Our Sponsor Sideshow Collectibles Send us News
Lord of the Rings Tolkien
Search Tolkien
Lord of The RingsTheOneRing.net - Forged By And For Fans Of JRR Tolkien
Lord of The Rings Serving Middle-Earth Since The First Age

Lord of the Rings Movie News - J.R.R. Tolkien
Do you enjoy the 100% volunteer, not for profit services of TheOneRing.net?
Consider a donation!

  Main Index   Search Posts   Who's Online   Log in
The One Ring Forums: Tolkien Topics: Movie Discussion: The Hobbit:
Now we're talking... The Hobbit DOS Fan Event - Hosted by PJ 11/4
First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All

Peterthorn of Rohan
Rivendell

Oct 26 2013, 6:21am

Post #26 of 54 (634 views)
Shortcut
Great, but no Martin Freeman? [In reply to] Can't Post

Why??:'(


tolktolk
Lorien

Oct 26 2013, 7:56am

Post #27 of 54 (622 views)
Shortcut
Hi Peterthorn [In reply to] Can't Post

If you look on the previous page, you will see that we already mentioned this - Martin Freeman is unavailable because he will be in Canada on that day starting work on the new TV series Fargo.


Peterthorn of Rohan
Rivendell

Oct 26 2013, 10:04am

Post #28 of 54 (560 views)
Shortcut
Thanks! [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm sure he will do a great job in fargo!


Avandel
Valinor

Oct 26 2013, 5:15pm

Post #29 of 54 (503 views)
Shortcut
Hate is too strong a word [In reply to] Can't Post

With respect, I question that it was fair to introduce a given storyline with a compelling set of characters, that many become involved with (and books are put out touting the big focus on dwarf culture "depicting that culture in a detail that was never seen before") - and then, based on the decision of the screen writers, those characters lose screen time - after a LONG wait to see them. In the many times I've rewatched AUJ, not once, ever, as the company gazes at distant Erebor, and as Smaug opens that amazing eye, have I thought "You know what? This film really needs lots more elves, and even better, a FEMALE elf!! And some romantic interest, too!). Don't think folks can be blamed for being tired of seeing Lego/Tauriel *shrugs* - you'd have to be a fan of them already - there's no reason at this point to have any emotional investment re the films themselves, yet E & L keep being pushed out there in PR material.

The initial fan audience will be forced to sit through minutes about a character whose reason for being part of the narrative IS open to debate (similar to complaints about book authors who start adding in characters, or suddenly devote entire chapters to secondary characters e.g. George Martin's last two GOT books). The character Tauriel IMO may legitimately be a guard captain, may have some interaction with Lego and Thranduil and capturing the dwarves and killing orcs, but past that don't see how it helps the [quest] narrative to highlight all these Tauriel backstory relationship/personality details - re Lego as well. (Some view this as enriching the story, for now I view it as having to sit through a commercial in the middle of the film, tho that may change after I see DOS).

Well, OK, no one has seen EL performance yet, fair enough. But that's the thing - Bilbo, 13 dwarves, Gandalf, Beorn, Thranduil, Bard, Smaug - their presence doesn't need explaining. Tauriel's presence does, yet instead of a balanced, quieter introduction of the character that would let the performance speak for itself, Lego and Tauriel through the summer were offered as the "face of DOS" as it were, and now again ELVES on the DOS EVENT poster. An event that caters to FANS who of course know the Hobbit is about, in fact, a hobbit, not Legolas and Tauriel. (Kind of disrespectful to the main cast, too, who put in a LOT of long hours and hot, hard work).

WB's publicity choices are not, of course, the fault of EL. But outside the "degree of elevation" the character seems to be getting, with no self-evident reason to do so, the choice of the actress IMO is also open to debate. EL apparently, unlike most, didn't read for the part, didn't have a history with LOTR, doesn't seem to spend a lot of time acting since LOST, didn't even, according to her, spend a lot of time on set. Physically to me her face looks older than Lego and Thranduil - hardly an "ageless" elf.

Hate? No, that's not true, too early for that. Think justifiably dubious and irritated that it seems an "Arwen-like" scenario is being done again. But I genuinely hope EL/Tauriel is a pleasant surprise and/or earns the respect some feel she deserves, I really do, since I have to sit there during DOS. In any case, negative posts re Tauriel/Lego wouldn't resurge (again) if WB didn't keep pulling the elf spam - every time things settle (like after the trailer - yeah! Bilbo, Thorin and Gandalf are actually IN the movie!!!!) here comes WB with its elf photo re-hash - can't even be bothered to take some new PR pictures.


Glorfindela
Valinor


Oct 26 2013, 10:33pm

Post #30 of 54 (439 views)
Shortcut
For what it's worth, Avandel [In reply to] Can't Post

I agree with everything you say.

I'm thoroughly sick of the sight of 'Tauriel' in particular. There is SO much more that could be shown that is relevant to The Hobbit story, and so many great characters that are a part of it (played by actors who can really act and who are of a far higher calibre in terms of acting ability than the actress).

The 'T' promotion is a complete turn-off, and shows that Warner Bros. have no understanding of Tolkien, and the millions of people who have read his works. From the looks of it, the people who are making decisions about the promotion of the film have no idea even what the film is about. Unimpressed


(This post was edited by Glorfindela on Oct 26 2013, 10:34pm)


Estel78
Tol Eressea

Oct 26 2013, 10:45pm

Post #31 of 54 (437 views)
Shortcut
I'm sick of Tauriel hate [In reply to] Can't Post

I have read Tolkien and i'm looking forward to Tauriel. A little feminine energy will do good. Go Tauriel!!!!

p.s.
Evangeline Lilly CAN act - at least as good as many actors that appeared in Hobbit / LOTR.


sauget.diblosio
Tol Eressea


Oct 26 2013, 11:12pm

Post #32 of 54 (423 views)
Shortcut
I'd consider myself an Evangeline Lily fan, [In reply to] Can't Post

and i loved her as Kate (Lost is one of my favorite shows of all time). But i'm taking a wait and see attitude with Tauriel. I'm sure Lily will at the very least be good in the role, but i'm afraid the character might be getting a little too big for her elven breeches. I don't mind expanded or composite or representational characters having a few lines or scenes (Gamling, Faramir's Captain, Gothmog), or even a bigger chunk of one of the movies (Lurtz). But the Tauriel thing just keeps getting bigger and bigger, and i'm just not sure how much "feminine energy" The Hobbit can take. I guess we'll find out a couple of months from now...


Avandel
Valinor

Oct 27 2013, 12:44am

Post #33 of 54 (396 views)
Shortcut
"Mashup" reshash pic cover of Italian magazine [In reply to] Can't Post

"the people who are making decisions about the promotion of the film have no idea even what the film is about."

Think that's true! and in a dark humor way I find that horribly funny and sad at the same time, executives at WB who make more money than I ever see. In the cheapness department, check out Thorin's facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/KingThorinOakenshield); someone posted the cover of an Italian movie magazine - at least Bilbo made the cover, and Thorin, and there's T & L and Bard.....of course this is a horrible Photoshop job of stuff we've already seen.
At least BILBO is front and center - so do Italians pay more attention than U.S. movie executives?


Avandel
Valinor

Oct 27 2013, 12:55am

Post #34 of 54 (387 views)
Shortcut
Have to take your word on EL [In reply to] Can't Post

Especially when you look at the resumes, training and experience of the rest of cast - particularly the ones with a background in comedy, which I understand is the hardest form of entertainment to pull off. And even Orlando Bloom comments about the formidable actors on set.


Avandel
Valinor

Oct 27 2013, 1:08am

Post #35 of 54 (387 views)
Shortcut
Very nice [In reply to] Can't Post

And I figure she can't be HORRIBLE, because what did E. Wood say about PJ? The one thing that PJ will get angry about is getting in the way of telling the story? And a truly bad performer would be getting in the way - who was that guy they let go after months of training and then (evidently very wisely) bringing Vito on as Aragorn. So as you say we will have to see, and in the meantime it'd be nice if WB would use its own more balanced character banner more often, as a poster. Plus it is still unknown of T & L are used so much in PR because they are trying to not spoil Thranduil, Beorn and Smaug and other parts of the film.


Ham_Sammy
Tol Eressea

Oct 27 2013, 2:16am

Post #36 of 54 (367 views)
Shortcut
Agree [In reply to] Can't Post

She's a very solid actress and I want to see how this plays out. I'm looking forward to it.

I still think though WB can't market it's way out of a paper bag. For what it's worth. LOL.

