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:
How will GDT face the issue of talking beasts?
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All

_V_
Lorien


May 2 2008, 4:51pm

Post #1 of 40 (488 views)
Shortcut
How will GDT face the issue of talking beasts? Can't Post

A major issue I feel in the Prequel Duology is that of the "talking beasts" of Middle-earth. Now Middle-earth is not Narnia, but there are a handful of talking animals. And sometimes critics deride this as too "children-movie" and "unserious"....this in an Oscar-winning series with talking tree-men!

I speak primarily of the Great Eagles and Gwaihir the Windlord. They already appeared in the LOTR trilogy, but Jackson kind of side-stepped the issue by simply avoiding depictions of Gwaihir talking. Gwaihir just silently picks Gandalf up from Orthanc in FOTR, and then again wordlessly appears in ROTK.

Gwaihir actually has speaking lines in the book, but Jackson simply cut them out (asking Gandalf where to take him from Moria and Gandalf saying Lothlorien, etc.)

Nonetheless, the Great Eagles are actually showcased in "The Hobbit". Arguably I think they're one of the main attractions; alone with Smaug, Beorn, and the Mirkwood Spiders. ***I have seen more than a few book-covers of the Hobbit with Bilbo riding an Eagle on the cover.

And Gandalf actaully has running conversations with the Eagles in "The Hobbit" so I don't think this is avoidable.

I don't feel this is odd: they aren't "normal" Eagles. The Great Eagles of Manwe are basically the animal counterpart to the Ents. That is, just as the Ents were created to be guardians of plants, the Eagles were created to be guardians of non-sentient animals (by Yavanna and Manwe)

Furthermore, the Eagles are not the only talking animals in "The Hobbit".

Roac the Raven can talk, and he's the one that relays the information to Thorin & Co. that Smaug has died, and that armies of rivals for the treasure are gathering. The book actually make it a point to say that the Ravens of Ravenhill (a spur of Lonely Mountain) can speak the Common Speach. Further, the Thrush has to actually speak to Bard to tell him of Smaug's weak spot.

I don't include Smaug in this listing, because people kind of expect Dragons to talk, and moreover, he's a magical creature moreso than a "real" animal so the "suspension of disbelief" is at play: audiences expect dragons to be able to talk. ( I must say, though, that the thing that always struck me about Smaug is "he's a man of wealth, and taste" (to quote "Sympathy for the Devil") he's not a raving monster like a Troll....he's refined and actually very witty and intelligent. Arguably I think he's the most nuanced villian that way in the entire series: even Sauron or the Lord of the Nazgul simply don't talk that much; Wormtongue isn't really "charming in an evil way" and Saruman isn't either. Smaug is a creature of "panache" so great it must be spelled "PANACHE!"

But I digress.....

The Trolls in LOTR are basically animals, but the Trolls in The Hobbit *can talk*. Obviously there are different kinds of trolls, and moreover, Tolkien's ideas of what they are changed over time. Surely, the Olog-hai were capable of speach, but the Trolls as a whole were always Brutes, more animalistic. How will the Troll scene be handled, when the Trolls *never* talk in Jackson's films?

And what of the Wargs? The Wargs are basically a demonic breed of super-wolf. They're real animals, not demons, and they're apparently a *subsecies* of wolf which later went extinct...similar to how Oliphaunts are a bigger version of Elephants, but they died out by modern times. Anyway, Wargs are presented as actually being much smarter than normal canines, apparently semi-sentient, to the point of possessing a basic language. Interaction with the Wargs was basic in Jackson's trilogy, but the Wargs are the centerpiece of a major action sequence in The Hobbit:

Gandalf kills the Great Goblin, and Throin & Co. escape. As it turned out, the Goblins and Wargs had been planning to launch a major raiding campaign against the Men living in the vales of Anduin that night
(the Wargs and Goblins are in a "loose alliance"...its not so much that the Wargs are horses to the Orcs, so much as that the Wargs are their allies and "permit" Orcs to ride them to form a sort of mounted unit)...the Wargs have gathered in a great council at a meeting place they have in a clearing. But the Orcs are late....we the reader know this is because they're busy dealing with Thorin & Co. killing the Great Goblin and then escaping.--->the CONVERSATION at the Warg Council is growing impatient, wondering why the Orcs are so late...a great white Warg Chieftain is argueing and trying to figure out what's the reason for the delay....meanwhile, Throin & Co. are running as fast as they can to escape the Orcs, think they've lost them, burst through some bushes into a clearing....and stare right in the face of several hundred Wargs, in the middle of their council...."out of the frying pan, into the fire" as they say....

