Message Board | Rules

Thread: Who has seen it and what did you think?

Bottom of Page    Message Board > The Fellowship of the Ring > Who has seen it and what did you think?   << [1] [2] [3] [4] >>
I want a swiss army staff!!

Ungoliant: Ooh! Get You! *clutches handbag to chest girlily*

Huan: I totally forgot that i'd already said hi to you here yesterday, so i've done it again somewhere earlier. I apologise for being thick again, but I had a hell of a hangover yesterday, so that must be taken into consideration!
I don't think I should try Ent Ale, I'm already 6 foot 2!
Sasquatch! Tee hee. And which old lady did you swipe the handbag from now, Plastic?

Huan: Point taken about point taken. Sorry if I sounded rather sore there - got up early to play golf & found out it was cancelled, which explained my foul mood. And then I saw was I thought was a pc statement - must really learn to control myself. S'like waving a red flag at a bull...

Grondie - loved the Swiss Army staff.
thanks jehanne,
but i don't think i'll be needing that much research. it's only meant to be 6000 words long, so should be able to get it done in two weeks. but it's due in october. Big Smile Smilie
Grondie, well nice try, but when the party enters Moria, you see how Gandalf puts that crystal on top of his (new) Staff. So it still could bee his first one.
Anyway, Wizard's staffs will most likey always be Swiss Army Staffs.
Now, to all those reviews: I liked Huan's very much although I don't agree in some points with him. Generally I think it just depends on how much freedom you are willing to give the director of such a movie whether you like certain changes or not.
As for Arwen, I think it was done too much, on the other hand it could be made to get a heroine character just to please some parts of the audience who don't know the books.
Similar to that I'd say the fighting scenes have been made so large to get a bit more action. This could make the difference between comercial success or flop.
Happy New Year to all of you!
And again Pete's right!
I nicked the handbag off of some old lady outside in the street. Very handy, it had two quid, a small mirror and a chelsea bun in it. Nice. And nothing's worse than having your golf cancelled, so I'll hold off the ninja badgers til next time you make a sasquatch crack!
Now if I read what I had written after missing golf..... well hell, it'd be like turning up at Helms deep with all the orcs gone . If you can't swing that axe... well it would be like Slaine in a Warp.
Any time you feel like I'm getting PC - send me a warning. Always appreciated.
Thanks for the support PlasticSuirrel... it seems as if Tom was right...
Now lets not be hasty here, i mean, letting Tommy be right? She'll never let us forget it!
TomBombadil wrote:

In the end someone always will, Pete, trust me... You may need to have some patience, but at some point you'll even get *taz, or *Plastic, or Grondmaster behind you... (the big three haha) Smile Smilie Smile Smilie Smile Smilie

I was referring to that... Smile Smilie
Hate to disappoint you Pete, but unfortunately it's opposites day at PT. So Plastic wasn't really agreeing with you. Wink Smilie And Tommy wasn't right either...
Now you got me... Who made the joke now, you or Plastic?
Don't confuse me...
Ungoliant made the really bad joke, and I suppose Tommy was right then, ah well! She had to be one day! All this big 3 talk, very silly *grumble, mutter, grumble*
Was just pulling your leg, Pete. But even if it was opposites day, then what I said could be reversed as well - so Plastic would have agreed with you & Tommy would have ben right. Wink Smilie
This is like that thing where one person always tells the truth and one always lies isn't it? I can never get that either.
*rubs head in bemusement*
To tell you the truth, neither could I. Smile Smilie
Hi everyone

This is my first time to this website and i get the feeling from reading few of these postBodys that everyone around here are old chums.

But since being a Tokien fan myself, though i confess i have only read the Hobit and LOTR once several years ago and only skimmed through them again last year to write my critical analysis of LOTR for a school report, i decided to put my two cents worth.

Personally, i thought the movie was absolutely fantastic, given the enormous amount of pressure peter jackson was under from Tolkien freaks like you people! =)

And secondly, i would have been more than disappointed if jackson had stuck to the book word for word, i think best movies are made when the director takes the essence of the original book and creates something utterly new and different.

Generally i thought the movie was excellent in scenary and casting, (Orlando Bloom as Legolas gets two thumbs up from me!) and practically everything else, except that i always pictured Frodo and other Hobbits as someone chubby middle aged blokes. But i guess that would have taken all the romance out of the story...

