax of the defeat of necromancer and Smaug.
There seems to be a certain amount of madness involved here. Is it just me? Are we saying that The Hobbit should have the songs cut out, most of the humor cut out, everything seriousified, and much added to fill the gaps and enhance to story? LotRize The Hobbit and we might end up with a good movie for people who don't care a hoot about the book, but what about people who want a reasonably true adaptation - not a total reinvention? The people (millions of them) who made JRRT famous! If people don't like the book as it is, why did they bother reading it? Did they read it only because they liked LotR so much and felt obliged to? Well, forget The Hobbit exists, if the knowledge is too hard to bear!

Btw, as is well known, JRRT tried to LotRize The Hobbit himself - and gave up the attempt. Why? Because The Hobbit is excellent as it is. JRRT (though reluctant to accept the fact) conceded he could not make The Hobbit something it wasn't. I'm sad JRRT grew to dislike so much of what he wrote. In the end, I guess he wanted to be seen as someone of highest literary merit. I, however, think The Hobbit is a brilliant fairy-tale and has enormous literary merit. It is wiser than the works of many of the literati. You know the ones. The ones that generally take themselves far too seriously. You'll recognize them when you see them, their heads tend to be buried up their bum-holes - apparently seeking the source of their sunshine. Hey! I've read plenty of stuff that takes itself seriously, some good, some shite. I prefer The Hobbit. It's the BEST.
Don't get me wrong Odo, I'm actually with you on this. It's just with what we know about the inclusion of WC et all I don't think we are going to get an adaptation of TH the book but some sort of batsterdized offspring, much of which I fear will have sprung solely from the coven of witches PJ calls his screenwriters and not from source. (Please, someone tell me I'm wrong and that the script isn't being done but by the same swine who destroyed LoTR! Hearing that might at least sooth the worst of my fears).
[quote="pettytyrant101":2t8ok32u]Sufficient I agree, likely sadly not. If you look at the track record of instances in the LoTR films where the script extrapolated from a small thing in the book[/quote:2t8ok32u]

I certainly agree that the filmmakers will likely go to some length to tie together the two strands of the story. I was surprised some weeks ago to read a fan theory on TORn suggesting that the leader of the goblin/warg faction at the Battle of the Five Armies might be led by one of the Nazgul in order to further integrate the story. Now I have no idea if the filmmakers would do something like that, and after consideration I should not be surprised if they do, but I think that there are more modest steps that could be taken even if they want to integrate the story.

Or, of course, they could just stick to making The Hobbit like the title implies they're doing. :roll:
[quote="Odo Banks":ti4depwp]Are we saying that The Hobbit should have the songs cut out, most of the humor cut out, everything seriousified, and much added to fill the gaps and enhance to story?[/quote:ti4depwp]

There is significant difference between what I think [i:ti4depwp]should[/i:ti4depwp] be done, Odo, and what I think [i:ti4depwp]will[/i:ti4depwp] be done. <img src='/images/smileys/wink.gif' border='0' alt='Wink Smilie' />

[quote:ti4depwp]Btw, as is well known, JRRT tried to LotRize The Hobbit himself - and gave up the attempt. Why? Because The Hobbit is excellent as it is.[/quote:ti4depwp]

Agreed. I actually prefer the high style of LotR to the fairy tale nature of The Hobbit, but that does not in any way diminish my love for The Hobbit. Both stories are excellent in their own way, and the diversity of genre within the legendarium is a strength of it, not a weakness.
[quote="pettytyrant101":20jpfiat](Please, someone tell me I'm wrong and that the script isn't being done but by the same swine who destroyed LoTR! Hearing that might at least sooth the worst of my fears).[/quote:20jpfiat]

Unfortunately, the same team (PJ, Fran Walsh, and Philippa Boyens) plus GDT are working on the scripts. I shudder to think of what they have decided "has" to be different or what parts are "no-brainers" to cut. :roll: (Note: I'm not saying that nothing should be changed or cut, but they have a track record of going way beyond what is necessary.)
Damn! Ah well was to much too hope they'd have been pulled from script duties, although surely some punishment is due for the LoTR scripts. To think they gave them an oscar for RoTK- I know where I'd tell them to shove it, so undeserved. On their previous we should not be surprised if the entire cast of LoTR makes cameos, good and bad guys. Just wish if they wanted to write a fantasy they'd bugger off and write their own and stop rewriting Tolkiens!
Yep.... I'm right crabbity too, Mr Tyrant. Fran and Phillipa are competent to write the script, but unfortunately they do seem to be being pressed into writing a new story loosely based on the old. I'm not sure they are a coven of witches, but I'm confident a Dark Sorcerer rules over them.


