Log In · Register

 
LOTR, yes, i am a nerd :)
SammyTheHeadbutt
post Aug 31 2008, 03:09 PM
Post #1


Let me be the one who calls you baby all the time<3
**

Group: Official Designer
Posts: 27
Joined: Jul 2007
Member No: 550,433



Whatever people say i will always love Lord of the Rings,
its a classic and amazing trilogy :)
am i seriously the only one nerdy enough to think that? haha :)
 
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 19)
nikx618
post Aug 31 2008, 03:11 PM
Post #2


asdfghjkl;
******

Group: Official Designer
Posts: 1,121
Joined: Jul 2008
Member No: 665,416



Imo, i thought it was the most BORING movie i have ever seen. Idk about the book. I would probably find it boring too, but idk, on account that i haven't read it. hehe.
 
only-tuesdays
post Aug 31 2008, 05:36 PM
Post #3


Lets Get Dead
*****

Group: Member
Posts: 381
Joined: Apr 2008
Member No: 641,562



You're not the only one. I love LOTR too. thumbsup.gif
 
technicolour
post Aug 31 2008, 06:02 PM
Post #4


show me a garden thats bursting to life
********

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 12,303
Joined: Mar 2005
Member No: 115,987



Okay, so, I read Fellowship of the Ring & about 1/2 of The Two Towers but just gave up. The songs the hobbits sang, oh man, they would go on for PAGES. I just couldn't do it.

The movies were AMAZING. I mean, sure they left a lot out, but for what they were, they did an amazing book-to-film adaptation.
 
firechild
post Aug 31 2008, 06:13 PM
Post #5


BBM: 310ED181
*****

Group: Member
Posts: 613
Joined: Jul 2008
Member No: 671,976



I found them boring. I liked harry potter better
 
*absinthe*
post Aug 31 2008, 11:08 PM
Post #6





Guest






I`ve only ever seen the movies, which are the shit. I`ve always wanted to read the books but never got around to them. sad.gif
 
Saikou
post Aug 31 2008, 11:42 PM
Post #7


最高のLady
*****

Group: Member
Posts: 300
Joined: Apr 2007
Member No: 514,808



The Hobbit wub.gif
 
Tramatize
post Sep 1 2008, 03:00 PM
Post #8


Senior Member
******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 1,288
Joined: Oct 2007
Member No: 585,380



EXPLICIT LANGUAGE
 
only-tuesdays
post Sep 1 2008, 03:29 PM
Post #9


Lets Get Dead
*****

Group: Member
Posts: 381
Joined: Apr 2008
Member No: 641,562



lol That was great.

The books are better than the movies though. There's more depth to them.
 
SammyTheHeadbutt
post Sep 2 2008, 04:37 PM
Post #10


Let me be the one who calls you baby all the time<3
**

Group: Official Designer
Posts: 27
Joined: Jul 2007
Member No: 550,433



haha i love Clerks 2 :)
 
huskar
post Sep 3 2008, 11:52 AM
Post #11


Member
**

Group: Member
Posts: 20
Joined: Sep 2008
Member No: 682,600



Lotr is one of the generic fantasy book that one has to read . It is a piece of high literature . Anyone who actually thinks it is stupid are retarded , no offense :P .
 
shadowfax
post Apr 13 2010, 10:08 PM
Post #12


Padfoot
******

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 1,084
Joined: Sep 2004
Member No: 50,413



Love them! I first saw the movies (and saw them much, much later than when they came out stubborn.gif ), then borrowed all three books from the library. I loved them so much that I bought the books but damn, books are so expensive. All 3 were about $20 each before taxes, and this is in Canadian dollars. I have yet to find a relatively cheap copy of The Hobbit with a nice cover illustration. Although there are many boring and slightly confusing parts in the LOTR books, I think the awesomeness of the entire story more than makes up for it. The appendices are also very interesting to read.
 
*futura*
post Apr 22 2010, 05:16 PM
Post #13





Guest






The books are amazing. They did a wonderful job with the film trilogy imo. I often wonder how the film trilogy would have been had they not removed Tom Bombandil from the original story though.
 
shadowfax
post Aug 9 2010, 08:35 PM
Post #14


Padfoot
******

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 1,084
Joined: Sep 2004
Member No: 50,413



I wonder if time constraints were the only reason Tom Bombadil wasn't included in FotR. The scouring of the Shire would have been anti-climatic in RotK but they could have added in Tom and his River-daughter.
 
*futura*
post Aug 10 2010, 06:25 PM
Post #15





Guest






QUOTE(shadowfax @ Aug 9 2010, 06:35 PM) *
I wonder if time constraints were the only reason Tom Bombadil wasn't included in FotR. The scouring of the Shire would have been anti-climatic in RotK but they could have added in Tom and his River-daughter.
You know, now that I think about it, maybe putting Tom in would have given the movie a whole different feel to it. The time constraint was probably the main cause as to why he wasn't in it, but I think without him, it's a bit more straightforward and to the point.
 
shadowfax
post Aug 11 2010, 08:53 PM
Post #16


Padfoot
******

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 1,084
Joined: Sep 2004
Member No: 50,413



Yea, that's true. His inclusion would've completely changed the tone of that part of the film. Getting from the Shire to Bree would've seemed too boring, I guess. Oh well.
 
Matsumoto
post Aug 11 2010, 08:57 PM
Post #17


Senior Member
******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 1,359
Joined: Apr 2004
Member No: 12,577



I haven't read the books and the only reason I've seen the movies is because my boyfriend made me watch them with him, although I couldn't stay awake and I don't remember anything really.
 
*futura*
post Aug 15 2010, 10:13 PM
Post #18





Guest






QUOTE
Peter Jackson originally contemplated having the character of Tom Bombadil, a character that was in the book but never made it to the movie, incorporated into a cameo scene in which the Hobbits are walking through the forest and see a man with a feathered cap dart through the trees, then they hear Tom singing and begin running through the forest, but ran out of time to film it.

LOL, after reading the FoTR trivia, I'm not surprised Jackson ran out of time to put Tom in it at all. Craaaaazyy.
 
Simba
post Aug 15 2010, 10:36 PM
Post #19


Photoartist
********

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 12,363
Joined: Apr 2006
Member No: 399,390



You're not a nerd, you just appreciate good literature


or idk, maybe you're a nerd too
 
superstitious
post Sep 6 2010, 02:25 PM
Post #20


Tick tock, Bill
*******

Group: Administrator
Posts: 8,764
Joined: Dec 2005
Member No: 333,948



QUOTE(futura @ Apr 22 2010, 05:16 PM) *
The books are amazing. They did a wonderful job with the film trilogy imo. I often wonder how the film trilogy would have been had they not removed Tom Bombandil from the original story though.

I was bummed that there was no Tom in the movies, though I was pissed as hell that there was no Houses of the Healing sequence (that lasted longer than 60 seconds or so, that is). There was entirely too much Arwin in the film. I think Liv Tyler is absolutely lovely, but she should have shown up a few times, and briefly. Then again, I've always been a major fan of Eowyn and Faramir.
 

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members: