LOTR - saw it last night (monday) low down, no spoil promise

[Genisist]

ok. just fyi. when you see it, if you see it. and if you care, just expect it not to follow the book too much. and you'll love it. its a great movie.

[Glych]

there's a book?

KIDDING KIDDING!

Thank you. I'm seeing it on friday.

-glych

[ErikZ]

The movies are doing so well they got someone to write a few books based on them. Don't bother though, they're pretty boring.

[Siece]

They might be boring, but I'm still being careful with my first edition[1] set. They'll probably be worth money some day.

On a more serious note, I'm actually kind of glad I decided not to take my daughter to see the film. And no, it's not because she's 3 years old and could never sit still for a 3 hour movie... OK, that was part of it. But the real reason is that they did Gollum much better than they did any of the other villians. So far the orcs, ringwraiths, etc. have been little more than cardboard evil. Risa would have laughed and thought they were cute. Gollum, however, is the sort of monster to give children nightmares.

[1]Technically, it's the 5th, 4th, and 3rd printings, respetively, of the first edition, but still...

--

[Glych]

I think it deserves an oscar for the special effects for Gollum.

The scene where he's debating with himself while the halflings sleep...wow!

Excellent direction!

As for the books, I both love and hate the books...

Tolkien was also a teacher in his life and was used to explaining highly complex things to, well, people that don't understand them...that's what teachers do... He was probably very good at it too...but this carries over into his writing.

I read...a LOT.

I'm used to good writers, bad writers, decent writers, sci fi, fantasy, non fiction, fiction, drama, comedy, literature, poetry, physics, theories, and business...not to mention any others I forgot to mention... I read everything from autobiographies to zoological studies...

Tolkien wrote for people who do not read much...

LET ME EXPLAIN!

For me, reading, say, The Hobbit. is mentaly taxing. Why? (forgive the incorrect quotes, my books are packed away, due to the remodel) Because Tolkien writes "we're in the shire." Good, cool. Shire. Self explaintory. A nice green pasture... But nooOOOooooo he has to describe the Shire for not 1, 2, or 3 pages, but 8....slowly changing and transforming my SHire into his Shire...well, after 8 pages of him twisting my brain around and we finally start onto Bilbo Baggens door....I can't take anymore. Then it's time to put the book down and take an advil...

There are only so many chapters you can write about a door...

Don't get me wrong, plot wise, point A to point B to point C and so on, is wonderful. The explainations of the motivations of the characters...wow! But....detail wise...it's....volumous...

LOL

If you ever want to read something funny, read Bored of the Rings..it's a farce, but basically, it's the entire story without description. Something akin to "In Middle Earth there's this place called the SHire which is green and cool ooking. Halflings live there which are people half the size of humans who go around barefooted. One of these guys lives in a cool place with a bitchin' door..." And so on and so forth...

-glych

[Siece]

For me, reading, say, The Hobbit. is mentaly taxing. Why? <snip> Because Tolkien writes "we're in the shire." Good, cool. Shire. Self explaintory. <snip>he has to describe the Shire for not 1, 2, or 3 pages, but 8....

Actually, Tolkien wrote The Hobbit for his children, who were 6 or 7 years old at the time, if I remember right. Kids that age really don't know what a shire is, and so he did have to explain it. It was fun to read when you were a kid, and it will be fun to read again to your children, when/if you have them. In between those times, however, it rightfully deserves to gather dust on your shelf, somewhere between Alice and Narnia.

--

[Glych]

Well, I'm talking about all of his writing, not just the Hobbit...

The one just sprung to mind the quickest, it doesn't make it "the best example EVER!"

But you catch my meaning about the description...

-glych

[Siece]

Well, I'm talking about all of his writing, not just the Hobbit...
<snip>
But you catch my meaning about the description...

Yes, I do, although I can't let the point pass without noting that most of Tolkien's writing, as we know it today, wasn't really his writing.

The Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales, and the History of Middle Earth were Tolkien's private notes. They're almost entirely description because all they were ever meant to be were stage notes, reminding Tolkien of what set pieces go with each scene, none of which the general public should have ever seen. After Tolkien died, his son gathered it all up, polished it as best he could, and published it under his father's name.

If you leave those out, then most of what Tolkien wrote was poetry, with relatively little description[1]. I just went and checked, and Bilbo's Last Song has exactly one line devoted to description, although most things have an accompanying adjective (but only one!).

[1]DisclaimerI'm saying 'little description' because nothing particularly stands out in my memory. The only book of tolkien's poetry which I actually own is the recently reissued Bilbo's Last Song. The other's have all been out of print since before I was born, but a few years back I managed to find most of them via interlibrary loan, and so got to read them through once or twice each. However, given that that was more than 3 years ago, and that I'm extraordinarily absentminded, it could simply be that I've forgotten it all.

[Glych]

The Silmarillion?!?!? *head explodes*

Don't remind me of the horror of that *wince* volumous...text....

Forgive me...I Hate that book...

Urg...

But, love him or hate him, he;s not one of my favorites...

and, Sieice, it's not like I like bad writers, I turned you onto Alfie, didn't I?

Booyah!!

(glych: 1, Siece: 0)

But to each their own.

-glych

[Siece]

The Silmarillion?!?!? *head explodes*

Don't remind me of the horror of that *wince* volumous...text....

Forgive me...I Hate that book...

My point was that it's not a book, or at least, not a whole one. <strike>The Silmarillion</strike> That Which Shall Not Be Named relates to a book in the same way that the stage notes relate to a play. Things would quickly fall apart if it didn't exist, but the audience (ie you, me and anyone else who reads the series) would walk out if we ever saw anything that would obviously point it out.

But, love him or hate him, he;s not one of my favorites...

It's actually OK. He's not one of my favorite's, either.

I tend to read writer's more along the lines of Heinlein and Asimov, although I have occasionally been blackamiled with my secret enjoyment of the Illuminatus! trilogy...

[FortyTwo]

The Silmarillion?!?!? *head explodes*

Don't remind me of the horror of that *wince* volumous...text....

Forgive me...I Hate that book...

My mother got The Silmarillion on CD for Christmas, and we listened to it as she drove me back to college. She eats that stuff up, all the Biblical analogies and lists of names and decriptions of every god and tree and so on... But, be it the lack of an actual plot or the fact that the reader's voice was so deep, soothing, and British, I fell asleep.

(I like actual reading better, myself, but Tolkien is just a bit thick in the wrong areas for my tastes.)

[Siece]

I was wrong...it can get worse...
If you like satire and/or have a strong stomache, click here:
http://tinyurl.com/4641

[Glych]

*blinks*

The Suess one is really good.

-glych

[Siece]

The Suess one is really good.

Yes...but if you keep reading the (long) legalese one hits you without warning. That's why I had to tell people to be careful...