|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ataahua
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Nov 27 2014, 11:41pm
Post #1 of 25
(1730 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Great titbits from Dan Hennah, Richard Taylor and Gino Acevedo
|
Can't Post
|
|
The New Zealand Herald has a great interview with these three men about their experiences on The Hobbit and LOTR:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/...mp;objectid=11365887
Celebrimbor: "Pretty rings..."
Dwarves: "Pretty rings..."
Men: "Pretty rings..."
Sauron: "Mine's better."
"Ah, how ironic, the addictive qualities of Sauron’s master weapon led to its own destruction. Which just goes to show, kids - if you want two small and noble souls to succeed on a mission of dire importance... send an evil-minded beggar with them too." - Gandalf's Diaries, final par, by Ufthak.
Ataahua's stories
|
|
|
Finrod
Rohan
Nov 28 2014, 12:50am
Post #2 of 25
(1004 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I thought this was a family-friendly forum?!
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
TL;DR: “Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.”
I can’t believe you actually wrote titbits in an international forum which childern subscribe to! My stars, what is this world coming to? Please update your posting title as soon as possible — and preferably retroactively — to the less controversial spelling tidbits so that we do not have to censor this forum from our children. It’s okay to write about “tids” and their associated bits if you really feel you must, but the other word is not suitable in an international context that claims to be family-friendly.
As someone who was once censored on this forum for having innocently written an everyday North American word acceptable for eight-year-olds at Sunday school here, but which supposedly caused ludicrous blushes and sniggers and catcalls of pottymouth in other parts of the Anglosphere, I fully expect that everyone be held to the same standard of “international acceptability of language used around small children” to which I was held to, even when it is uttered in utter innocence and which does not mean anything rude or prurient or naughty where its writer happens to be writing.
The world is bigger than your own hamlet.
At least, that’s what I was told. I presume the same “rule” applies to all.
…all eyes looked upon the ring; for he held it now aloft, and the green jewels gleamed there that the Noldor had devised in Valinor. For this ring was like to twin serpents, whose eyes were emeralds, and their heads met beneath a crown of golden flowers, that the one upheld and the other devoured; that was the badge of Finarfin and his house.The Silmarillion, pp 150-151 while Felagund laughs beneath the treesin Valinor and comes no more
to this grey world of tears and war.The Lays of Beleriand, p 311
|
|
|
Bombadil
Half-elven
Nov 28 2014, 2:06am
Post #3 of 25
(844 views)
Shortcut
|
A...GREAT & MUST read... as well as the Related article..
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Nothing is Better than getting the "Source Material"
First hand...many, Enlightening quotes that expanded
Bomby's Thinking...
Pushes the Puzzle Pieces into Place...
Probably will read this again Tomorrow Too!
Since a Few words should be quoted here for
people to process
on their own.
BUT as Adults, it's really up to YOU... to try to understand?
Thank you, Ataahua from the Sunny Side of NZ..
 
www.charlie-art.biz
"What Your Mind can conceive... charlie can achieve"
|
|
|
Ataahua
Forum Admin
/ Moderator
Nov 28 2014, 2:47am
Post #4 of 25
(864 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Yes, the rule does apply to all
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
and there's nothing wrong with the word titbit - just as we wouldn't remove 'bastardisation' when the word is used properly.
Celebrimbor: "Pretty rings..."
Dwarves: "Pretty rings..."
Men: "Pretty rings..."
Sauron: "Mine's better."
"Ah, how ironic, the addictive qualities of Sauron’s master weapon led to its own destruction. Which just goes to show, kids - if you want two small and noble souls to succeed on a mission of dire importance... send an evil-minded beggar with them too." - Gandalf's Diaries, final par, by Ufthak.
Ataahua's stories
|
|
|
Danielos
Rohan
Nov 28 2014, 4:29am
Post #5 of 25
(804 views)
Shortcut
|
Relax! Do we really need hysterical moral panic on a Hobbit forum? I suppose it is the traditional American double standard (violence is ok, sex/nudity is not)?
|
|
|
Name
Rohan
Nov 28 2014, 4:39am
Post #6 of 25
(776 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Yeah I'm still trying to figure out if that post was a joke
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
How many Tolkien fans does it take to change a light bulb?
"Change? Oh my god, what do you mean change?! Never, never, never......"
|
|
|
Eowyn of Penns Woods
Valinor
Nov 28 2014, 5:07am
Post #7 of 25
(727 views)
Shortcut
|
**********************************
NABOUF
Not a TORns*b!