So how would this scene play out? I think it would be a bit "overly fantastical" for the Wargs to actually use Common Speach....its implied they physically dont' have the mouthparts to make the sounds. But what I personally envision is that this scene would be like....Wargs barking back and forth at each other (in a primitive "Warg-langauge" which David Salo will devise)....and they *run subtitles* on the bottom of the screen, just as they did with Elvish languages!

And last but certainly not least, Del Toro's clear favorites, the Giant Spiders of Mirkwood: this will be a major centerpiece of the film....but the Spiders in the books, again, actually TALK. Using Common Speach. Bilbo wanders into their nest (invisible) and overhears them bickering about eating the Dwarves.


So what will Del Toro do? Will the talking animal creatures prevalent in the books...still talk? Or, as in Jackson's Fellowship of the Ring scene involving the escape from Orthanc....will this simply be dropped? Gandalf will simply have one-way conversations with the Eagles?

What will happen?


"Pleased to meet you, hope you guessed my name, but what's puzzling you, is the nature of my game"

Formerly known on TORN as "Draug the Unspeakably Violent"

(This post was edited by _V_ on May 2 2008, 4:53pm)


Compa_Mighty
Tol Eressea


May 2 2008, 5:31pm

Post #2 of 40 (295 views)
Shortcut
I hope they don't make them speak English [In reply to] Can't Post

To keep these movies feeling real enough, thtey should avoid it at all costs.

It's been mentioned around here they might not talk, but a couple of characters might understand them. Namely Gandalf. There's no problem with the raven communicating Smaug's weakness, the problem would be seeing him talk... this is not Narnia.

Here's to Del Toro becoming the Irvin Kershner of Middle Earth!

Essay winner of the Show us your Hobbit Pride Giveway!


Sunnydale_Strider
Registered User

May 2 2008, 6:09pm

Post #3 of 40 (260 views)
Shortcut
Smaug [In reply to] Can't Post

Sorry I didn't see this topic before I posted in the Smaug bit but I think it's better here....

I'm actually really hoping that they don't use a voice for Smaug. Smaug is a dragon and giving it a voice gives it human qualities which makes it less scary. It all may be just cause after seeing things like Aslan in lion & witch & optimus prime in transformers. The thing I disliked about their voices were how they didn't change. Liam Neeson no matter what he was doing, running, jumping, fighting, talking and not moving it was the same calm tone. No passion, was flat. Same with optimus prime he was jumping about but his voice doesn't strain or shout. It took away the amazing CGI that has been used. I think Smaug won't be as scary or real if it's given a voice. Again it may be just cause it's hard to imagine something like a god, dragon etc talking. I think of them as something you couldn't do with words. Sauron's deep voice briefly used worked ok but not knowing made it scarier. The beasts the nazgul flew when they appeared for minus morgul when frodo, sam & gollum are near the bridge,
emphasis is given to their loud shrieks, which are made deafening and that was amazing. Just a terrifying roar/growl that's huge and fills the area as far as the eye can see with more power than anyone could imagine would be one of the most terrifying things I could imagine if I was in their shoes approaching the dragon. I don't like things to be changed but I think giving it a human quality would take away some of the fear. You could be made to think you could talk it out of stuff but if it's pure animal there's nothing no one can do.



Compa_Mighty
Tol Eressea


May 2 2008, 6:16pm

Post #4 of 40 (263 views)
Shortcut
I have to differ there... [In reply to] Can't Post

I believe only Smaug should talk. His voice is 75% of his personality, you know?

Besides, I'm not sure Smaug is meant to be scary scary. He's more of an intriguing character, a relic of ancient days still walking the world.