Thank you for your questions, now go sod off and do something useful - Martin Freeman Twitter chat 3/1/13


DwellerInDale
Rohan


Oct 27 2013, 2:29am

Post #37 of 54 (378 views)
Shortcut
Truly this makes no sense at all [In reply to] Can't Post

These recent attacks on Evangeline Lilly truly make no sense at all. First, by their own admission most of the critics did not follow LOST, had no idea what she had done between LOST and The Hobbit, or that she decided to take a year off after LOST, The Hurt Locker, and Real Steel in order to start a family. Anyone who watched LOST through the 5th episode will know immediately why Evangeline was the obvious choice for Tauriel. LOST was one of the most globally popular shows of all time, and EL was nominated for a Golden Globe Best Actress award for her portrayal of Kate. By contrast, most of the actors playing the Dwarves are relatively unknown outside their given country of residence, having mostly appeared in low-key British or New Zealand TV. That doesn't mean, of course, that they weren't good choices for their roles in The Hobbit.

Second, the most important point for the movie is whether the actor or actress will do well in their particular role. Let's assume for the sake of argument that Cate Blanchett is one of the most gifted actresses of the current generation, and that Evangeline isn't as gifted. She still can be incredible as Tauriel and can do scenes that Cate could never pull off (example below), just as Richard Armitage couldn't be convincing as Legolas. Orlando Bloom freely admits that he wasn't in the same league as Viggo (BTW "Vito" is a character in "The Godfather"), but many people believe that his Legolas is his best work ever, and that he is very convincing as an elf. Similar comments could be made re Liv Tyler's Arwen.

I think that saying "I hope EL is a pleasant surprise" while at the same time likening her part to "commercials in the middle of the film", talking about "being forced to sit through", and using sarcastic terms like "elf spam" is contradictory and a self-fulfilling prophecy. Why not simply wait for the film and keep an open mind?



Don't mess with my favorite female elf.




dormouse
Half-elven


Oct 27 2013, 9:12am

Post #38 of 54 (337 views)
Shortcut
Tell me something... [In reply to] Can't Post

Why does the salary of executives at Warner Brothers bear any relevance to this at all?

I get that you don't like the idea of Tauriel on principle and the choice - whoever made the choice - to promote the elves when promoting this film has been off-putting for you. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me to reject something out of hand before you've seen it, but that's up to you. You were putting your case very clearly until this post, and then I thought - what?

Now, I don't know what executives at Warner Brothers are paid. I don't care, to be honest - it's nothing to do with me. I presume they earn it, whatever it is, and if they don't, then that's Warner Brothers' problem, not mine. I don't know who is making the decisions about promoting the films, or whether they've read Tolkien (or, perhaps more pertinently in this case, whether they've dicussed the film with Peter Jackson or someone close to him). I'm not sure how you do. But when you toss that into the conversation, I can't help but wonder how far your attitude to the film is coloured by a general dislike of Warner Brothers. Which seems to me to be doing an injustice to Peter Jackson and his film.

Besides which, it isn't very logical. Just because someone may have a high salary doesn't mean they can't read a book, or understand a film when they see it......

[BTW - in case you're wondering, I'm not a)employed by WB or b) a highly paid executive. Or a highly paid anything, for that matter.... I just like the grounds on which the discussion is based to be made clear.]


Arannir
Valinor


Oct 27 2013, 4:10pm

Post #39 of 54 (272 views)
Shortcut
Logic [In reply to] Can't Post

I fully agree with your post and am also a bit surprised how some see the T and L promotion as a sign that the marketing guys have no clues what they are doing, when I see hundreds of Twitter and Facebook posts with surprise and excitment that especially Legolas will be in the movie, or people in the cinema during trailers going "omg it is Legolas!".

I understand that some of this is not exactly awesome for people who dislike their inclusion.

But from a marketing standpoint it seems to work very well imho especially in separating it from part one and emphasizing the new things to come.



“A dragon is no idle fancy. Whatever may be his origins, in fact or invention, the dragon in legend is a potent creation of men’s imagination, richer in significance than his barrow is in gold.” J.R.R. Tolkien

Words of wisdom that should be remembered - both by critics, purists and anyone in between.


Elessar
Valinor


Oct 27 2013, 4:25pm

Post #40 of 54 (257 views)
Shortcut
It's sad [In reply to] Can't Post

I really like what I've seen of Tauriel included and love her in lost. I got to meet her for a bit while helping at the Weta booth and I have to say she was a sweetheart. All the hate she's getting is a bit silly and over the top IMO. I think the people going on and on with the way they're disliking her is going to make Tolkien fans look bad. I'm talking as bad as how SW fans are viewed as a whole. That to me is embarrassing and not something to be proud of.



