LOTR, yes, i am a nerd :) |
LOTR, yes, i am a nerd :) |
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 :) |
|
|
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.
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
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* |
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.
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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. |
|
|
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 :)
|
|
|
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 .
|
|
|
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 ), 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* |
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.
|
|
|
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* |
Aug 10 2010, 06:25 PM
Post
#15
|
Guest |
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.
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
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* |
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. |
|
|
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 |
|
|
Sep 6 2010, 02:25 PM
Post
#20
|
|
Tick tock, Bill Group: Administrator Posts: 8,764 Joined: Dec 2005 Member No: 333,948 |
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. |
|
|