LAN.gnome
Urban Legend
|
|
|
« Reply #280 on: 12-31-2003 16:07 »
« Last Edit on: 12-31-2003 16:07 »
|
|
Not so much in other movies, though; I think it's just in LOTR that he looks so feminine. If you've seen Orlando Bloom on talk shows or in Pirates of the Carribean, he doesn't look so girly. I think it's the long blonde hair that does it. Not-girly, entirely-masculine TOTPD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cube_166
Professor
|
|
hated the first film, found the second one to be okay and the third to be enjoyable. However the end was far too long, should have ended on the rock and all that followed was meaningless drivel designed to prey on the bladders of the extremely dedicated filmgoers, especially after you've already been there for nearly three hours. Gripe the second: the adverts for it on tv. Yeah it was a decent film. Maybe even a good film, but for christsakes, they make it sound like its the best film ever to be created, as if the sole purpose of the existence of the human race is to create this film. And on one advert someone describes the film as heartbreaking. Heartbreaking? what film has she been watching? the only mildly sad part in the entire film is gollum (by far the best actor among the group) gets killed, and i can't really see anyone bursting into a huge flood of tears because they'll never see Gollum again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mr. Potter
Professor
|
|
Well, it's someone's opinion. You don' think is that good, some people think is excellent. And I found it heartbreaking. People react differently to films.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
~FazeShift~
Moderator
DOOP Ubersecretary
|
|
|
« Reply #289 on: 01-01-2004 22:45 »
« Last Edit on: 01-01-2004 22:45 »
|
|
In the first one, Saruman, played by Christopher Lee (bloody hell, just rent the first films) imprisoned Gandalf in his big black tower (Orthanc, in Isengard) which you see at the beginning surrounded by water. He told a moth (remember, wizard) to get his pal Gwaihir, lord of the eagles to come rescue him.
So in the final battle, the moth comes along to tell him the eagles are coming again, like cavalry (after he told it to get the eagles again, though I'm not sure when he did this, anyone remember?)
Edit: Also, Tolkien was obsessed with eagles, they're in many of his books. Well two definately, The Hobbit aswell.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grim
Professor
|
|
Originally posted by Cube_166: ...I can't really see anyone bursting into a huge flood of tears because they'll never see Gollum again. I know its not what you meant, but when they eventually make the hobbit into a movie, Gollum makes an appearance in that too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
LAN.gnome
Urban Legend
|
|
Originally posted by mazaite: Well not entirely Elrond, Galadriel, and all the other elves (except Arwen) who don't get physicaly killed in some way, all go to the west at some point in their lives when they are ready to leave middle earth behind forever. Indeed, but Elrond and Galadriel must go, while the rest of the elves (albeit all of them) choose to go.
|
|
|
|
|
David A
Space Pope
|
|
Originally posted by Cube_166: ...i can't really see anyone bursting into a huge flood of tears because they'll never see Gollum again. And that is perhaps the saddest thing of all; no one will mourn the passing of poor Smeagol. Originally posted by LAN.gnome: It's called the Undying Lands; it's where the gods reside, and is the place that the elves are leaving Middle-Earth for. The Valar and the Maiar are not gods. Middle-Earth has only one God: Eru, the One, who in the Elvish tongue is named Ilúvatar. Originally posted by Venus: can someone explain to me the purpose of the eagles? The eagles make more sense if you've read The Hobbit. In The Hobbit, Gandalf, Bilbo, and the dwarves befriended the lord of the eagles. This fact probably should have been mentioned at some point in the films.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mr. Potter
Professor
|
|
I agree with that. I mean, I love the LOTR movies but it's true that there are some plot holes and under developed characters. That's a problem found in many movies, not only in the ones adapted from books, but also in all kind of epic films.
|
|
|
|
|
|
David A
Space Pope
|
|
Originally posted by Tikka Bird: Maybe the ring would have made him succomb anyways, we'll never know. It's very likely that Sméagol would have eventually succumbed anyway. Gandalf said that, as far as he knew, Bilbo was the only person who had ever willingly given up a ring of power; and Sméagol was a rather greedy and grasping individual to begin with. But you're right. We'll never know what would have happened, if things had gone differently. Also, when Smeagol and Gollum are arguing, many people in the theatre were laughing!!? Why? I found it very deeply touching. People were laughing? Tell them I hate them. I was practically in tears watching that scene. And I ended up hating the average moviegoer for being so shallow. Well, take a look at the average movie. That's what the average moviegoer likes. These people are idiots.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David A
Space Pope
|
|
Originally posted by mazaite: Not really. The ring make's people want to possess it no matter the cost. The Sméagol we see in the flashback is already insane from the ring. Originally posted by Kid Ridiculous: Right, it just means he was weak willed to be affected so quickly, not nessesarily evil. Okay, fine. He was weak willed. [Fry]But my point remains valid.[/Fry] Originally posted by Venus: I was really hoping for a happy ending for him and hated the way things ended up. Oh, I don't know. I think it was a happy ending, of sorts. He did destroy the ring; and in death, Sméagol is finally free of its hold on him. It isn't the happiest ending that he could have had; but tragic characters usually don't get to live happily ever after.
|
|
|
|
|
Cube_166
Professor
|
|
|
« Reply #311 on: 01-04-2004 19:18 »
« Last Edit on: 01-04-2004 19:18 »
|
|
Originally posted by Venus: i adored Smeagol. Seriously he was the one reason i became a fan of the movie series. I could give a damn about the hobbits, the epic battles, all of it. Exactly. That is why the first film is so abysmal yet the other two are good. [Gets pelted with rotten fish] What? People can't have a negative opinion around here?
|
|
|
|
|
|
User_names_suck
Professor
|
|
I think the first was the best but I did like the character of Gollum/Smeagol,
I find Tolkiens choice odd because I assume it has parralels to bible teaching and christian belif, And so if corrupted characters can become good again, that runs parralel to the new testament forgiving God, but it seems the rings affects cant be undone
|
|
|
|
|
David A
Space Pope
|
|
Originally posted by User_names_suck: ...it seems the rings affects cant be undone The effects of the ring are akin to drug addiction. An addiction can't simply be undone. Think of an alcoholic who's been sober for years. You could say that he's overcome his addiction, but he still wouldn't go have a drink, because the addiction is still there. Remember Bilbo's reaction to seeing the ring, in Rivendell? Bilbo was able to give up the ring, but as long as the ring was around, he would always be tempted to use it. Unlike Bilbo, Sméagol never chose to give up the ring. It was taken from him, and he wants it back. To continue the analogy with alcoholism, Sméagol is like an alcoholic who hates being a drunk, but keeps coming back to the bottle anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Action Jacktion
Professor
|
|
|
« Reply #316 on: 01-05-2004 22:08 »
« Last Edit on: 01-05-2004 22:08 »
|
|
Gollum had to die, but he also had to die right at that moment. Frodo has several chances to kill him but he doesn't because he pities him. That turns out to be good for Frodo because it's only because of Gollum that the Ring is destroyed. It all goes back to what Gandalf says when he's telling Frodo about Gollum. Originally posted by David A: The Valar and the Maiar are not gods. Middle-Earth has only one God: Eru, the One, who in the Elvish tongue is named Ilúvatar. Tolkien did refer to the Valar and Maiar as gods, but I think it was mainly a convenient term.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|