DwellerInDale
Rohan


Oct 27 2013, 4:26pm

Post #41 of 54 (260 views)
Shortcut
A similar Legolas anecdote [In reply to] Can't Post

About 3 months ago I taught a calculus class where I live (northern Thailand). After the lecture, which used some PowerPoint slides, I noticed I had the DOS teaser trailer on the USB drive, and I showed it to the class. None of the students was a native English speaker or could have been more than 10 years old when LOTR came out. But when Legolas came on the screen, all of the girls in the class went nuts.

Marketing guys have no clue? C'mon, folks, wake up and smell the coffee.

Don't mess with my favorite female elf.




Glorfindela
Valinor


Oct 27 2013, 6:40pm

Post #42 of 54 (217 views)
Shortcut
Well, yes. [In reply to] Can't Post

It did occur to me that this was an effort to make The Hobbit films more appealing for viewers in South-east Asia. Legolas as he was in LotR was very popular in Japan, Thailand and other South-east Asian countries. AUJ did not do too well there, and no doubt Warner Bros. are hoping to increase sales of the film in South-east Asia due to his inclusion (and his massive promotion). I hope their campaign does not back-fire on the film.


In Reply To
About 3 months ago I taught a calculus class where I live (northern Thailand). After the lecture, which used some PowerPoint slides, I noticed I had the DOS teaser trailer on the USB drive, and I showed it to the class. None of the students was a native English speaker or could have been more than 10 years old when LOTR came out. But when Legolas came on the screen, all of the girls in the class went nuts.



(This post was edited by Glorfindela on Oct 27 2013, 6:41pm)


Avandel
Valinor

Oct 27 2013, 9:41pm

Post #43 of 54 (174 views)
Shortcut
logical to me, all things considered [In reply to] Can't Post

Er, as one of those LOST-less critics I'd counter that it's your point #2, along with things that EL has said herself in interviews, that I am most uneasy about (but actually agree with your point #2), depending on what the dramatic demands of Tauriel actually are. A varied background in local theater, TV, comedy clubs, drama school, D, C, B films, even "junky" entertainment - all of that to my mind provides useful tools and experience in voice, delivery, accents, conveying emotion, use of the body and hands, embracing a character, BECOMING the character. For instance, can't say I'd ever heard of Ken Stott before. But I marvel at his portrayal of Balin - IMO every look, gesture, and word is perfect, and seems effortless - he IS Balin. That's not to say someone without all that training and experience can't do a fine job in a given part - all the music stars who have effectively crossed over into film - but over the long run think the lack of experience/training might be an issue.. (BTW, thanks for pointing out the Vito/Viggo thing - my bad - Godfather LOL.....)

Tom Wlaschiha as Game of Thrones' Jaqen H'ghar (as an example) made a huge impact with just a few appearances; everyone wants him back. So if I have to "lose dwarf/Bilbo/Gandalf screen time" to experiencing Tauriel's back story (and Legolas doings) I want T & L to be THAT amazing in their performances. Physically for sure, IMO EL was not at all an obvious choice to replace Saoirse Ronan whose appearance practically screams perfect-for-the-part. Especially if Lego and/or Kili are supposed to have an interest in that to me EL looks older than either of them, and the "softer look" she is trying to give Legolas at the river bank in trailer one isn't working, any more than Lego trying to look grim and clench his jaw.. IMO changing the actress to that degree, I would have reworked her part into something older and tougher and not the more stereotypical "rebellious warrior young princess everyone loves". Which to me would have been more interesting, as well (that's also a point, too, no matter what actress, what are they supposed to do if boxed into a given type part.....)

Well, yes I do have a contradictory and negative attitude - that's hoping for the best, but I don't see how I could have any other at the moment - not from the perspective of coming to care about a given set of characters and moving along their stories (and believing PJ), but having to grind to a halt and "deal with" a character so far that to me is not an intriguing or novel addition. That's one issue. A second is that EL herself in interviews has not appealed to me e.g. some of her comments I find questionable (being polite here). A third is what seems to have been an almost free-wheeling process on the part of Boyens e.g. the "feminine energy" "she's our red-headed girl" comments - meh. And the fourth was the onslaught of elf-centered publicity which DOES feel at T & L are being forced on me. Think the handling of presenting Tauriel by WB and even Boyens has been poorly done for whatever reason, indifferently alienating at least some "AUJ character-invested" fans like myself who were guaranteed to go to DOS, no matter what. (Also it did OB and EL no service, either, attracting some fans but alienating others). So think I am keeping as open a mind as I can, with what information has been made available a this time.

