Red Mosquito

stip wrote:
These are all people who can WRITE. Intricate plots, moral complexity, real characterization, dialogue that can make you laugh, cry, think. Tolkien built a marvelous world, and outlined a simplistic but incredibly epic story within it, and then really failed to tell it well. Reading Tolkien is like reading a history text. I think Jackson's interpretation is the far superior story

I quite liked Frodo in the LOTR books. In the films I wanted to punch him in the face on a regular basis.

There's definitely moments in film three where he overplays it for sure.

Sarah. wrote:I'm excited for the new Pratchett book. Although every time I finish one I have a little cry in case it's the last one he writes

me too. I actually have 3 of his 4 books he did with Ian Cohen and that other guy (the science of discworld series) and Long Earth and Dodger sitting unread on my shelves so I have new stuff after he packs it in.

I'm a bit worried about this new one. I wasn't a huge fan of unseen academicals (but my brother, who is more of a soccer/sports guy than I am assured me that it would be great if I was more familiar with what he was satirizing), and the last book was a let down. Vimes is maybe my favorite character, and the book felt clunky. The dialogue was a bit stilted in places--more speechmaking than dialogue. Full paragraphs instead of organic exchanges. We'll see how this one goes, since the Lipwig books are great.

I enjoyed UA. And yeah, I think you hit the nail on the head about the last one. I still enjoyed it though.

Dodger is great, very discworldian in a lot of ways.

I wish I'd liked the Long Earth books more than I did.

This thread has been completely derailed now. Sorry.

Sarah. wrote:This thread has been completely derailed now. Sorry.

Said Peter Jackson never.

Tangent complaint but the LOTR extended releases came with cool statues.
Thanks to new line.
This new company, whoever it is, warners?
Don't seem to be doing them but are doing different versions of the extended releases for different retail/online retail outlets. And that just sucks.

Totally unnecessary picture of sting in my living room. (No, it doesn't glow)

Interesting article. Stip!
http://www.theonering.net/torwp/2013/09 ... e-thingol/

dimejinky99 wrote:Totally unnecessary picture of sting in my living room. (No, it doesn't glow)

Bet it lights up when the goblins come.

Sadly. It does not.

Or maybe I don't know any goblins?


There's a whole running debate on the LOTR/Hobbit forums about why sting lights up in the movies and Glamdring does not. (Both being Elven blades, they both should)
I never found out the reason why.

I'm nervous.

There's a new trailer for this out today.

Doesn't it usually follow that the more trailers a film has, the worse it is?

i wouldnt think so.

dimejinky99 wrote:I'm nervous.

There's a new trailer for this out today.

Doesn't it usually follow that the more trailers a film has, the worse it is?

I think Enders Game has just had the one, and that has a 2.3% chance of not being a terrible movie.

New trailer is up and it looks like PJ. Has made some crazy changes
http://www.theonering.net/torwp/2013/10 ... g-is-here/

uh

what on earth

I know right?

What in absolute fuck has he done?

Well, he's clearly made The Hobbit a different movie entirely.

I remember when Lord of the Rings came out, I thought it was funny that people had waited for years for a new Star Wars and they got one....just not from George Lucas.

Now, Peter Jackson is becoming George Lucas, it seems.

Making one (small and unassuming) book into one (giant, epic) trilogy by stuffing it full of new ideas and Tolkien marginalia was always going to fail.

Respectful disagree.
For such a slim book but ripping yarn, and a whole goldmine(hehe) of backstory and other support material to draw from, handled right, these could really be truly amazing films.

And they would have been had New Line been in control. But Warners/MGM are and PJ seems to be under huge pressure to make these the biggest blockbuster films possible in the traditional sense so as to get as many people in as possible. Both these companies were about to go under and borrowed hugely to fund them with a view to the returns bringing them back into the black.

New line gave PJ almost a complete freehand. He's not getting that with these releases at all

I didn't say it couldn't be entertaining, but it was never going to be true to the book, stretched out into three. For the same reasons that the Narnia movies weren't true to the books because they were changed to become an "epic" movie. These books are not epics; they're humble campfire stories. Anyway, regardless of all that, they'd all be better movies without Peter Jackson involved and that was my main point really. He also dragged King Kong out into a pointlessly bloated movie.