|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Darkstone
Immortal
Sep 8 2014, 9:19pm
Post #76 of 101
(667 views)
Shortcut
|
...taking the intent of a poster's comment and completely misrepresenting it in a statement that you can then label "complete nonsense" is straw manning then knock yourself out. Oh, wait. You are.
****************************************** For a while the three companions remained silent, gazing after him. Then Aragorn spoke. "They will look for him from the White Tower," he said, "but he will not return from mountain or from sea." Then slowly he began to sing: "Boromir is dead Poor Boromir is dead All gather round his canoe now and cry He had a heart of gold And he wasn't very old Oh why did such a feller have to die?" Then Legolas sang: "Boromir is dead Poor Boromir is dead He's lookin' oh so purty and so nice He looks like he's asleep It's a shame that he won't keep But the sun’s out and we're runnin' out a' ice." Then Aragorn sang again: "Boromir is dead Poor Boromir is dead From Minas Tirith comes a weepin' sound The East Wind for a spell Will now blow a different smell Til Boromir is underneath the ground." So they ended. Then they turned their boat and drove it with all the speed they could against the stream back to Parth Galen. -Rodgers and Hammerstein, The Lord of the Rings
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Sep 8 2014, 9:29pm
Post #77 of 101
(642 views)
Shortcut
|
As Jackson was also wrong about the
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Appendices being published by Christopher Tolkien and the idea that rather than a re-write Tolkien May have been working on a companion book to TH. A bibliographical thesis it ain't.
|
|
|
Arannir
Valinor
Sep 8 2014, 9:33pm
Post #78 of 101
(631 views)
Shortcut
|
Though I think they indeed could have prevented such discussions by being clearer about the appendicies material, I cannot see the grounds for a straight out lie or deliberate misleading. Why would they, they often talked about their changes to the lore openely and didn't try to make it look to the general audience that something was directly from Tolkien when it wasn't. It really does seem like an over-simplification to me. But I totally see how this weighs more for someone who generally doesn't believe the books are in good hands with PJ and Co.
"I am afraid it is only too likely to be true what you say about the critics and the public. I am dreading the publication for it will be impossible not to mind what is said. I have exposed my heart to be shot at." J.R.R. Tolkien We all have our hearts and minds one way or another invested in these books and movies. So we all mind and should show the necessary respect.
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Sep 8 2014, 9:35pm
Post #79 of 101
(642 views)
Shortcut
|
What an odd view, to my way of thinking.
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
To price an adaptation by weight. I've paid for 125 pages worth, and I didn't get my money's worth.
|
|
|
pettytyrant101
Lorien
Sep 8 2014, 10:13pm
Post #80 of 101
(627 views)
Shortcut
|
Thats not exactly what I meant
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
although I will assume you are not straw manning me Simply that there was never any need to even mention the length of the appendices, especially when so little of those pages are directly relevant to the story they are telling. The only reason I can see for them to have trotted that line out in various interviews was to create a false impression about the amount of Tolkien material they had to use to justify the split into three, rather than just saying they were embellishing what was there with a lot of their own invented material.
"A lot of our heroes depress me. But when they made this particular hero they didn't give him a gun, they gave him a screwdriver so he could fix things. They didn't give him a tank, or a warship, or an x-wing fighter, they gave him a call box from which you can call for help. And they didn't give him a superpower, or pointy ears or a heat ray, they gave him an extra heart. And that's an extraordinary thing. There will never come a time when we don't need a hero like the Doctor."- Steven Moffat
|
|
|
Elthir
Grey Havens
Sep 8 2014, 10:21pm
Post #81 of 101
(617 views)
Shortcut
|
It's one thing to argue extreme simplification in calling the Appendices 'Hobbit notes' -- because if not for The Hobbit we wouldn't have The Lord of the Rings nor the Appendices, and Bilbo's tale is related to the larger world of Middle-earth and so on -- but it's another to suggest that Tolkien once intended to rewrite The Hobbit with this material. Jackson is essentially saying: we are going to use material that Tolkien once wrote when he intended to rewrite The Hobbit... and we are going to use it to rewrite The Hobbit for our film. And in my opinion, in context 'Hobbit notes' here sounds just like what Jackson mischaracterizes them to be, with respect to intent to revise/rewrite the already published book [which book was revised by the author for the second and third editions].