I mentioned elsewhere I picture him like a polite, elegant and elderly, yet deadly and a tad evil British Lord.

But maybe that's just me.

Here's to Del Toro becoming the Irvin Kershner of Middle Earth!

Essay winner of the Show us your Hobbit Pride Giveway!


Nazguy
Bree


May 2 2008, 8:32pm

Post #5 of 40 (221 views)
Shortcut
Funny... [In reply to] Can't Post

I was thinking about this the other day.

The trouble with depicting talking animals is that it can look, well, a bit naff. I can imagine that this is going to present GDT with somewhat of a headache.

Regarding Smaug, it might be better if he doesn't speak at all. How would you depict a talking dragon without it looking cartoony? It would have to be extremely well done for it not to create an awkward moment in the film.



DiveTwin
Rohan


May 2 2008, 8:42pm

Post #6 of 40 (226 views)
Shortcut
You Said It! [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
To keep these movies feeling real enough, thtey should avoid it at all costs.

It's been mentioned around here they might not talk, but a couple of characters might understand them. Namely Gandalf. There's no problem with the raven communicating Smaug's weakness, the problem would be seeing him talk... this is not Narnia.



No, this is not Narnia - that's a great contrasting point Compa MIghty. As you say in another response, if there's to be any talking I hope it's only Smaug (and I'm still curious how that will come off ... but have faith that it will).

It would (to me) come across as very silly and "Narnia-like" to have the spiders and eagles talk. Even the trolls don't really need to - you could creatively just have the dwarves get captured one by one, show visual scenes of the trolls making preparations to cook them, etc. without the talking. Same with the spiders - it would be much better (and in line with the LOTR's atmosphere) to have Bilbo create a way to get the spiders to chase him without having to sing the "Attercop" song. And when it comes to the eagles, you don't have to show them communicating at all - you can have Gandalf discussing to Bilbo and the dwarves what's happening based on his understanding of the eagle over the years (i.e. - he's already "communicated" with them offscreen).

And with the thrush / raven, you could easily do the same thing there as PJ did with the moth - Gandalf spoke to it and he understood. You could say there's some backstory or link to the race of Dale understanding the birds from days gone by, then you could just show the thrush in Bard's ear and him understanding - but not show the bird actually speak. Or say that you could tweek the scene to have the thrush be smart enough to dip his beak into the mud/something, fly in front of Bard and smear the mud onto his own chest in the same spot that Smaug's weakpoint is. Maybe then point his beak to the oncoming dragon (back and forth) so that Bard then looks at the dragon and "gets it".

Anyway, just some thoughts and ideas that run through my head....

But if "The Hobbit" and the second movie are going to live within the same world that PJ already built - and that world is built by grounding it as realistically as possible - then I hope that none of them talk. Besides, PJ didn't have the troll talk in "Fellowship" nor did Shelob speak in "Return Of The King" nor the eagles talk in either one in order to keep that "grounded in reality" feel to it. Of course, Shelob or the troll in FOTR didn't talk in the books either (like spiders and trolls do in "The Hobbit" book) but again, if the world that PJ created is canon, then hopefully that stays consistent.

In my humble opinion, of course!!


merklynn
Lorien


May 2 2008, 9:00pm

Post #7 of 40 (245 views)
Shortcut
Creepy stuff in Pan's Labyrinth [In reply to] Can't Post

The spiders should have female voices. It worked brillaintly in "Planet of Spiders" an old Doctor Who episode from 1974, the one where Jon Pertwee's doctor regenerated into Tom Baker. The slightly modulated female voices had an incredibly malicious and creepy tone to them. I did not find this to be a negative in anyway, and I think it heightened the fear factor towards the spiders.