Hey welcome Rosie!

what do you mean with old chums? I'm only 20, I betch Tommy is even younger

thanx for sharing yet another way of looking at a movie, thanx i've never thought of that

as for the hobits you're right, I thought i knew something but i couldn't get my finger on it... they were indeed a bit chubby and middle aged insteead of in their tweens

How wonderful to finally meet a fellow countryperson at PT.

Everyone is friendly here but by no means old! Neither are we all old hands. I only joined myself about a fortnight ago.

Don't necessarily believe anything they tell you about me.... it wasn't me who tried to strangle Hugo Weaving, honest!

Anyway, extra warm welcomes from me. Let me know if you are interested in the chat line (no one else is in a compatible time zone with me! I refuse to get up at 4.00am for anything)

Hope you are safe from the bushfires!

Please post soon![Edited on 23/1/2002 by Allyssa]
*does his best AC/DC impression*
Want a Whole Lotta Rosie!! etc. etc.

Welcome. We are indeed Tolkien freaks, and some of us have been here a long time, and Grondy's pretty old, yeah Wink Smilie
And if he'd done something totally different I'd have loved it, but it wasn't totally different enough to get in that league, but it was sooooo pretty!
Hi Rosie!
Somehow I think I nedd to say a few words as well. So, I'm in this chat for about three wekks only and I'm not old. *G*
And now just to stick to the topic: I think you're right about hobbits. Frodo doesn't look anthing like 50 years old. Neither do the others look any younger than Frodo.
Thanks everyone..
I will be leaving pretty soon to watch FOTR for the third time. I just can't get enough!!
It's even appearing in my dreams..
Last night, i dreamt that Legolas and Gimli were in my room and my first impulse was..get a camera!!
then sadly i woke up.
oh well..
Hi Rosie
With a post like that, Plastic will have field day - Imean Rosie, Gimli and Legolas in the same room with a camera.....
I'm new here too - but what's enjoyable about this site : forum is it is "chummy" not PC and within reason you can call a cat.... a cat.

Know what you mean though my dreams usually involve Viggo Mortensen...
...and within reason you can call a cat.... a cat.

Unless you're talking about the real thing, add the word 'dog' before or after it, and post it outside the taverns. Then Taz will come down on you like a ton of those rectangular building things... Wink Smilie

Hmm, wonder if he'll see this...


*whispering to Ungoliant* did you see the film?
*normal voice* Welcome Rosie! And I'm not that old, really. Only 17. Nearly 18. Big Smile Smilie With Oldies we mean the ones who have reached the status of friend, the others are still strangers. But we're one big bunch of... crap really... ANd we love it! Big Smile Smilie
I've seen that movie, with a girl an Elf and A dwarf in a bedroom, that's what the camera was for! Wink Smilie
And I like to call a cat a foul hissing little ball of mange that isn't worth the oxygen it takes up Big Smile Smilie
Oh that'll get Taz going then.
Not only Taz! My cat is the most beautiful animal in the world! Cats are intelligent, well-balanced, cute, loveable and not the least bit droopy and at least they are independent. Dogs keep following you around, they slaver and drool your shoes (or even worse socks) under, and you can't have a decent conversation with them cos they never listen. A cat knows when to shut up! Big Smile Smilie
Ah, but dogs can fetch and find... when was the last time your cat brought you something it hadn't eaten first? Think about that next time you lose your remote control.

Smile Smilieg
Dogs are loveable. Cats are pretentious.

The reason a lot of us seem to know each other, Rosie, is because this board has been around for a's been on different servers and things. This particular one is just the most recent incarnation...I think it's about 2 months old? The original one started really a while was already well-established when I turned up this past summer. I think Tommy and I are the youngest ones around here...I'm 17, but unlike Tommy, I'm nowhere near 18 (grr...)

And to keep from getting in trouble about being way off topic, this is the part of the post that's relevant to the original topic...I liked the movie very much.

Big Smile Smilie
This particular board has been here since the very day the movie came out. As the old one died that very morning, which was pretty darn inconvenient as you can guess.
I have just seen the film for the second time. The casting is good, the set designs great - but the story! Why? The part I hate the most is Galadriels mirror. This shows what a stupid director Peter Jackson is. He has completelly miss interpreted the scene. It contains nothing of what is important in the book. They could have cut the whole shit!

This scene is about TWO things (PJ failes to understand both):

1) For the firts time Frodo understands thru the mirror that the eye is seeking him. Jacksson has by that time made so many stupid "ring on"-special effekts that the mirror is like putting on the ring, and the burning cunt (sorry eye) has been exposed like if it was a Coca-cola comersial.