[quote="pettytyrant101":kv8cb7tz]Just wish if they wanted to write a fantasy they'd bugger off and write their own and stop rewriting Tolkiens![/quote:kv8cb7tz]

You speak like a sage! :ugeek: I call it illicit trading on someone else's fame! Cheap and nasty idea, no matter how much money they make, or how much hubris they bring to the project per their unholy [b:kv8cb7tz]"Brand New Much Improved Hobbit."[/b:kv8cb7tz]
[quote="pettytyrant101":1wbxfxg6]Just wish if they wanted to write a fantasy they'd bugger off and write their own and stop rewriting Tolkiens![/quote:1wbxfxg6]

Part of me thinks that they are incapable of writing original fantasy, but I really can't say. However, I think it is rank intellectual laziness (and perhaps even dishonesty) to take advantage of an existing fandom the way they did.
[quote="Odo Banks":2pgofhe2]Fran and Phillipa are competent to write the script, but unfortunately they do seem to be being pressed into writing a new story loosely based on the old.[/quote:2pgofhe2]

I don't think they're being pressured into anything. If you listen to the Director/Writer's commentary on the LotR EEs you begin to get a sense of their mindset concerning the original text. When they claimed that it was necessary to change the story because "what would it have been like otherwise", I felt really lost. The "otherwise" is [i:2pgofhe2]right there in the book[/i:2pgofhe2], which is what they're supposed to be using as a basis! I think it's clear that they were more concerned with telling their own story (or at the very least, LotR the way they wish it was) than telling Tolkien's story.
Yes, I'm being a little too chivalrous I know.... but men of my generation have never treated the fairer sex as equals, as if they've got minds of their own, and so if they go astray, we nearly always lay the blame at the feet of Dark Sorcerers. (Jezebel is one exception to the rule - and Eve, come to think of it).

Also, I find the idea of witches a bit... ah.... :oops: ...stirring... :oops: They have loose morals, or so it's said... :oops: Oh! All right! :x I've got the hots for Phillipa.... :oops: this is sooooo embarrassing... :oops: Are you happy you got it out of me, Eldo! :x ...

Anyhow :x I'm sure Philippa would do just fine with the script if someone like me was on top of her, and not some Dark Sorcerer... [b:cz8lkgiv][i:cz8lkgiv]Over [/i:cz8lkgiv][/b:cz8lkgiv]her! I meant [b:cz8lkgiv]OVER [/b:cz8lkgiv]her! :x :oops:

Okay, you're right. Let's burn those bitches....!

(I'm definitely crabbit now! Your fault, Eldo, your damn fault!)
[quote="Gandalfs Beard":21y0ddpa]Has anyone actually SEEN Hellboy 2?[/quote:21y0ddpa]

Nope, though I've heard many good things about it (and GDT's other movies), which is encouraging. However, the script will limit what he can do, though I do believe that he is involved with it, which is probably good. <img src='/images/smileys/bigsmile.gif' border='0' alt='Big Smile Smilie' />

[quote:21y0ddpa]I don't doubt that there will be alterations due to the adaptive process, but unless you think it's going to be less than 50% faithful to the book (like Wizard of Oz or Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, or some of the Potter films (GoF)) I don't see the point of preemptively complaining about the alterations. [/quote:21y0ddpa]

I think you're right that we should wait and see, but I'm not terribly optimistic. I hope to be pleasantly surprised though. <img src='/images/smileys/smile.gif' border='0' alt='Smile Smilie' />

[quote:21y0ddpa]As far as I'm concerned, the track record of Jackson and his team is excellent, with a rather high percentage of faithfulness to LotR--FAR more then one gets from most from most adaptations.[/quote:21y0ddpa]

They were able to throw in lots of pieces, yes, but a faithful adaptation is more than just getting more than X% of the scenes in the book carried over. They changed and added on many fundamental levels. The percentage of faithfulness is misleading when you consider how different so many of the characters were.
[quote="Odo Banks":2pnnbzeb]I've got the hots for Phillipa.... :oops: this is sooooo embarrassing... :oops: Are you happy you got it out of me, Eldo! :x ... [/quote:2pnnbzeb]

At this point I'm not terribly surprised, actually. I was when I saw a whole thread full of it once, but I suppose I'm desensitized to it now. I don't really agree, but it's okay.

[quote:2pnnbzeb]Anyhow :x I'm sure Philippa would do just fine with the script if someone like me was on top of her, and not some Dark Sorcerer... Over her! I meant OVER her! :x :oops: [/quote:2pnnbzeb]

Now you're getting creepy. :lol:
Love's like that, Eldo, it's not scientific at all - and thank God!
No offense, but that sounds more like infatuation. <img src='/images/smileys/wink.gif' border='0' alt='Wink Smilie' />
[i:5jrbbxvg]"Science, science, science - that's all you ever think about!" [/i:5jrbbxvg] (With apologies to Monty Python).

Oh Eldo. [i:5jrbbxvg]"Infatuation". [/i:5jrbbxvg]I mean - [i:5jrbbxvg]really...! [/i:5jrbbxvg]Lah-de-dah! You and your big words. How are you ever going to meet a beautiful elf maiden and woo her, if your only weapon is [i:5jrbbxvg] 'science' [/i:5jrbbxvg] or "intellect"? It'll never work.

Imagine this:

[i:5jrbbxvg]YOUNG MODERN THINKING MAN: Greetings fair maiden.. no, I mean - Hello my intellectuial equal. I'm attracted to you, like hydrogen and oxygen molecules... No, that's no good... I'm trying to find suitable words to woo you with... Look I'm not infatuated with you... perish the thought... Ah! Did you know that love doesn't exist... Ah! I do have a suppressed biological interest in you - while respecting you as my equal, and I'm not planning to get into your clothing... I mean... I think we should form a platonic relationship at first. Then after awhile, if both parties agree to mutually beneficial terms, we will indulge in sex. Once with me on top. Once with you on... We will toss a coin to see who is on top first.... No, that doesn't sound quite right..."
BEAUTIFUL MAIDEN: "*+^# off, Dork!" [/i:5jrbbxvg]

The above is a cautionary tale. It happened to a friend of a friend of mine. (Oh all right, it was me).

This is how I wooed my wife:

[i:5jrbbxvg]Odo: Hey gorgeous. Want to have sex?
(Future) Wife: Oh all right, so long as it doesn't take too long. I've got teaching rounds and I'm still trying to finish my degree."
Odo: No worries love. I'll be quick."[/i:5jrbbxvg]

[i:5jrbbxvg]After[/i:5jrbbxvg] that, we fell in love.

So Eldo, forget science.

(I do apologise if what I wrote above has little to do with what you meant. Sometimes the creative in me is very overpowering, and once it clicks in, anything might come out! :?)

Anyhow - I love Philippa with full blown naturalness. Keep your big words to yourself in future.
:lol: :lol:
No matter what the scriptwriters do, Del Toro is still the director, and is perfectly capable of blending humour and seriousness, "high" and "low" (or fairy tale) fantasy (distinctions that I have always believed arbitrary to the point of meaninglessness). Has anyone actually SEEN Hellboy 2?

I don't doubt that there will be alterations due to the adaptive process, but unless you think it's going to be less than 50% faithful to the book (like Wizard of Oz or Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, or some of the Potter films (GoF)) I don't see the point of preemptively complaining about the alterations. As far as I'm concerned, the track record of Jackson and his team is excellent, with a rather high percentage of faithfulness to LotR--FAR more then one gets from most from most adaptations.

[b:1lw6th3z]GB[/b:1lw6th3z]

PS: That WAS a bit creepy Odo :lol: .
They weren't THAT different :P :roll: . The script simply took some of the characters' original traits and involvements and extrapolated a reasonable character arc from them.