As for the animals talking, personally I'd love it. I don't think it will be too "Narnia". Besides, I enjoy Narnia, although it is a different kettle of fish, and clearly Narnia is written for children while LOTR is not. Talking animals in The Hobbit duology might indeed make critics call it a children's movie as a result. But to use this label as a form of derision would be very wrong, as if being a children's movie somehow belittles the film's worth. I think the story is for anyone, at any age, and the film will no doubt reflect this. I mean, it has some creepy stuff in it for a children's book / movie. Riddles in the Dark, the mirkwood spiders, Smaug, etc... Pan's Labyrinth also has a lot of creepy stuff, and is very very dark in places with the Spanish civil war and brutality of facism. In this respect so long as a goblin doesn't grab a knife and repeatedly stab anyone in their eye socket, then I think the Hobbit has a good fit for a director in Guillermo del Toro. ;-) The blend of dark and haunting light in terms of themes and drama in PL is a great match up for The Hobbit. Just keep the torture down please. :-D


(This post was edited by merklynn on May 2 2008, 9:01pm)


Empedocles
Rivendell


May 2 2008, 9:58pm

Post #8 of 40 (210 views)
Shortcut
Talking beasts [In reply to] Can't Post

I believe Smaug needs to talk, and as GDT just pointed out, he already has someone in his head as who the actor that would provide the voice might be, so i think that's pretty much settled. Fortunately, SMAUG WILL BE TALKING

Regarding the rest, please no talking beasts. The spiders and the eagles don't really need to talk. Roarc talking can be easily avoided. The only problem I see is the Trolls, I believe they should talk. I've always thought that the Hobbit Trolls were a different breed than the Moria or Mordor Trolls. Actually, if you take a closer look at the Trolls in ROTK, they don't look stupid at all, quite the contrary, they look like smart beasts.

So I don't have a problem with Bert, William and the other one talking. I do hope they change their names though, they don't sound trollish at all.

Guillermo!! Give us back Glorfindel!!!


DiveTwin
Rohan


May 2 2008, 10:42pm

Post #9 of 40 (201 views)
Shortcut
True but... [In reply to] Can't Post


In Reply To
I believe Smaug needs to talk, and as GDT just pointed out, he already has someone in his head as who the actor that would provide the voice might be, so i think that's pretty much settled. Fortunately, SMAUG WILL BE TALKING

Regarding the rest, please no talking beasts. The spiders and the eagles don't really need to talk. Roarc talking can be easily avoided. The only problem I see is the Trolls, I believe they should talk. I've always thought that the Hobbit Trolls were a different breed than the Moria or Mordor Trolls. Actually, if you take a closer look at the Trolls in ROTK, they don't look stupid at all, quite the contrary, they look like smart beasts.

So I don't have a problem with Bert, William and the other one talking. I do hope they change their names though, they don't sound trollish at all.



I think the trolls are different breeds in "The Hobbit" as well - but would still favor them not talking.

I wasn't implying whether they were stupid or smart beasts as a reason to talk (or not) but simply that I hope they don't speak. I love the environment and mood that PJ already built with LOTR and personally would like to see that continue. And the troll scene in "The Hobbit" could easily play out without the trolls actually holding a discussion. However, you'd have to remember the scene in FOTR where Bilbo tells the children how the trolls were going to squash them into jelly, so however it's done in the movie "The Hobbit" would have to keep that in mind. But that also could be done with the trolls visually preparing what they want to do to the dwarves and Balin & company catching on by watching them.

I definitely agree with you about the names, although it would be easiest to not name them at all - and simply refer to them as "the trolls". Again, more in line with the LOTR universe that PJ created and GDT is planning to stay within.


FutureDirector
Registered User

May 2 2008, 10:59pm

Post #10 of 40 (202 views)
Shortcut
Smaug [In reply to] Can't Post

Personally, he should talk, like the book. But I also believe that he should speak telepathically, because it would look pretty cheesy and narniaish if he opens his mouth constantly. If they do this, the voice can be creepy and evil... going on the lines of Saurons voice being bruned into Frodo when he wore the ring.


Glaurung63
Lorien

May 3 2008, 1:52am

Post #11 of 40 (257 views)
Shortcut
Talk..its only talk.... [In reply to] Can't Post

"Arguements, agreements, advice, answers,
Articulate announcements
Its only talk"

Since you quoted the Stones another fav band popped into my head, King Crimson...."Elephant Talk"
I think we will be debating until they raise the final curtain....lol....which is great....but I say let the movie makers make the movie, and give me some popcorn....

Although I reserve the right to voice my opinions, however half baked on Longbottom Leaf and Green Dragon ale...