Don't think my negativity will keep me from appreciating someone really good - Tom Cruise, Matt Damon have both turned my mind around; Chris Hemsworth seems to be coming along. And I DO hope that is the case w. Tauriel. BTW may not agree with you on all points (yet) but thought your post was really well-written with good thought.


Avandel
Valinor

Oct 27 2013, 11:33pm

Post #44 of 54 (154 views)
Shortcut
movies and making money...... [In reply to] Can't Post

OK, fair enough - my reference to the salary of folks at Warner Brothers was a snarky comment based on my wanting the world to be a better place, if you will - LOL. Specifically, and I suppose I shouldn't have been shocked, but I was - thinking of an article (might have been Variety but it wasn't just some blogger sounding off) weeks back about the choice of Ben Affleck as Batman and why that was "smart choice for Warner Brothers" (and in the interests of full disclosure, at the time rumored RA was in the running for the part as well as 10 or so other actors - rumored).

What shocked me was that the article detailed that the choice of Affleck was a great BUSINESS deal for various reasons - can't remember them all but basically Affleck wasn't being chosen for his acting skills alone, but cultivated in a business sense for a future payoff on several projects re directing and/or owning the rights. E.g., he wasn't chosen because he was the best actor for Batman (not saying RA was either or that's a good part for him). Just think for a major film you'd want the best person for the part, not the one holding some copyrights you want a part of - to me that should never have been a consideration. (I also remember the shock waves that rippled through Hollywood when Disney's Dick Cook - an industry icon and beloved - was fired, and even Steven Spielberg and Johnny Depp made rather rare public comments expressing distress. Again, had to do with money.) I was surprised WB execs would even be involved in choosing a cast member, thought the director did that......

Anyway the Affleck choice backlash is pretty well known - but the point being I love movies and books. It's a business, and those same movies and books wouldn't get made without funds. But I'd like to think that those same business people involved with the films have SOME sense of "art" if you will, that there's some awareness that films and books become part of culture, start trends, become a legacy. And even the posters for movies become a collectible art form. So in a perfect world, I'd like the WB folks to pay attention, and to care, a little bit, about what they are going to make millions on re DOS. Of course business executives read, and I assume they at least saw AUJ. The summer-long DOS "elf promotion" has baffled many - leads to the question of why? Kind of misleading, really, unless DOS is primarily about elves. But someone with "signature authority" is approving the art, paying the bills to get it printed - and to my mind, this is a decision signed off by an executive (high salary) who've been presented with an ad campaign and approve of it. And DOS is not (I assume) a story about Legolas and Tauriel with Thranduil looking on occasionally. You make a good point tho which I had not thought of - whether PJ himself is making helping make these decisions - well, if that were the case, I'd have to think some more. He does seem to love elves.

Dislike of Warner Brothers? No, not at all. If anything it seems WB, mercifully, seems to have given PJ a fair amount of latitude - WB didn't HAVE to approve three movies, and in a climate where movie studios have become gun shy and worry about stock prices, they seem to have worked well with PJ and all the ups and downs of making the Hobbit movies. But the PR - meh - OK, fair enough, perhaps someone decided elves will bring even more audience, based on data from some tracking company. Or maybe it's PJ's input as well. Even so, seems like there's been a decision not to invest in any new PR graphics work, let's just rehash, re-use, which is always cheaper. (And like a lot of people, do some graphics work and/or buy movie art and collectibles from time to time, so the PR stuff is something I'll pay a lot of attention to. Really was hoping for a gorgeous (new) DOS poster, even have the wall space picked out).


Avandel
Valinor

Oct 27 2013, 11:44pm

Post #45 of 54 (146 views)
Shortcut
True [In reply to] Can't Post

Well, that makes sense - completely forgot that U.S. movie companies are viewing the international markets as gold mines, and specifically targeting them, successfully too.


Glorfindela
Valinor


Oct 28 2013, 12:18am

Post #46 of 54 (149 views)
Shortcut
Whether they are 'successful' in this strategy [In reply to] Can't Post

With non-Asian markets – or any other international markets – remains to be seen. I've seen much criticism of it elsewhere apart from these boards.

EL is not well known in the UK, for instance. A season of Lost was shown on one of the main channels, then the programme disappeared (I think other seasons may have been shown on some paying channel). She is probably better known in the US, so perhaps that is why Warner Bros. are promoting her so much? This year's promotion of the film, with very little of the key characters from the book – Thorin, Bilbo and Gandalf, or even new characters such as Thranduil and Bard – has seemed truly bizarre to me.