(This post was edited by Elthir on Sep 8 2014, 10:26pm)
|
|
|
Arannir
Valinor
Sep 8 2014, 11:00pm
Post #82 of 101
(609 views)
Shortcut
|
... I still think it was an (unneccessary ) oversimplification used to meet the argument of "how can you translate this book into a trilogy" but not with the the intent to make everything look as if it came from Tolkien (they have never tried to talk around their changes at all) but simply to highlight that they did not just put in there whatever came to mind but based those additions on something that in one form or the other came from Tolkien - and if it was just the material that shows that the whole legendarium is much more present at TH timeline as the book itself might suggest. But again, this has all very much to do with how one perceives the outcome, imho. If one belongs to those who can see a lot of - what some describe as -"Tolkien spirit" in this extended and partly rewritten Hobbit, than one will easier accept a positive outlook on what they said in these interviews. If one finds these movies to be careless adaptions and treatments of the source material than I understand how these quotes would just fit in that "careless" evidence category. I would be hard on them as well if they would actually push for the impression that Tauriel, Azog alive or similar things are just part of Tolkien's ideas for an extended Hobbit. But as far as I recall they never did that and talked about it in dozens of interviews - how they invented those plotlines, why, etc (again, I am not talking about the quality of those arguments here - how one thinks about those will once again heavily influence the overall verdict).
"I am afraid it is only too likely to be true what you say about the critics and the public. I am dreading the publication for it will be impossible not to mind what is said. I have exposed my heart to be shot at." J.R.R. Tolkien We all have our hearts and minds one way or another invested in these books and movies. So we all mind and should show the necessary respect.
(This post was edited by Arannir on Sep 8 2014, 11:02pm)
|
|
|
Avandel
Half-elven
Sep 9 2014, 12:19am
Post #83 of 101
(640 views)
Shortcut
|
I can't wait to read what you say I said next! *Snigger* ENTERTAINMENT UPDATE: In a move that has entertainment pundits chuckling, but ruefully conceding that Sir Peter Jackson is just the knight on a white horse to energize the moribund movie industry, it was announced today that Peter Jackson & the New Zealand crew will once again be helming a sweeping saga of Middle Earth. Peter Jackson announced the development and production of a multi-film drama-adventure epic that will chronicle the war to protect northern Middle Earth against a corrupt and savage magician guild of the Haradrim, who have risen in rebellion under the the standard of the reborn serpent lizard Dragon Lord. When questioned about earlier statements made during the completion of The Battle of Five Armies, Peter Jackson said breezily, "Look, you all would feel the same if you were working six, seven day weeks AND after months, years of work, and at the end of it all, what did I get? HATRED. Looking back at it all, guess I shouldn't have had my nose to the grindstone so much. To me it was just some gentle tweaks of original material, but the so-called "Tolkien purists" hated me for that. Then on the other side of the coin, who knew the more "liberal fans" would form these CLIQUES and EACH and EVERY group would HATE me. Why? Because I didn't give enough! The elf fans are mad that there wasn't enough "elf face time". The wizard fans want more magic. The orc fans complain the orcs weren't big and vicious enough. The people fans complain there's not enough human pathos. The animal lovers claimed there wasn't enough "goat face time." And of course the absolute WORST are the dwarf fans - not only was there not enough dwarf FACE TIME, but you should see the hate mail I got daily over Thorin, Fili, and Kili. My pugs tore up my favorite white shirt, and the cat keeps doing his business in my coffee - not a great way to start a day, I can tell you. I've had to use travel mugs but the little *bleep* just flicks the lid off with a claw.... "Yeah, Fran and I started a few modest little film projects after BOFTA, here and there. But yah know, as exhausting as these complicated behemoth projects get, there's something to be said for being able to instantly get the best restaurant tables and not having the paper chewed apart every day." Peter Jackson explained the as-yet untitled epic films will draw from the Hobbit Appendices, as was done previously for the Hobbit films. "There's a gold mine of nuggets in that material just waiting to be brought to light and nurtured", said Sir Jackson excitedly. "And with yesterday's announcement that Richard Armitage will be playing Thorin III Stonehelm (of course with a trademark mane of truly glorious hair) who happily has two sons named Kili II and Fili II as well as a daughter named Dis, ecstatic "Heir of Durin" fans actually sent me a humongous fruit basket - yah know, one of those things that looks like a flower arrangement. Richard Taylor was SO impressed. Maybe now I can put my