Lord of the Rings: The real reason...

Posted by simonsteele 
Lord of the Rings: The real reason...
Date: January 19, 2003 03:19PM
Posted by: simonsteele
...the hobbits' encounter with "Tom Bombadil" was not filmed.

Copy the following passage from TB:

Old Tom Bombadil is a merry fellow;
Bright blue his jacket is, and his boots are yellow.
Green were his girdle and his breeches all of leather;
He wore in his tall hat a swan-wing feather.
He lived up under Hill, where the Withywindle
ran from a grassy well down into the dingle.

Paste into Babelfish translator, select English-to-French.

[babelfish.altavista.com]

Now change the result back to English.



Re: Lord of the Rings: The real reason...
Date: January 19, 2003 03:36PM
Posted by: matthewp
lol!! thats mad, who the hell found that out anyway :)



Re: Lord of the Rings: The real reason...
Date: January 19, 2003 04:12PM
Posted by: Vader
I always thought this Bombadil was suspicious ...








REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS
Re: Lord of the Rings: The real reason...
Date: January 19, 2003 04:49PM
Posted by: Zcott
Re: Lord of the Rings: The real reason...
Date: January 19, 2003 05:02PM
Posted by: Vader
Mind, you I just came back from the cinema where I saw Two Towers for the second time. I have already posted my opinion about it - a great movie, a feast for the eyes, unfortunately with a lot of annoying mistakes and alterations I know JRRT would have NEVER tolerated (although all in all he would have been fascinated by the movies).

You know what really annoys me the more often I see the film(s)? This guy who tries to play Frodo. Okay, he is way too young, I said that before. Frodo is already 50 years old in the novel and even if hobbits generally live longer and even if he was under the influence of the ring, he should look a bit older. But can somebody please go out and tell Mr. Wood that he is incapable of any form of acting whatsoever? The only thing he can do is look as if he suffered from constipation. Rolling his eyes back every ten minutes as if he was about to have an orgasm does not make an actor out of him. Sam is brilliant, Gandalf - well he's a Shakespeare actor, that says it all; the Aragorn guy is devoted to his role to an extent where it can almost be considered as pure obsession. Mr. Wood? Nothing. Looking pitiful and close to tears might have an effect on 12 year old teeny girls who apparently think Elijah is sooooooo cuuuuute, but sorry, it doesn






REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS
Re: Lord of the Rings: The real reason...
Date: January 20, 2003 02:11AM
Posted by: Eagle
I don't want to make an issue out of this, Vader, but I thought Elijah Wood's acting in the first two films was pretty good...not worthy of an Oscar, but not all that bad, nonetheless.

Do you seriously think that 12 year old teeny girls would sit through a 3 hour "Dungeons & Dragons - type" movie just to gape open-mouthed at Mr Wood? C'mon, they got better things to do (yeah, like I'd know!)...probably perving at Justin Timberlake or something...*shudder*

I haven't read your first "definitive" review of the film, so I don't know what your opinion was of the character of "Gollum", surely the best piece of computer-generated wizardry I have ever seen. I thought Yoda was damn good in "Attack of the Clones", but Gollum @#$%& all over Yoda.

BTW, where does it say in "Fellowship of the Ring" that Frodo is 50 years old, and how do you know that Frodo just hasn't aged gracefully? He coulda had a Hobbit facelife or something...... (trails off towards incomprehensibility)



The only thing that helps me maintain my slender grip on reality is the friendship I share with my collection of singing potatoes.
Re: Lord of the Rings: The real reason...
Date: January 20, 2003 03:08AM
Posted by: matthewp
he is definately 50 years old before he sets out towards Bree in the book.
The main difference I didn't like in the Two Towers was when Frodo and Sam were forced to go back to Gondor and that Farimir was a bit of an idiot (for want of a better expression :-) in the film wheras in the book he was the total opposite.
still bloody good films though



Re: Lord of the Rings: The real reason...
Date: January 20, 2003 04:17AM
Posted by: genesis
This sounds like a good film for the morbits to start their careers.