Certified Curmudgeon
Knitting Knerd
NARF: NWtS Chapter Member since June 17,2011
|
|
|
Spriggan
Tol Eressea
Nov 28 2014, 8:18am
Post #8 of 25
(695 views)
Shortcut
|
Is just another example, I would think, of a word which, if deconstructed, offers the possibility for eyefuls of sin, and this should never be included in a post here at TORN.
Actually, I'm more uncomfortable with kids reading about these saucy birds, whether goose or gander, as I fear it may generate unhealthy connotations. Perhaps we could stick to "tit for tat" instead?
(This post was edited by Spriggan on Nov 28 2014, 8:25am)
|
|
|
Bombadil
Half-elven
Nov 28 2014, 9:09am
Post #9 of 25
(615 views)
Shortcut
|
Most Excellent Point! Spriggie! HA ha..//
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
www.charlie-art.biz
"What Your Mind can conceive... charlie can achieve"
|
|
|
emre43
Rohan
Nov 28 2014, 9:22am
Post #10 of 25
(646 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I really hope this post is a joke
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
titbit is a family friendly word. I best not post pictures of the Blue tits in my garden then...
|
|
|
Bombadil
Half-elven
Nov 28 2014, 9:31am
Post #12 of 25
(605 views)
Shortcut
|
|
YOU GO Girl!!... Starling.. Darling!..///
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
www.charlie-art.biz
"What Your Mind can conceive... charlie can achieve"
|
|
|
smtfhw
Lorien
Nov 28 2014, 12:05pm
Post #13 of 25
(563 views)
Shortcut
|
|
|
|
Finrod
Rohan
Nov 28 2014, 3:15pm
Post #14 of 25
(517 views)
Shortcut
|
You have very nice chickadees, madam, but I find your language provocative.
…all eyes looked upon the ring; for he held it now aloft, and the green jewels gleamed there that the Noldor had devised in Valinor. For this ring was like to twin serpents, whose eyes were emeralds, and their heads met beneath a crown of golden flowers, that the one upheld and the other devoured; that was the badge of Finarfin and his house.The Silmarillion, pp 150-151 while Felagund laughs beneath the treesin Valinor and comes no more
to this grey world of tears and war.The Lays of Beleriand, p 311
|
|
|
Bombadil
Half-elven
Nov 28 2014, 3:26pm
Post #15 of 25
(493 views)
Shortcut
|
|
There must about 50 Slang Wordzz Referring "Those Thingiezzz"//
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
www.charlie-art.biz
"What Your Mind can conceive... charlie can achieve"
|
|
|
Crunchable Birdses
Rohan
Nov 28 2014, 5:59pm
Post #16 of 25
(467 views)
Shortcut
|
|
What are you banging on about?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Sorry I mean "heck", my bad.
* crunch *
(This post was edited by entmaiden on Nov 29 2014, 3:47am)
|
|
|
Mr. Arkenstone (isaac)
Tol Eressea
Nov 28 2014, 6:20pm
Post #17 of 25
(456 views)
Shortcut
|
|
I didnt noticed until you pointed out, if you didn´t I would not have hurt my eyes with that horrible word...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Come on...
The flagon with the dragon has the brew that is true
Survivor to the battle for the fifth trailer
|
|
|
Danielos
Rohan
Nov 28 2014, 7:05pm
Post #18 of 25
(429 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Frustrated family-friendly community?
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Isn´t it strange that it is mostly the moral family-friendly community that seem to find all these hidden dirty messages? You surely must have a pretty dirty imagination to dig up all that stuff?
|
|
|
Bishop
Gondor
Nov 28 2014, 7:37pm
Post #19 of 25
(436 views)
Shortcut
|
|
This quote from Dan feels a bit off to me
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
Everything is director driven with Peter. It's a very cool thing because you can't just slide off on some whimsical tour. You have to stay with the book. And he is very strongly a Tolkien aficionado. It's about Tolkien's book, Tolkien all the time. And we go back to Tolkien's illustrated book as much as possible.