Facebook page back up and go out in public." But what of accusations that these new Middle Earth films are simply polluting the purity of Tolkien's original material, or milking for profit? "Bah," said Sir Jackson. "People from 'round the globe, in every language you can imagine, have spoken. It would be more selfish - dare I say greedy, hur hur - to keep something that has created so much love from the world. I can't think that the Professor wouldn't have appreciated that. Besides, everyone thought that Star Wars was inviolate and we know how that turned out." A representative of Warner Brothers concurs. "These next nine films will need new words invented just to describe their breadth and scope. Villains that will become true classics - including Benedict Cumberbatch as the serpent lizard Dragon Lord and a dragon that will dwarf (no pun intended) the largest dinosaurs of Jurassic Park. 64 fps and 4-D (tickets will cost more, but well worth it!) Special theaters that display the films as holographs, so the audience is literally IN the film. And a mind-boggling cast that includes Lee Pace as Thranduil and Peter Dinklage as the leader of a group of Southron rebels who unexpectedly ally with Thorin III - Richard Armitage, Lee Pace, and Peter Dinklage onscreen together? Might as well make space for the Oscars already. We're looking at other likely Game of Thrones cast we could steal siphon work with, and of course are in talks with Martin Freeman." An attempt to elicit a comment from lead actor Richard Armitage failed when the reporter was found sobbing in a closet, claiming that Richard Armitage had given him what was described as a "Thorin glare" and that he now felt "permanently inadequate". A second attempt failed when the female reporter sent to interview Mr. Armitage fainted and subsequently quit her position with the paper to become the secretary for the fan organization known as the "Armitage Army".
Hó , Það sé ég föður minn Hó , Það sé ég móður mína, og Hó, Það sé ég bræður mínir og systur mínar Hó , Það sé ég mitt fólk aftur í byrjun Hó, gera Þeir kalla til mín, og bjóða mér að taka minn stað meðal þeirra í sölum Valhallar Hvar hugrakkir mun lifa að eilífu
|
|
|
pettytyrant101
Lorien
Sep 9 2014, 12:27am
Post #84 of 101
(626 views)
Shortcut
|
on here to just make just a post with a smiley in it- this one- - (assuming that's finding something amusing and not acute constipation, hard to tell) so now I have to think of some response. So how about, I enjoyed that.
"A lot of our heroes depress me. But when they made this particular hero they didn't give him a gun, they gave him a screwdriver so he could fix things. They didn't give him a tank, or a warship, or an x-wing fighter, they gave him a call box from which you can call for help. And they didn't give him a superpower, or pointy ears or a heat ray, they gave him an extra heart. And that's an extraordinary thing. There will never come a time when we don't need a hero like the Doctor."- Steven Moffat
|
|
|
Elthir
Grey Havens
Sep 9 2014, 12:35pm
Post #85 of 101
(569 views)
Shortcut
|
... I still think it was an (unneccessary ) oversimplification used to meet the argument of "how can you translate this book into a trilogy" but not with the the intent to make everything look as if it came from Tolkien (they have never tried to talk around their changes at all) but simply to highlight that they did not just put in there whatever came to mind but based those additions on something that in one form or the other came from Tolkien - and if it was just the material that shows that the whole legendarium is much more present at TH timeline as the book itself might suggest. That's not really my argument however. What Jackson did was get specific, giving a false textual history to the Appendices [even if by mistake], so that anything he takes from those pages to add to The Hobbit has the air of authorial support -- not simply because it comes from Tolkien's hand and mind, but that it was once written with the intent to revise the actual story. I mean (as far as 'everything' is concerned), Jackson did give the number of pages here, at least suggesting that there is much more than there really is that surrounds Bilbo's particular tale, but I very much doubt he meant that every change he was making comes directly from the Appendices. What his statement does mean, however, is that whatever material he might take would be from Tolkien's own notes [once written] to revise The Hobbit. And let's say this wasn't lying on Jackson's part, but ignorance, as indeed he seems to defer to Stephen Colbert that his version of things might not be true... ... well, if so what was his thinking when the press came around? I'll equate the Appendices with notes for a rewrite to The Hobbit, without qualification, even though it's just something I think is true, or 'heard' is true, and if it turns out not to be the case, then... ...oops. The mistake just happened to support the filmmaker's decision in a way that is false... but... oops. And again, checking a reliable source before explaining to the press was not an option? The History of The Hobbit was published in 2007, just for example of one source.