Visit my website [www.mrears.com]
Re: Lord of the Rings: The real reason...
Date: January 20, 2003 04:42AM
Posted by: Vader
You are right matthew. Faramir is not like in the novel. A lot of things have been (unnecessarily) changed

- why does Aragorn fall of the cliff? I guess just to have more Liv Tyler pics in it.
- why do Wargs look like hyena if they should look like wolves?
- why does Gandalf talk about "the soul of your son" to Theoden (at least he does in the German synchro). Gandalf would never talk about souls going somewhere. This does contradict the whole concept of human mortality as presented in The Silmarillion. Not to speak of the questionable use of the term "soul" itself.
- what are the elves doing in Helm's Deep? In my book there are no elves from Rivendell there. Why? Because there are not enough elves left there to build an army. In my book the army of Isengard gets destroyed by the Huorns.
- what kind of angel (or winged creature??) does Aragorn wear around his neck? I don't remember anything like this (can't check, I am at work). I remember something like a gem, but no silver angel.
- I may talk bullshit now, but I think Osgilath already was lost when they went by. Faramir would have taken them straight to Minas Tirith where his father Denethor II is stewart. Why taking them to Osgilath if it's under attack?

To make myself clear, this is possibly the best screen adoption of a novel ever.

Gandalf, Gollum, Sam, Merry, Pippin, Saruman (although Lee overdoes it a bit), Aragorn, Gimli, Legolas - who can say his imagination of the characters was better
?








REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS
Re: Lord of the Rings: The real reason...
Date: January 20, 2003 04:53AM
Posted by: simonsteele
and yet again one of my jokey topics turns into a serious discussion



Re: Lord of the Rings: The real reason...
Date: January 20, 2003 04:57AM
Posted by: genesis
lol Sim how come when everyone posts something serious, it turns jokey, and when you post something funny it becomes serious? :P



Visit my website [www.mrears.com]
Re: Lord of the Rings: The real reason...
Date: January 20, 2003 05:47AM
Posted by: Glyn
Its not fair is it sasjag. Back to the topic though, that has gotta be one of the best things ever. Quite how it gets to that I dont know, but whoever programmed it needs another job :)



Re: Lord of the Rings: The real reason...
Date: January 20, 2003 07:08AM
Posted by: Vader
Okay, back to the jokes!

Q: How do you get a hobbit into the fridge?
A: Open the fridge, push the hobbit, close the door

Q: How do you get orcs into the fridge?
A: Open the fridge, take out the hobbit, put in the orcs, close the door.

Q: How can you pass Mordor without being spotted by the orcs?
A: Quite easily, they are all in the fridge.

Q: What did Sauron say when he met Isildur?
A: Pull my finger.

Q: What did Saruman write on the sign at his gates when he saw Treebeard and his kin coming?
A: No ENT TREE

Q: What did Frodo do to Sauron?
A: He gave him one in the eye.

Q: Why can't Saruman keep his dairy produce fresh?
A: Because his fridge is full of orcs.

- This orc has no nose
- How does it smell?
- Awful!


the gp3 community: stop it or we will kill a pig.
Vader: Good, then we will have the Lard of the Pink.








REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS
Re: Lord of the Rings: The real reason...
Date: January 20, 2003 08:03AM
Posted by: Vader









REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS
Re: Lord of the Rings: The real reason...
Date: January 20, 2003 10:57AM
Posted by: _Alex_
Actually I think Elijah Wood is a bloody good actor. It wouldn't have done much good to cast a 50-year old in the role of Frodo, and I think Wood is doing a fantastic job. And you can hardly expect Peter Jackson to completely replicate the book in his motion picture. He said from the outset that he doesn't want to disappoint, but some things are going to have to go, and making a film is different from writing a novel. And I think the conversion has worked perfectly.

what are the elves doing in Helm's Deep? In my book there are no elves from Rivendell there

They are Lothlorien elves, led by Haldir.




HISTORIC BTCC VIDEOS
Re: Lord of the Rings: The real reason...
Date: January 20, 2003 01:36PM
Posted by: Vader
There are two HAldirs in the books of JRRT.

One is an elf who died in the First Age, 473. He was Lord of the Haladin, the Second House of Adan. Haldir, son of Halmir, husband of Glóredhel, father of Handir and foster-father of Húrin und Huor. Haldir led the Haladin force of the Union of Maedhros, and was slain with most of his men guarding the retreat of Fingon across Anfauglith during the Nirnaeth Arnoediad.