_V_
Lorien


May 3 2008, 3:12am

Post #12 of 40 (207 views)
Shortcut
Smaug should definately talk...and we already know he will [In reply to] Can't Post

GDT mentioned that he's thinking about voice actors. So no discussion there; He talked in the book and he'll definitely talk in the films

"Pleased to meet you, hope you guessed my name, but what's puzzling you, is the nature of my game"

Formerly known on TORN as "Draug the Unspeakably Violent"


Sunnydale_Strider
Registered User

May 3 2008, 11:40am

Post #13 of 40 (190 views)
Shortcut
Smaug [In reply to] Can't Post

Should just be like a balrog. You can see without saying that Gandalf knows who certain creatures are thinking or talks to them in certain ways but in the world peter jackson made talking wouldn't work. It would talk away a lot of fear of the dragon. I can't see how it would matter how they got in it would be an ancient creature talking in english with an accent. You know if they did they'd get some with a deep voice that got a sore throat. They might as well go for Ricky Gervais for an example no voice could work. The closest I could imagine is a ancient tongue that someone couldn't hardly tell as a language something that's in rumbles. But if a talking tree can be just about ok then I guess a dragon will be ok too.


_V_
Lorien


May 3 2008, 2:18pm

Post #14 of 40 (170 views)
Shortcut
... [In reply to] Can't Post

  

Quote
Since you quoted the Stones, another fav band opped into my head, King Crimson..."Elephatn Talk". I thinkw e will be debating until they raise the final curtain...lol...which is great...but I say let the movie makers make the movie, and give me some popcorn....



SAY. SOMETHING. CONSTRUCTIVE.

(plus I have no idea how that group is)

Oh I see you're new; joined five days ago: THIS IS WHAT WE DO ON HERE. The very CONCEPT of "a fan messageboard" is "we're here to debate EVERYTHING": Haven't you seen the screencaps of the day and movie discussion? Weren't here when the films were being released? That's what Lord of the Rings fans....DO. We obsessively debate the subtlest nuance of this literature, and surprisingly, Weta, Jackson, and now Del Toro are perfectionists TOO and they kind of listen to what we have to say now and again.

"Pleased to meet you, hope you guessed my name, but what's puzzling you, is the nature of my game"

Formerly known on TORN as "Draug the Unspeakably Violent"

(This post was edited by _V_ on May 3 2008, 2:20pm)


_V_
Lorien


May 3 2008, 2:22pm

Post #15 of 40 (183 views)
Shortcut
He's scary because he DOES talk [In reply to] Can't Post

Smaug's talking doesn't make him LESS scary

If we was just a sleeping dragon Bilbo was sneaking around it wouldn't be very scary.

What's scary is the *tension* in the scene that Smaug and Bilbo are having a running conversation, and with each passing moment Bilbo is more and more horrified that Smaug is going to kill him. Without Smaug's talking and the verbal interplay with Bilbo, there isn't really any tension.

"Pleased to meet you, hope you guessed my name, but what's puzzling you, is the nature of my game"

Formerly known on TORN as "Draug the Unspeakably Violent"


Aunt Dora Baggins
Half-elven


May 3 2008, 3:57pm

Post #16 of 40 (175 views)
Shortcut
I agree. [In reply to] Can't Post

Smaug isn't just a big scary monster. He's definitely a person, with an amazing personality. An older and eviler version of Chrysophylax. If we don't hear him speak, he won't be Tolkien's Smaug at all. In fact, the greatest evil Tolkien's dragons do is not with their fiery breath or great claws, but with their words. Think of Glaurung.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"For DORA BAGGINS in memory of a LONG correspondence, with love from Bilbo; on a large wastebasket. Dora was Drogo's sister, and the eldest surviving female relative of Bilbo and Frodo; she was ninety-nine, and had written reams of good advice for more than half a century."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"A Chance Meeting at Rivendell" and other stories

leleni at hotmail dot com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~



hello_goodbye
Registered User

May 3 2008, 5:14pm

Post #17 of 40 (187 views)
Shortcut
Differing Wants. [In reply to] Can't Post

The problem is if you eradicate the talking animals and beasts which are encountered for in The Hobbit and make them more dark, more realistic and more LOTRish you don't have J.R.R Tolkien's the Hobbit, you have a prequal to Peter Jackson's Lotr.