I enjoyed reading your lucid posts above. You make very good points.


In Reply To
Well, that makes sense - completely forgot that U.S. movie companies are viewing the international markets as gold mines, and specifically targeting them, successfully too.



sauget.diblosio
Tol Eressea


Oct 29 2013, 2:19pm

Post #47 of 54 (75 views)
Shortcut
Lost was on Sky 1 over there, i believe. [In reply to] Can't Post

And i was under the impression that it was quite popular over there. A podcast that i used to listen to (and then watch, when it went from audio only to video) about the show was English, and one of the guys on it was the editor of The Official Lost Magazine, which was published over there as well (he also went on to co-write The Lost Encyclopedia). Plus, Evangeline Lily dated Dominic Monaghan for a few years at the time, so i imagine that only added to England's awareness of her.


Glorfindela
Valinor


Oct 29 2013, 3:23pm

Post #48 of 54 (67 views)
Shortcut
Don't know anything about this, I'm afraid. [In reply to] Can't Post

It passed me by completely. Lost didn't even come close to the popularity of, say, Buffy in Britain – now that series is very well known, even years after it finished.

Dominic Moinaghan is not particularly popular or well known in Britain – although he recently appeared in a truly awful 'wildlife documentary' that was markedly inferior to the many excellent such documentaries shown on British TV.


DjU
Lorien

Oct 29 2013, 6:19pm

Post #49 of 54 (59 views)
Shortcut
Lost WAS big [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
It passed me by completely. Lost didn't even come close to the popularity of, say, Buffy in Britain – now that series is very well known, even years after it finished.


...really! No offence meant, but I think your perception of the *general* popularity of those two shows is slightly off there!

Yes you may have not watched Lost, but it WAS big in the UK especially for the first two years before SKY brought the rights. It remained big after, just part of the impact was gone now it was locked behind the SKY gates.

Buffy, yes it was popular, and still remains popular but it is more or less the definition of a "Cult" show


Arannir
Valinor


Oct 29 2013, 6:28pm

Post #50 of 54 (58 views)
Shortcut
I very much doubt LOST was not a huge thing back in 2005 and 2006 unless I only met totally unusual UK citizens ;) [In reply to] Can't Post

However, the change of ownership of the license certainly hurt the ratings... after a quick google I got the impression that DVD sales were also high.


From Lostpedia.



Quote
United Kingdom

Lost premiered in the United Kingdom on August 10th, 2005 on terrestrial broadcaster Channel 4. Despite strong ratings for the series, satellite broadcaster Sky1 won a bidding war for the rights to broadcast Lost beginning with the season 3 premiere, "A Tale of Two Cities". This resulted in a significant decrease in ratings due to Sky1 being a digital, subscription channel.

Season 1 - Channel 4

Premiere: Around 6.75 Million - average of the two episodes shown
Finale: Around 5.345 Million - average of the two final episodes shown

Season 2 - Channel 4

Premiere: Around 4.51 Million - average of the two episodes shown
Finale: Around 3.365 Million - average of the two final episodes shown

Season 3 - Sky1

Premiere: Around 1.5 million viewers (approx. 1,516,9000) -average of the two episodes shown.
After hiatus premiere: Around 1.5 million (approx. 1,550,000)
Finale: Around 1.2 million (approx. 1,214,000)

Note: In between the the after hiatus premiere and the finale, Virgin Media cut Sky One from its service, resulting in the further loss of viewers.




“A dragon is no idle fancy. Whatever may be his origins, in fact or invention, the dragon in legend is a potent creation of men’s imagination, richer in significance than his barrow is in gold.” J.R.R. Tolkien

Words of wisdom that should be remembered - both by critics, purists and anyone in between.

(This post was edited by Arannir on Oct 29 2013, 6:29pm)

First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All
 
 

Search for (options) Powered by Gossamer Forum v.1.2.3

home | advertising | contact us | back to top | search news | join list | Content Rating

This site is maintained and updated by fans of The Lord of the Rings, and is in no way affiliated with Tolkien Enterprises or the Tolkien Estate. We in no way claim the artwork displayed to be our own. Copyrights and trademarks for the books, films, articles, and other promotional materials are held by their respective owners and their use is allowed under the fair use clause of the Copyright Law. Design and original photography however are copyright © 1999-2012 TheOneRing.net. Binary hosting provided by Nexcess.net

Do not follow this link, or your host will be blocked from this site. This is a spider trap.