2) Galadriel lets Frodo understand that if he succeds her ring will lose its power and the beautiful Lorien will disappear. It's one of the most moving parts of the book - even if Frodo does good it will bring bad thing with it. There is no good ending.

Sorry my english is as bad as the movie.
I'm with you on that one manlag, I thought I was the only one who thought Sauron's eye looked like one of them things. Welcome my friend, i can see me and you will get along just fine. Smile Smilie
thanks grondmaster..

still, i would have perfered a chubby, jolly, mushroom-loving and pipe-weed smoking Frodo..

i forgot that he was only 33.
perhaps i should go back and reread the books..

oh and the movie for the third time is still fantastic, but a little too much for the bladder, especially after a jumbo mango smoothie.

and i'm still hopelessly in love with Orlando/Legolas.[Edited on 8/1/2002 by Rosie]
I agree with Grondmaster. The hobbits were still quite young for hobbits. Only just out of their "tweens"
I will commit the ultimate "harry kari" (to Tolkien fans)and declare, I liked the movie more than the book. I thought the book was flawed and too wordy and jumpy. The movie flowed along much better and I understood what was going on and the reason for it.
I will not reply to the above post, cos I definetely don't agree with it, but I can't put my astonishment to words. Smile Smilie

The hobbits did look a bit young and immature. A bit too young and immature. Smile Smilie
Hi all. I have to say, of the various boards I follow, this is perhaps the nicest and funniest. It's quite a pleasant change from real life conversation with Tolkien-ites who take it all more seriously than work, taxes, social skills, hygiene... scary folks, some of them.

I don't think I really want to weigh in on the "I hate Elrond, Galadriel was awful (since actually I kinda liked them both ), where's this, where's that..." stuff, because, as interesting as I think my opinions are, I'm sure somebody else has already said it somewhere. But I just wanted to offer a bit of support to Swampfaye's last post.

Wait, don't hurt me. I don't mean that the movie was "better" in some abstract sense than the book. But I did find it more entertaining. I've read LOTR a number of times, but I've found that over the years my relationship to the text has changed enough that the sense of wonder that first attracted me has been lost (or redirected or even mutated). See, I'm a graduate student working on Old English and Old Norse texts. "Ah, very Tolkien of you!" I often hear. Exactly. That's the problem. When I read LOTR these days, it's tough to keep myself from thinking "well, that word looks like it's derived from ...." or "that scene is right out of saga x". LOTR is an epic text, sure, but I'm surrounded by them, and it's no fun when Galadriel smiles and I think "Chapter 3 of my diss needs so much work!". Tolkien's language, characterization (and lack thereof, in cases), structure and even pacing are too steeped in his academic world, now my academic world, to be an escape for me.

The movie, on the other hand, isn't work. It has beautiful scenery, beautiful music and beautiful people, plus some nice gore to keep the kiddies up at night. It's a distillation of the wonderful text that first caught me years ago, and I didn't once think of Njal or Hrafnkel or Hrothgar or anyone else I should be researching when I'm really at the movies. Some bits I liked in the book weren't there, of course, and some were quite different, but the sweep of the thing, the sense that this group was embarking on a terrible adventure that would mean triumph and pain and death and glory, that was there for me. Where reading one of Tolkien's lovely but very, very long descriptive passages means a possible nap these days, the movie made me want to go charging around with a sword! For my students' sakes, I won't, but I had missed that thrill that comes from a great story well told. And, for me, that made up for every odd casting choice, every cut scene, and every "Sauron the Power Rangers' villain" moment. It's not a perfect translation of the text to the screen, but I really believe that a perfect translation would have made a poor film. And left me without an excuse to avoid Chapter 3.

Beside, Legolas sure is nice to look at!
hi Jehanne,
For me, the movie of LOTR is a better movie than the book LOTR is as a book. does that make sense? i know i'm going to get slaughtered for this... but to me it seems that Peter Jackson has taken the best parts from the book and improved on it. Dont get be wrong, I love LOTR and the inhabitants of Middle Earth, but it's not my favourite book. But Peter Jackson made a fantastic film which knocked off No. 1 from my list.. Aladdin. Big Smile Smilie Do we need any more validation?

For me, the movie of LOTR is a better movie than the book LOTR is as a book. does that make sense?

I totally agree, LOTR bumped my favorite movie from it's #1 spot. (and I never liked the trillogy books, hobbit was great, but LOTR never was even in my top ten)
Yeah, I agree with both of you, Rosie and Swampfaye. The movie isn't really a "good parts version," but it is a "long, interesting but dramatically crippling discursions cut out" version. Don't get me wrong, the book has depth. Miles of it. But it's slow. Dangerously slow in parts.