[b:1tikwlcu]GB[/b:1tikwlcu]
[quote="Gandalfs Beard":11xv2p7c]The script simply took some of the characters' original traits and involvements and extrapolated a reasonable character arc from them.[/quote:11xv2p7c]

Perhaps they took some parts of the book as "inspiration", but they bloated them almost beyond recognition by making them defining aspects of the characters. Like Aragorn, who in the book suffers some brief self-doubt in the early chapters of The Two Towers, is defined and crippled by his self-doubt for almost the entire film trilogy. Or Denethor, who in the book lost his mind after the apparent death of his son, but in the movie was a nutjob from the moment we first see him. Or Elrond, who in the book doesn't fully approve of his daughter marrying a human, but in the movie deceives Arwen in order to separate the couple.

I can go on, if you'd like. :P
Well in the movie we only see Denethor after the loss of his favourite son, Boromir. But I couldn't stand his arrogance and his favouritism in the book either, so I fail to see the major distinction you are making <img src='/images/smileys/wink.gif' border='0' alt='Wink Smilie' /> .

But I digress, and we've already beat this death on other threads :lol: .

[b:2o42i4uj]GB[/b:2o42i4uj]
[quote="Gandalfs Beard":1o77hpyo]Well in the movie we only see Denethor after the loss of his favourite son, Boromir. But I couldn't stand his arrogance and his favouritism in the book either, so I fail to see the major distinction you are making <img src='/images/smileys/wink.gif' border='0' alt='Wink Smilie' /> .[/quote:1o77hpyo]

It took the apparent loss of [i:1o77hpyo]both[/i:1o77hpyo] his sons in the book to make him lose his mind. But you are right, this has been done to the death. <img src='/images/smileys/bigsmile.gif' border='0' alt='Big Smile Smilie' />
I have been thinking about it and there would be several problems in including the songs. They would take up too much time, people would think they are stupid, and I don't even think if they did the songs they would do it as it was in the book! AAAAAAARRGH!!! They probably aren't even going to STICK to the book!! :o <img src='/images/smileys/vevil.gif' border='0' alt='Very Evil Smilie' /> The whole point of making a movie about a book is so that the events in the book are followed as closely as possible, because if the writer made a good book then he knew what he was doing!!!! Don't screw with a story because if makes it worse.

:cry: The book is awesome anyways!! They shouldn't even think about changing it and making it better because the book is so AWESOME. Which is why I am scared shitless. I really want them to stick to the book even if it risks lack of publicity income. Just because.

Yup. The movie is going to be awful. I just know it. :cry:
[quote="Tartorus":2behvktv]I have been thinking about it and there would be several problems in including the songs. They would take up too much time, people would think they are stupid, and I don't even think if they did the songs they would do it as it was in the book! AAAAAAARRGH!!! They probably aren't even going to STICK to the book!! :o <img src='/images/smileys/vevil.gif' border='0' alt='Very Evil Smilie' /> The whole point of making a movie about a book is so that the events in the book are followed as closely as possible, because if the writer made a good book then he knew what he was doing!!!! Don't screw with a story because if makes it worse.[/quote:2behvktv]


Err....ah...um...? Tartoros, do you WANT the songs in, or do you NOT want the songs in? :?

(NB The sense of [i:2behvktv]raging against the machine[/i:2behvktv] that shines forth in your delightful ranting, however, I do find [i:2behvktv]very much [/i:2behvktv]to my taste. There is just [i:2behvktv]not enough[/i:2behvktv] ranting going-on on this forum, I feel. Eldorion, though a Purist, is often far too polite about it. :x Mind you, Mr Tyrant's sheer crabbitness is always refreshingly uplifting <img src='/images/smileys/bigsmile.gif' border='0' alt='Big Smile Smilie' /> ).
I share your worries, Tartorus, but not your despairs.

[quote="Tartorus":jnpesv1l]They shouldn't even think about changing it and making it better because the book is so AWESOME.[/quote:jnpesv1l]

Well they're going to have to change things, that's how it works when you're switching mediums. I just hope they don't change things because they're trying to make the story "better".