(This post was edited by Elthir on Sep 9 2014, 12:42pm)
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Sep 9 2014, 12:54pm
Post #86 of 101
(560 views)
Shortcut
|
No, not at all - well certainly not my intention
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
That was my genuine interpretation of what you had said. I was trying to work out what you felt was the nature of the promise made by mentioning 125 pages, such that not achieving the promised outcome constitutes a lie, and you seemed to be drawing on customer/seller metaphors, as in your car sales example further up, and suggesting that the promise of your ticket price had been unfulfilled. For my own part i can't see that a filmaker saying that they are taking a 125 page text and adapting it, is in anyway the same as a car dealer saying that a vehicle has a 2l engine. And oddly i think that the legal recourse available in these situations is probably a decent guide - you wouldn't get your ticket price back for an adaptation which was less literal than you would like but you certainly could if the car turned out to be a 1l. I think again we are here beggin the question of Jackson not just saying that they were adapting material from the appendices but also that they were doing so literally. For me, i would say that is just one intepretation and not particularly one suggested by the speaker. To the question of this being the only reason, i can certainly picture others, though we can't know the intention. LOTR is very unusual in having appendices of the length and depth that it does. I can't off hand think of another novel which has this (though I'm sure there must be some). I could well picture that, for a lay audience, without a sense of scale, stating that they were including storylines from the appendices could sound like saying they were using material from the back cover! What is ultimately being discussed, i guess, is whether there is an additional hour or so's screentime to be derived and adapted from the Dol Guldur, Moria Orcs, Quest of Erebor and any other connectivity or inspiration from the appendices material. And I think we would probably all agree that there is. Whether the degree to which that adpation is literal is enjoyable is down to personal taste.
|
|
|
Elthir
Grey Havens
Sep 9 2014, 2:43pm
Post #87 of 101
(551 views)
Shortcut
|
I just watched the interview again and here Jackson does restate the idea that [from what he understands 'you should tell me actually' (to Colbert)]... the Appendices... 'were they kinda like notes that he was preparing to do a revised version of The Hobbit?' adding that... 'that was the story that I heard'. And adds: it's a question that he's been wondering for quite a few years. Well that was the story he told. And yes I suppose it's possible to imagine a scenario in which Jackson was more sure of his story earlier, then less sure by the time he asks Stephen Colbert... ... but yeesh. And no he is not 'on trial' here but on the other hand he should well know his decision to expand the story of The Hobbit is going to be questioned, and one would expect that he get his facts straight, from a reliable source, before that happens.
(This post was edited by Elthir on Sep 9 2014, 2:57pm)
|
|
|
Glorfindela
Valinor
Sep 9 2014, 5:07pm
Post #88 of 101
(531 views)
Shortcut
|
And those last to shots of Richard Armitage are great!
|
|
|
pettytyrant101
Lorien
Sep 9 2014, 6:58pm
Post #89 of 101
(515 views)
Shortcut
|
Spriggan I was jesting about the straw manning, I never thought you were. The fault is mine as I don't think I can have made myself clear enough about what I meant regarding the 125 pages. The car thing was meant only to illustrate the point that if you pay for any product and believe the sales pitch was delibretly false you have a right to feel you have been cheated and lied to. In the case of a car, quite a lot, in the case of a film an awful lot less so, obviously. And I am not expecting to sue them to get my money back either. Which is a pity as I hate a light sporran. But that doesnt change the nature of it. Its still selling a product with a falsehood. Whatever the product. Ask yourself the question, why did they keep saying in interviews variations of "we’ve adapted The Hobbit, plus taken this additional 125 pages of notes", notes PJ would then inform were Tolkien's 'expanded hobbit notes' intended for his revision of TH to make it fit LotR's? Why did PJ not just say 'we've adapted The Hobbit, plus taken additional pages of notes', then clarify that by saying the notes were from the appendices at the end of RotK and without attaching any numerical value to them at all? Why keep saying 125 pages, why mention 125 at all? And why falsely claim they were Tolkien's expanded notes for revising The Hobbit to bring it in line with LotR's? I think the answer is clear. To give the impression the reason a slim children's novel was being made into three films was that there were 125 pages worth of additional material to adapt of Tolkien's own expanded hobbit notes, and written for the very same purpose of bringing TH further into the world and tone of LotR's. If your are someone who has never the read the books but liked the first trilogy- millions of people- thats what PJ says and you dont know its completely wrong, and if you do know the books you assume that the relevant few bits to TH story in the appendices will be in the film. (Of course what you dont know is that they are just taking some names, a couple of event outlines and then stringing them altogether with their own entirely invented stories and characters that never left any pen of Tolkien's and will take up sizeable chunks of the run time). So its a line of promotion, that if you dont scrutinise it too closely, can deceive both types of fan. So you see the grievance I have with the films in this instant is not about the fidelity of adaptation, what there is of that, but about how it was pitched. The line they were using to sell it. And the dishonesty in that pitch. They must have known that it was not true. And if PJ did not know and was just repeating a line he had been fed to say that is not much less staggering. Especially as by this time he had filmed so much material he had three films worth. How could he not know where all that extra material had come from? Did he just not ask anyone? Even before going before press to talk about it? That just seems too incredible to believe too me. I'd also take a small gamble that in the Colbert interview the reason PJ did not trot out the same line without caveats was that he was at risk of Colbert correcting him and pointing out those 125 pages were not Tolkien's expanded hobbit notes for his revision at all. And maybe even that the relevant information was only a very small proportion of those 125 pages.