One of my classes was talking about this the other day (instead of talking about Beowulf. what a bad teacher! oh, wait, that's me...), and one student said that she thought Tolkien was a great thinker but not really a great writer. And I agree, mostly. He's such an influential postAuthorID, "father of modern fantasy" and all that, but LOTR is pretty uneven. There are great ideas and some wonderful scenes, but there are also some REALLY BORING parts (and not just in the prologues), some barely-there characters and some of the worst dialogue I've ever read.

I always liked the idea of the trilogy better than the works, I think. So, yeah, LOTR was never a desert island book for me either. The movie, though... I don't have class tomorrow, so I'm ditching the research and seeing it for the fourth time!
I've seen the movie three times already and it's just as good..

Jehanne, did you say you taught Old English and Old Norse texts? then perhaps you could help me.. i'm trying to gather some research about the background of LOTR and its symbolism and linguistic aspects... and it's driving me nuts![Edited on 10/1/2002 by Rosie]
I went to see it with friends, and although I'm glad I read the book first, I thought the film was excellent. It captured some of the scenes perfectly, but some of the scenes were dragged out and not as active as they could have been, still, with such a great starting point (the book) to live up to, I think the directors did well, and I hope the next one is just as good.[Edited on 10/1/2002 by Lanya]
Won't sell many wozznames either. But thenTolkien was a tweed wearing, middle-aged professor, who probably believed in the Edwardian mores of his youth, having never been told of the true lifestyle of those old lechers. Big Smile Smilie
Hello Jehanne and lanya. You've all got really good points. Right now, I'm thinking that Tolkien is a bit long-winded and dull, but the Movie was a really fun Movie that you don't have to think about too hard. Which is just what you want at this time of year Smile Smilie
Rosie- (sorry that this is off-topic)

I actually teach medieval history- this term it's "The World of the Anglo-Saxons" and "The Age of Invasion" (I throw the Vikings in there, a bit odd chronologically, but hey, I wanna teach them). So I inflict these texts on my students to show them how to read and use primary sources. I use translations but I'll help any student so inclined to use the original.

Somewhere in my wreck of an office I have a nice bibliography of texts that talk about Tolkien's influences and my own notes on "that bit looks like it came from here." It's under something though (many somethings) and it will take me a bit to find it. Offhand, I know that T.A. Shippey's work is readable and easy to get. Verlyn Flieger at UMaryland and E. L. Risden have written on this too. And don't forget the big Arthurian scholars- Frodo is a mini Grail knight, with his failure at the brink and his wounds that will not heal.
Thank you so much!
will now have to go to the library and look these up.
know any good websites that might have stuff?
I try to avoid tv if I can. But as to whether a person can or cannot eat popcorn at a certain movies...I do it all the time. Sometimes on purpose, just to enjoy the looks on the faces of some of the more pretentious in the audience. Yes, I've seen some from Plastic's list. And yours.

I guess some people feel strongly about movies. I don't - I lump it all together since it's just a form of entertainment, and doesn't change my life one way or another. But I guess I would feel as strongly if you said a sewage pipe is the same as a gas pipeline, or if all engineers were the same. Smile Smilie *That* would get me on my high-horse.

But back to the topic. I think that replacing Glorfindel with Arwen doesn't do anything for the plot. It just made it a tad boring...waste of a good 5 minutes I think.
I don't like movie popgorn. Those cunning b******s. First they sell you popcorn and get you all thirsty, so you have to go out and buy them drinks, which makes you go to the bathroom in the middle of the movie, so you have to go and watch it again to fill in the missing bits! Captalist Pigs.. *grumble*

Ondaatje was so annoying! I still haven't finished English Patient and In the Skin of a Lion was ok.. i guess.

I'm not a big movie fan so those names don't really mean much to me. But i do like foreign films, especially the french ones. We get World Movies at home so i check'em out whenever. Jean de Florette was excellent and so was ..i think Le Gloire de Mon Pere.. or something similar.. or was it le chateau de ma mere??? argh..them french names.

anyway, getting back to the topic, Lord of the Rings rocks!! ooohhhh-hoooo~
*still high on Bacardi Breezers*
will definitely become a classic of the 'pop' movie culture. like Star Wars.
But will we put on costumes and go to midnight showings like we do with 'The Rocky Horror Show'? lol

Kurosawa swings. His "Seven Samurai" is another case of better in 'black and white'.
Cool Smilie
  << [1] [2] [3] [4] >>