[quote:jnpesv1l]Yup. The movie is going to be awful. I just know it. :cry:[/quote:jnpesv1l]

Even though I'm not that optimistic about the chances of The Hobbit being a good/faithful adaptation, I think they'll be some pretty awesome movies. There's a difference, I think. Even if they're nothing like the book, I expect I'll be entertained when I'm sitting in the darkened theatre two to three years from now. 8-)
[quote="Odo Banks":1dbbsl43]I feel. Eldorion, though a Purist, is often far too polite about it.[/quote:1dbbsl43]

I've made it a mission of sorts to combat the "rabid Purist" stereotype as often as I can. <img src='/images/smileys/bigsmile.gif' border='0' alt='Big Smile Smilie' /> I also find that people generally respond better and more rationally to politeness.
Hey! Weren't you listening, Eldo? Didn't you hear my enchanted foghorn?
[i:rga7x4nd]"Aggressiveness wins nearly every argument. Violence wins the rest." [/i:rga7x4nd] :ugeek:
Is that Wise Odo speaking, or am I simply culturally ignorant? :P
I agree with your point Eldo that the worst thing would be if they try to make the story 'better'. That was the major flaw with LoTR, they thought they could write a better version than Tolkiens, I nearly walked out the cinema when Frodo sent Sam home in the middle of Mordor so he could be best buddies with Gollum. Only reason I didn't is being Scottish I'd damned well paid my money so I was going to stay, and suffer as it turned out.
As to your scurrilous accusation of me being "crabbit" Odo I'm sure I never used to be, I think though I can pinpoint the exact moment it happened, when the wind changed and it stuck, it was the day I walked out the cinema having seen the abomination that was TT. Been crabbit ever since, so for me TH will either tip me over the edge (in which case you will need to think of a new Scots word to describe me) or cure me. So I've a lot resting on this film.
There will surely be no cure for the heart break these movies may bring, Mr Tyrant!

As to my wisdom, Eldo - I have my own brand! I [i:2c9y9ncq]think for myself[/i:2c9y9ncq], that's why I [i:2c9y9ncq]am[/i:2c9y9ncq]! (Indeed, I think Wise Odo talks a lot of rubbish, to be painfully frank! Some day I'll rub it right in his face! I will! I'm not just blowing hot air here!)
Songs would be good. Of course. Yeah they are going to have to change stuff but still they should make it like the book. Songs probably won't work. So many variables. They will have to change some things to make it a little more modern and events cut. But I would like songs. Songs would be good.
Howdy,

I see that many Tolkien fans want the Hobbit movies to have a (to varying degrees) different "feel" from the LOTR movies due to the fact that it is indeed a different book. I totally respect this and would never criticize a fellow Tolkien fan but I completely disagree. After all, like another fan posted, the books are different but the world and many of the characters and themes are the same. Also, in my opinion, Peter Jackson did such a beautiful job with LOTR that I don't know why one would want to stray from it.

Also I see that many fans are firmly set against the concept of "bridging the gap" between The Hobbit and LOTR. Again I disagree and think this would be marvelous IF THEY COULD PULL IT OFF. I do not deny this would be challenging due to the significant time gap and relative lack of source material from this time period. Being a huge Aragorn fan, I would love to see his youth (arrival at Imladris, years as a ranger, campaigns in Rohan and Gondor...). I realize these events have little to nothing to do with the Hobbit but if they do not appear here, they won't appear anywhere.

PEACE
OMG - yet [i:2udhj1tx]another [/i:2udhj1tx]one! :roll:
Shush, Odo. :P

[quote="Ancalagon":10pr8xnc]Howdy[/quote:10pr8xnc]

Hello, welcome!

[quote:10pr8xnc]in my opinion, Peter Jackson did such a beautiful job with LOTR that I don't know why one would want to stray from it.[/quote:10pr8xnc]

I too think he did a good job, though there are places where I think he could have done better. As it is, especially since PJ wasn't perfect, I would like to see The Hobbit be its own story rather than LotR: The Prequel. I don't see why TH and TLotR should be the same sort of story, but it may be that I just like variety.