The Haldir is an elf, too. He lived during the War of the Rings. He was in fact an elf from Lórien, one of the three brothers who intercepted the Company of the Ring and escorted its members to Caras Galadon.

The first one died a few thousand years (and two aeons) too early, the second one does not die at all. There is simply no need to bring in elves at the battle of Helm's Deep. It does not serve any purpose and is absolute unnecessary.








REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS
Re: Lord of the Rings: The real reason...
Date: January 20, 2003 04:14PM
Posted by: ThePredictor
why does Gandalf talk about "the soul of your son" to Theoden (at least he does in the German synchro). Gandalf would never talk about souls going somewhere. This does contradict the whole concept of human mortality as presented in The Silmarillion. Not to speak of the questionable use of the term "soul" itself.

Well this is not entirely true. While I agree that the term soul is questionable, Gandalf speech can fit with the Silmarillion.
Its pretty clear in the book that death ("the gift of the mortal men";) doesn't mean total annihilation of the being. Men after death go clearly somewhere else - even if the "place" is never revealed.
Hence the use of the term soul because it is the simplest and quicker way to make understandeable a concept that otherwise needed much more esplications not easily included in the flow of a movie.
As for Liv Tyler/Arwen her importance in the whole plot becomes more clear if you carefully read the appendix at the trlogy.

P.S. Gandalf was an amateur, I am the pro.



Post Edited (01-21-03 00:15)

Be ready!
Re: Lord of the Rings: The real reason...
Date: January 20, 2003 04:21PM
Posted by: MysticalCrayon
roflmao at the translation ... sooo funny

Re: Lord of the Rings: The real reason...
Date: January 20, 2003 05:43PM
Posted by: Vader
If there is someone who read the works of JRRT carefully, it is probably me. I wrote the thesis for state's exam at Uni about it.

I object against the term "soul" because it either implies some sort of a Christian concept or an ancient classical concept which both do not really apply to the world Tolkine created. I say this, even though I am convinced that his work is truly a Chrsitian,not to say a Catholic work, as he claims himself in his letters. Whatever it is that makes men alive - probably a spark of the Flame Impersihable - is neither related to psychë or anima nor to daimonion. We must not forget that Tolkien would have never brought anything into the world that has no place in it. Even if the motivation to write the book (and all of his work) was a religious or rather theological/cosmological desire, the world does not immanetly carry these thoughts in it. Since there is no clue given about the religion and myths of the Rohirrim, we can only guess about their rituals and beliefs. From what is written in the Silmarillion, it would have been better to avoid "His soul is in the halls of your forefathers" by simply saying "He is in the halls ..." This would leave enough room for cosmological speculations without giving "false" or at least questionable clues. I think JRRT would hav e said something similar.

I know that Arwen play an important part and I like the "preview" on what will happen in the appendices. I simply don't like unnecessary additions. Why adding appocryphs if the canon itself thrilling enough? I amy sound like a dogmatic and I do not object against the freedom of the artist in general - I just see no other than Mr. Tyler's contract to add the scene where Aragorn falls of the cliff and they meet in his dreams. This is almost absurd. Sorry, but it is.

Your mission, should you decide to accept it, is to worship Vader. In the event of your capture, we will deny all knowledge of your identity and mission and refute any connections that you may make to us.This message will destroy itself after 5 seconds.








REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS
Re: Lord of the Rings: The real reason...
Date: January 21, 2003 02:34AM
Posted by: ThePredictor
Vader I agree but remember this is a movie and the average spectator probably don't even knows about Silmarillion or The Hobbit or the tales series so some degree of simplification must be accepted. Probably many who watched the movies are still asking themselves who actually made the ring/rings so....

Vader your mission, like it or not, is to worship mozzarella. You had already been warned so you'd better behave.

PS: I've just sent you a ring throu Bundenpost, please wear it and let me know if you like.



Be ready!
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

Maintainer: mortal, stephan | Design: stephan, Lo2k | Moderatoren: mortal, TomMK, Noog, stephan | Downloads: Lo2k | Supported by: Atlassian Experts Berlin | Forum Rules | Policy