I think he meant well, but it just seems not true. There's nothing wrong with departing from the text at all, so I'm not sure why he felt the need to say this.
|
|
|
DjU
Lorien
Nov 28 2014, 8:32pm
Post #20 of 25
(406 views)
Shortcut
|
Everything is director driven with Peter. It's a very cool thing because you can't just slide off on some whimsical tour. You have to stay with the book. And he is very strongly a Tolkien aficionado. It's about Tolkien's book, Tolkien all the time. And we go back to Tolkien's illustrated book as much as possible. I think he meant well, but it just seems not true. There's nothing wrong with departing from the text at all, so I'm not sure why he felt the need to say this.
Um, He didn't saying anything to the contrary. It seems by missing out the rest of the quote you have slightly lost track of what he was actually saying.
We read and broke down the book while the script was being developed. We developed a whole process of design elements for one director and when that changed and we got Peter, we revisited everything so that we could say, "Well, is this valid, is it not. Is it going down another track. Is this your track?" Everything is director driven with Peter. It's a very cool thing because you can't just slide off on some whimsical tour. You have to stay with the book. And he is very strongly a Tolkien aficionado. It's about Tolkien's book, Tolkien all the time. And we go back to Tolkien's illustrated book as much as possible. Well we certainly refer-- I refer to that every set we do and say, "Well what are the influences here? Where was he thinking it was?" It may not work for film, but it's certainly going to influence the film.
He is saying that even if they are doing something different they still referred to the book to at least see what the influences or reasons were.
|
|
|
Bishop
Gondor
Nov 28 2014, 8:54pm
Post #21 of 25
(388 views)
Shortcut
|
I've read other quotes that are similar, and I just wonder why he feels the need to say such things. Do you think for example when they were filming scenes between Kili and Tauriel that they were referencing the book? Or do you think they referenced Tolkien's illustrations of Smaug for example? What about the times they just abandoned Tolkien's exact physical descriptions of characters?
Just to be clear here, again I'm not saying changes should not have been made. I get that this will happen. I expect it in fact, and welcome it. But I don't understand the need to make sure people understand that you reference Tolkien for "every set".
|
|
|
Salmacis81
Tol Eressea
Nov 28 2014, 10:42pm
Post #22 of 25
(376 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Yeah, that is strange of someone to say...
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
...since Jackson clearly slid off on quite a few "whimsical tours" during the course of the first two films. To be honest, I've gotten the impression that Jackson doesn't much like The Hobbit book. I could be wrong, but the fact that he has to amplify everything to the umpteenth degree and felt it necessary to throw in a romance just for the sake of having a romance strikes me as Jackson not thinking the original story was good enough.
(This post was edited by Salmacis81 on Nov 28 2014, 10:43pm)
|
|
|
Name
Rohan
Nov 29 2014, 12:30am
Post #23 of 25
(352 views)
Shortcut
|
|
Yes, although I'm beginning to wonder
[In reply to]
|
Can't Post
|
|
How much of this has actually been Jackson's vision. Obviously a lot of it has been. But there's definitely been a lot of influence on this film from other people, from both outside and inside the studio.
How many Tolkien fans does it take to change a light bulb?
"Change? Oh my god, what do you mean change?! Never, never, never......"
|
|
|
FernysApple
Bree
Nov 29 2014, 1:40pm
Post #24 of 25
(303 views)
Shortcut
|
I think this guy is well meaning but deluded if he thinks they went back to Tolkiens illustrations. I will eat fried troll bogies if anyone can find ONE example of them using the illustrations as a guide. They didnt. Most of their design decisions came from, 1. LOTR but with added plastic cgi. 2. Bizzaro land, eg Bunny sled, stoned poop head. 3. Jacksons imagination. 4. generic video games. 5. swiped from Raiders of the Lost Ark. its self deluded lalaland stuff.
|
|
|
Mithfânion
Rivendell
Nov 29 2014, 7:58pm
Post #25 of 25
(276 views)
Shortcut
|
I think it's fully Jackson's vision, it's just that Jackson has always been perfectly willing to show his own vision of Middle Earth, instead of the one in the book.
He has shown on numerous occasions that he will simply invent characters or plotlines when he feels the need, or show scenes in the exact opposite of what they were in the book.
I think someone like Richard Taylor is a PJ adept, to him it would certainly seem like Jackson is completely driven by the book, whereas to people less involved, people like us who look in from the outside and see the end product, we can clearly see that what Tayloris saying is a wild exaggeration, and that while there is a certain faithfulness to some parts of the books, there is also a good deal of invented deviation, which PJ did simply because he wanted to.
|
|
|
|
|