The Hobbit's Middle Earth is a far more magical, naive, fun and yes childish place to be than the coming-of-age, going-to-war Middle Earth of Lord of The Rings.

Now I'm as unconvinced as most of the posters are about Talking animals in movies, criticly and financially it dosn't always work- and indeed I'm not thinking keeping all the talkies, just thinking about the singing goblins on screen makes me cringe but i say don't be to unhappy if there are plans to put some of the talkies in! :)


Glaurung63
Lorien

May 3 2008, 9:10pm

Post #18 of 40 (177 views)
Shortcut
Been reading TORN when FOTR was but a rumor.... [In reply to] Can't Post

...not that I should have to justify my online habits, but I was a member here long ago when Sean Connery was rumored to play Gandalf, and as I related in another post, I strayed from posting but kept reading. The recent announcement about The Hobbit finally happening got me excited again to sign up and post! Hey, sorry to try to inject some other opinions into this discussion, and I hope you do look up the band King Crimson. The song "Elephant Talk" is awesome and serves a point I was trying to make with a little humor. I believe I said that debate is great, and will continue until opening day, and I look forward to being surprised, intrigued, and delighted by the director's choices. I can't wait to sit in a theater with some popcorn as the lights go down. That said, I will state something constructive and vote for Leonard Nimoy as the voice of Smaug....it would be logical for dragons to hoard treasure after all...


N.E. Brigand
Half-elven


May 3 2008, 9:17pm

Post #19 of 40 (144 views)
Shortcut
RE: ... [In reply to] Can't Post


Quote
SAY. SOMETHING. CONSTRUCTIVE.


Everyone is free to respond as they wish, within the boards' standards of conduct. Humor is as welcome as substance -- it's just a message board.


Quote
Weren't here when the films were being released?


I wasn't either. I joined shortly after RotK opened.

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
We're discussing The Lord of the Rings in the Reading Room, Oct. 15, 2007 - Mar. 22, 2009!

Join us Apr. 28-May 4 for "Treebeard".


Magpie
Immortal


May 3 2008, 9:33pm

Post #20 of 40 (151 views)
Shortcut
ouch [In reply to] Can't Post

not a fan of the newbie vs old timer card. It sets up a class system. Plus, as had been pointed out... you don't really know who that person is. This kind of thing is a trap for folkdancers, too. They get some experience under their belt and then a new face walks in the door and they love being the 'experienced' person that can help the newbie... only to find the newbie is someone who's danced for 10 years and has just been taking a break for the last year.

I would suggest that those who've been on the boards long enough know that one can never tell what direction a thread will head in and that's often the best part of TORn.

King Crimson: ah, those were the days. In the Court of the Crimson King was a big favorite of mine. Trippy. Right on. Far out. Off to YouTube for a blast of the past.

Popcorn: yum



magpie avatar gallery ~ soundtrack website


_V_
Lorien


May 3 2008, 10:33pm

Post #21 of 40 (137 views)
Shortcut
I am sorry I... [In reply to] Can't Post

I am sorry I just took your statement "I think we will be debating until they raise the final curtain....lol....which is great....but I say let the movie makers make the movie, and give me some popcorn...." in a bad way because.......it sounded like this thing that pops up in TV series discussions I have online alot, which is "well yeah the episode stunk, but there were enough explosions that weren't you entertained? So we're all entitled to our opinions"..........which I think is dumb because saying "well everyone can have their opinion on whether this weeks' episode was bad and we'll be debating it endlessly"....basically is giving up on trying to make in-depth criticism.

In short, its sort of like "well you say Pirates of the Caribbean 3 wasn't as good as the previous ones, but we're all entitled to our opinion" (I run into that online all the time) which is effectively saying "why even bother debate it because it is so subjective that its impossible to say anything about it"

Sorry that's not what you were saying, I didn't understand your wording: i.e. I thought you said the old "everyone's going to have their own opinions and none of it matters objectively" thing when I think you were saying you looked forward to the debate and film one way or another.....sorry I misconstrued that. in the words of Hitchiker's Guide, "we appologize for the inconvenience"...