"A lot of our heroes depress me. But when they made this particular hero they didn't give him a gun, they gave him a screwdriver so he could fix things. They didn't give him a tank, or a warship, or an x-wing fighter, they gave him a call box from which you can call for help. And they didn't give him a superpower, or pointy ears or a heat ray, they gave him an extra heart. And that's an extraordinary thing. There will never come a time when we don't need a hero like the Doctor."- Steven Moffat
|
|
|
Avandel
Half-elven
Sep 9 2014, 10:54pm
Post #90 of 101
(505 views)
Shortcut
|
think only the mods can say what is allowed
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
They're like Norse gods, only with better computer skills, and they can tell when you try to slip bad language onto TORn written as runes.
Hó , Það sé ég föður minn Hó , Það sé ég móður mína, og Hó, Það sé ég bræður mínir og systur mínar Hó , Það sé ég mitt fólk aftur í byrjun Hó, gera Þeir kalla til mín, og bjóða mér að taka minn stað meðal þeirra í sölum Valhallar Hvar hugrakkir mun lifa að eilífu
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Sep 9 2014, 10:56pm
Post #91 of 101
(479 views)
Shortcut
|
Well this is a long post so I'll try to keep my reply a little shorter, though to be honest I think I have probably made the points here in the posts above. On the first point, I wouldn't say one was a lesser version of the other. I would say these are two entirely different things. It's rather like the difference between a watercolour of the highlands and an OS map of the highlands, to continue the Scottish theme. As to why, I would always say we can't know. However, as a potential reason I discussed above the issue of trying to convey scale to a lay audience, who would otherwise probably be unlikely to associate the term with any volume or depth of narrative. LOTR is rather an outlier against a landscape of most novels not having appendices or, for those which do, appendices consisting of perhaps a single map or a couple of family trees. I think it is the next point where we come back to the weights and measures bit - 125 pages worth of adaptation. I don't know what this would mean in practice any more than what 1000 pages worth of adaptation meant for LOTR - that we saw a minimum of X pages, or that we saw at least Y % of each page ? It doesn't, to my eye, have any sensible response to this sort of quantification. Whilst I would agree that the comment that these were the notes for the 1960s revision attempt is no more correct a historiographical comment than the idea that the appendices were published by Tolkien's son, the broader point - that the aspects of the appendices we have mentioned were indeed written to link TH and LOTR - is correct. The rest is back to the argument that if you say you are adapting X then you must mean to imply you are doing so literally. I'm afraid I simply don't think that's the case.
|
|
|
Avandel
Half-elven
Sep 9 2014, 11:17pm
Post #92 of 101
(479 views)
Shortcut
|
OT but hafta say the Crucible PR shots IMO are museum-worthy - don't know who the photographer was, but amazing work. Tho granted the subject is a work of art. And Thorin: Just hope the man loves it here in the U.S. so he spends plenty of time with us.
Hó , Það sé ég föður minn Hó , Það sé ég móður mína, og Hó, Það sé ég bræður mínir og systur mínar Hó , Það sé ég mitt fólk aftur í byrjun Hó, gera Þeir kalla til mín, og bjóða mér að taka minn stað meðal þeirra í sölum Valhallar Hvar hugrakkir mun lifa að eilífu
|
|
|
Glorfindela
Valinor
Sep 9 2014, 11:25pm
Post #93 of 101
(481 views)
Shortcut
|
I've seen some Crucible shots of Richard Armitage prominently displayed in some places in London – possibly even a couple of those you've posted. He is such an intense-looking (and tall!) man…
|
|
|
Altaira
Superuser
Sep 10 2014, 4:06am
Post #94 of 101
(477 views)
Shortcut
|
You pretty much nailed it, Avandel, if I do say so myself. Brilliant parody too! You had me grinning from ear to ear.