[quote:10pr8xnc]I realize these events have little to nothing to do with the Hobbit but if they do not appear here, they won't appear anywhere.[/quote:10pr8xnc]

The movie-fanboy within me would like to see lots of different things on screen, but without any coherent narrative you have no real movie. This is why I hated the idea of the bridge movie: it was shaping up to be a bunch of unrelated or semi-related stories that would be collected into an anthology of sorts and then passed off as a real movie. I think restraint in storytelling is a very good quality: sometimes we just need to deal with not seeing everything and not stretch out the narrative too far. Tell a good, compelling story, but don't get bogged down too much in all the backstory.

^ My two cents. <img src='/images/smileys/smile.gif' border='0' alt='Smile Smilie' />
Weeeeeeeeell, I like including the White Council, Dol Guldur, and the banishing of the Necromancer in the two Hobbit films <img src='/images/smileys/wink.gif' border='0' alt='Wink Smilie' /> . And possibly a (very) brief montage near the end of the second film showing a glimpse of the expedition to Moria, young Aragorn, Saruman and a Palantir, etc. But it should end with Bilbo, safely back in the Shire some years after the fact, telling his story to a very young Frodo (The films could possibly start that way too, Bilbo narrating his tale).

Anyway, I quite agree with you Ancalagon, that Jackson did a brilliant job with LotR. But I do think The Hobbit films should respect the difference in the tone of the books. As it really is going to be mostly Bilbo's version of events, I don't particularly see a problem with that. And as I think the tone evolves in the last chapters of The Hobbit anyway into something more like LotR (the Battle of 5 Armies etc), I think it should segue nicely into LotR.

[b:3kkvthmv]GB[/b:3kkvthmv]
Sorry guys <img src='/images/smileys/bigsmile.gif' border='0' alt='Big Smile Smilie' />
Just wishful thinking I guess
No need to apologize for disagreeing. <img src='/images/smileys/smile.gif' border='0' alt='Smile Smilie' />
I have no truck with apologists! They are the brood of PJ. I say, down with the iconoclasts! :x Get your own story! Stop trading on Tolkien! Make up your own story, I say! :x
While I agree with the general sentiment of your post (or rather, the second half of it), Odo, I think we should be nicer, even (or rather, especially) to the apologists. 8-)
I never apologize to Apologists, Eldo. Never have, never will! Call me old fashioned! :x :x
Does your old-fashionedness preclude not doing anything that would lead to an apology in the first place? :P
Of course not! That would be silly...

I concede there are times when some lateral thinking is called for though, especially when people insist I apologize for something I've said. If confronted by such a situation, I state that [i:qepjoq6k]clearly[/i:qepjoq6k] I made some kind of typogaphical error, and that the person I offended should have understood what I [i:qepjoq6k]meant [/i:qepjoq6k]not what I [i:qepjoq6k]said[/i:qepjoq6k].

Or if it's a question of me (seeming) to be wrong about something: well, the point is, I wasn't [i:qepjoq6k]really [/i:qepjoq6k]wrong, it just seemed like I was wrong [i:qepjoq6k]on the surface [/i:qepjoq6k], for the English language can be tricky at times, and any given English phrase is open to all sorts of interpretations, and so is it any wonder some people think I've got things wrong at times - but they're wrong! 8-)
I had an e-mail discussion with Michael Martinez about the vagueness of the English language (among other things) once: I was trying to talk to him about Balrog wings and it turned out we were using different definitions of "wing". :lol: It's annoying how confusing it can be at times, even when you're talking face-to-face, but especially by mail or on the Internet.
Yes, I can see the problem. I like my balrog wings with ranch dressing...no...wait...I meant buffalo wings :P :lol: .

[b:3ip8f3ze]GB[/b:3ip8f3ze]
I used to be so confused by 'buffalo wings'. I didn't understand them since, of course, buffalo don't have wings. :lol: :roll:
That's because they're all harvested for food, clipped off you see :mrgreen: . Come to think of it, I wonder how Balrog wings [i:2uzuthzy]would[/i:2uzuthzy] taste with ranch dressing :? ?

[b:2uzuthzy]GB[/b:2uzuthzy]
Hot and spicy! <img src='/images/smileys/bigsmile.gif' border='0' alt='Big Smile Smilie' />
Thats EXACTLY what I was thinking 8-) !!!

[b:626xthre]GB[/b:626xthre]
Movie-Balrogs, at least, would have a distinctive 'smoky' taste. 8-)
  << [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] >>