"Pleased to meet you, hope you guessed my name, but what's puzzling you, is the nature of my game"

Formerly known on TORN as "Draug the Unspeakably Violent"


_V_
Lorien


May 4 2008, 12:33am

Post #22 of 40 (129 views)
Shortcut
also I... [In reply to] Can't Post

was confused and thought (based on your sign in time) that I was dealing with another post from a noob going "everyone's entitled to their opinion" because they didn't understand what we were debating (this happens alot online) sorry for my confusion

"Pleased to meet you, hope you guessed my name, but what's puzzling you, is the nature of my game"

Formerly known on TORN as "Draug the Unspeakably Violent"


_V_
Lorien


May 4 2008, 12:44am

Post #23 of 40 (137 views)
Shortcut
That's IT! He's an older eviler Chrysophylax! [In reply to] Can't Post

Chrysophylax Rules!

"Pleased to meet you, hope you guessed my name, but what's puzzling you, is the nature of my game"

Formerly known on TORN as "Draug the Unspeakably Violent"


merklynn
Lorien


May 4 2008, 1:16am

Post #24 of 40 (139 views)
Shortcut
Elitism [In reply to] Can't Post

This is something I've noticed along with you, in a few people's posts, a kind of elitism. I appreciate that being around for a while and having discussed many topics many times before is just the way it is, but newbies, and even people like myself who post in sporadic bursts, are hard pressed to track down and research every topic they are interested in talking about prior to posting about it. I have made an effort on occasions to do this myself, and I either don't know how to get the best out of the search system, or I'm just not prepared to blow 10 or so minutes checking through old threads. A lot of my posting is done on short breaks at work. There are a lot of threads and I have periods of weeks or even months of not posting. So if the elitists want to snap at newbies for posting something that has previously been discussed, they need to get off their high horses and be a little more friendly and encouraging.

I don't mean to complain about it, its not really THAT bad here, and I've seen it far worse elsewhere. But Tolkien fans come from a variety of mediums with the books being at the heart, but I don't think any one medium should be the measure of one fan's quality over another, and likewise I don't think posting the "everybody has their own opinion, lets just see what we get" is bad. I have personally witnessed some users "freaking out" or getting hung up on mere rumors to the point of sounding like conspiracy theorists. I believe in one thread, I said something like "let's just wait and see" so I feel I'm also a target here maybe indirectly of V's post.

Sometimes the rational "look, lets just chill and see what happens" is the best way to try and get people to take a breath and look at the big picture. I'm not saying its always used in that fashion, but overall, there are many types of fans, some that want to get incredibly nitpicky and tied up on trivialities, and some who are more casually interested and willing to give things more time for facts to develop. Yes, there's a third kind, the fans that will lap anything up, but I don't think they should be lumped in with the casual fan. That's unfair. I see myself as a casual fan. I'm passionate about Tolkien's Middle-earth, but I'm not die-hard on the details. I will not lap up anything, in fact I am EXTREMELY picky and fussy about the shows I watch and I have abandoned many books, shows, and comic series which I think have failed to live up to their promise or have derailed themselves in someway. V's comment about his experience with fans from TV shows just made me want to clarify that not all casual fans are just happy to eat their popcorn and watch just anything that gets churned out. I expect quality. it's a stereotype I wanted to address.

I think it would be nice if we could be more receptive to all types of fan and keep in mind our differences, while remembering what we have in common. No I'm not trying to be bland, or Martin Luther King Jr either. Its no fun to be told you should have researched the threads better before posting, or when did you last read the books? Or how long have you been on the board? etc... I haven't faced any of those here personally, but I have experienced similar things in other fandoms and its not a warm environment. Elitism sucks.


fmaximus
Rivendell


May 4 2008, 2:06am

Post #25 of 40 (111 views)
Shortcut
As long [In reply to] Can't Post

as it's not cheesy as was the case with Dragonheart or Eragorn IMO. It's going to be a difficult task especially if the Hobbit is to have the same believability that the LOTR had.

First page Previous page 1 2 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.