Koru: Maori symbol representing a fern frond as it opens. The koru reaches towards the light, striving for perfection, encouraging new, positive beginnings.
"Life can't be all work and no TORn" -- jflower "I take a moment to fervently hope that the camaradarie and just plain old fun I found at TORn will never end" -- LOTR_nutcase
|
|
|
dernwyn
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Sep 10 2014, 10:25am
Post #95 of 101
(467 views)
Shortcut
|
find that pic of us at one of our meetings? You even show Hengist wearing his sword! Avandel, your own computer abilites are amazing!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "I desired dragons with a profound desire"
|
|
|
Avandel
Half-elven
Sep 10 2014, 3:17pm
Post #96 of 101
(452 views)
Shortcut
|
Don't know what RA has plans for next - except am sure there will be a lot of travel and PR and LOL answering the same questions from various interviewers re BOFTA. To me, RA has great comedic skills and would love to see him do some comedy - even his dry remarks with his "sons" in Into the Storm had me laughing and loved him in Vicar of Dibley. LOL guess this original POST tho was re the lead character in BOFA. Well, if you have several intersecting stories going on then you are going to have, film-wise, a whole bunch of main characters. It's hardly RA's fault that he's delivered a performance so charismatic that even little kids worry about him. That's not saying, either, that other actors aren't doing a stupendous job. Digital art, from Ayuri on Deviant Art I'd say just be happy about it, because there's a fair number of movies with stellar casts that are mystifying in that in spite of amazing casts, the film itself just falls flat.
Hó , Það sé ég föður minn Hó , Það sé ég móður mína, og Hó, Það sé ég bræður mínir og systur mínar Hó , Það sé ég mitt fólk aftur í byrjun Hó, gera Þeir kalla til mín, og bjóða mér að taka minn stað meðal þeirra í sölum Valhallar Hvar hugrakkir mun lifa að eilífu
|
|
|
Avandel
Half-elven
Sep 10 2014, 3:32pm
Post #97 of 101
(451 views)
Shortcut
|
Dernwyn - I just want to know at SDCC
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
LOL did TORn rally to the defense of poor Smaug *sniff*? *bleep* Jedi....and anyway, the Hobbit movies will ALWAYS be better, because Hobbit weapons are cooler than light sabers and we have the best hair, in any movies, ever.
Hó , Það sé ég föður minn Hó , Það sé ég móður mína, og Hó, Það sé ég bræður mínir og systur mínar Hó , Það sé ég mitt fólk aftur í byrjun Hó, gera Þeir kalla til mín, og bjóða mér að taka minn stað meðal þeirra í sölum Valhallar Hvar hugrakkir mun lifa að eilífu
|
|
|
Glorfindela
Valinor
Sep 10 2014, 3:33pm
Post #98 of 101
(447 views)
Shortcut
|
Not overdone, like the teeth of some actors who shall remain nameless (by me). I've actually liked him in most things I've seen him in – North and South and AUJ may be my favourites, but he was also really good in the British series of Strikeback, for example. Funnily enough, I didn't particularly notice him in Spooks, but that may be something to do with the the way that series was written.
|
|
|
dernwyn
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Sep 11 2014, 12:44am
Post #99 of 101
(429 views)
Shortcut
|
In the white, waving white sticks? Smaug mistook them all for funny-shaped lollipops...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "I desired dragons with a profound desire"
|
|
|
Bard'sBlackArrow
Lorien
Sep 12 2014, 12:28am
Post #100 of 101
(409 views)
Shortcut
|
LOL did TORn rally to the defense of poor Smaug *sniff*? *bleep* Jedi....and anyway, the Hobbit movies will ALWAYS be better, because Hobbit weapons are cooler than light sabers and we have the best hair, in any movies, ever. LOL - yup the hair and the dwarfish weaponry are the bee's knees, but...but I love lightsabres. That said, Ithose Jedi are going to get seriously burned. Did they not learn Smaug created Mustafar? <buggers off because I'd rather not be inspired to write that crossover>>> Oi! Nearly forgot to post who I think will be the leads in BoT5A, I would hope for Bilbo and Thorin. I want to see that arc completed and give Richard a lot more screen time. Needs more dwarves, dang it. thanks for posting the photo, gave me a little lift.
... on the other side of tomorrow...
(This post was edited by Bard'sBlackArrow on Sep 12 2014, 12:30am)
|
|
|
|
|