|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Sept 2, 2021 13:18:12 GMT -5
An enjoyable documentary on Tolkien :
I don't think I had ever heard the voice of Christopher or John.
|
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Sept 2, 2021 23:46:35 GMT -5
And narrated by Judy Dench! Who should have had a part in the movies!
I have no idea what character she could have played, but now that this documentary has associated her with Tolkien, I demand that she be in the movies. Retroactively.
|
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Sept 4, 2021 17:38:07 GMT -5
And narrated by Judy Dench! Who should have had a part in the movies! I have no idea what character she could have played, but now that this documentary has associated her with Tolkien, I demand that she be in the movies. Retroactively. Long before the Peter Jackson films were even an twinkling in anyone's eye I actually saw her as Galadriel; she has that take no crap, regal persona down to a tee. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2021 19:05:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Nov 7, 2021 19:21:04 GMT -5
Looks like I should have held out, I bought myself a new set of Lord of the Rings just last Christmas and I didn't think it could be topped:  But that new set looks amazing! I love the illustrations. |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Nov 7, 2021 22:11:16 GMT -5
I have a couple of Tolkien art books - The Art of the Hobbit and The Art of Tolkien - but I'm still tempted to get this, even at that steep price. I'd like to have a look at it first though, must check if they have it at the local book shop. I'll check my Art of Tolkien too: if it claims to be "complete", i.e. if It seems that it probably contains everything in this illustrated LotR, I'll probably refrain from buying it.
|
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,218 
|
Post by Confessor on Nov 16, 2021 16:49:20 GMT -5
Finally managed to score a copy of the old Ballantine paperback The Tolkien Reader for a reasonable price and in pretty nice condition too...  I first became aware of this book when someone here (possibly mrp or Roquefort Raider) shared a photo of their Tolkien book collection and this was in it. I certainly liked the idea of a nifty little paperback that gathered together some of Tolkien's stray writings like "The Adventures of Tom Bombadil", "Leaf By Niggle", "Farmer Giles of Ham", and the professor's celebrated essay on Fairytales. But I will admit that Pauline Baynes' awesome cover illustration of Tom Bombadil was also a big part of the appeal in tracking down this paperback too. I'm looking forward to getting stuck into this on the long winter nights ahead. |
|
|
|
Post by Rob Allen on Nov 16, 2021 17:55:20 GMT -5
I've got that edition as well, and it's as good as you're hoping it is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2021 10:12:40 GMT -5
If this hasn’t already been shared, I’ll put it here: thecritic.co.uk/bored-of-the-ringsI think the guy has a point. I like Tolkien’s LOTR, but this “extended universe” is feeling much like a contrived cash cow to me. Just my view, though, I know many welcome it. |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Nov 26, 2021 1:09:52 GMT -5
If this hasn’t already been shared, I’ll put it here: thecritic.co.uk/bored-of-the-ringsI think the guy has a point. I like Tolkien’s LOTR, but this “extended universe” is feeling much like a contrived cash cow to me. Just my view, though, I know many welcome it.
I think it's a valid POV, for sure. I've never been able to make up my mind which if any of the posthumous Tolkien books I want to read beyond the Silmarillion, which I think was a welcome addition to the existing canon published during hs lifetime. But I have no idea how far I want to go beyond that, if at all.
The Hobbit movies I never have felt much interest in viewing, though I've looked at a few online images to see, for example, how they portrayed Sauron, after hearing that that character made an appearance in them, for some unacountable reason (well, unaccountable creatively, not commercially, of course). It was evident from the very start that they weren't at all concerned with the differences in tone and atmosphere between the Hobbit and the LotR trilogy, that they just wanted to cash in on the commercial success of the film vesion of the latter by making a prequel along the same lines. I doubt I'll ever go out of my way to see them.
As far as the tv show is concerned, there's every reason to feel suspicious, even cynical, towards the motivations behind it, but that doesn't mean it can't end up being a good show in spite of all that: I just watched the first of the Hammer Dracula films, and while I'm sure the film-makers chose the subject matter mainly for commercial reason, and it cannot be described as a faithful adaptation of the novel, it ends up being kind of magic anyway - largely because of the inspired, or perhaps just plain lucky, casting of Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing, but there were other important aspects as well - e.g. set design, photography, direction. Because of these elements it succeeds in evoking something of the spirit of the Stoker novel for me, almost in spite of itself - that is, in spite of things like its over-riding commerical concerns and cavalier attitude towards the source material.
That's probably the best we can hope for from the tv series: inspired or lucky casting, and technical expertise that goes beyond the merely professional to capture, if only by accident, something of the spirit of Tolkien's world. I'm still planning to give it a try, because unlike in the case of the Hobbit movie, I haven't yet heard anything specific that's struck my alarm bells, though there are lots of general grounds for doubt. My expectations are low, because I think it's really hard to pull these things off even with the best of intentions - and from my POV as a Tolkien fan, I'm not sure this series is being made with the best of intentions, in contrast to say, Jackson's LotR or Villeneuve's Dune
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2021 7:15:50 GMT -5
Just doesn’t feel organic to me at times.
I know the purpose of any entertainment company is to make money. That’s the bottom line. But I still feel a cash cow is a ‘thing’ at times.
I’m ecstatic that we’re finally seeing the further adventures of Reeve-Superman and Keaton-Batman in comicbook forum. I’d love to see some more Batman ‘66 stuff. I can’t help but think there are some TV and movie franchises that are ripe for rediscovery.
But purely on a personal level, it just feels like that “Bored of the Rings” article hit home for me. Just a subjective thing, I know.
I didn’t watch The Hobbit films. I may do. I know this has been touched upon before, but those goblin tunnels in the book were rather intimate, small and claustrophobic, yet the footage I saw of those tunnels in the movies seemed huge in scale. I’m surprised they managed to fit all that stuff in.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roquefort Raider on Nov 26, 2021 8:49:22 GMT -5
I didn’t watch The Hobbit films. I may do. I wouldn't, honestly, and I say that as a huge fan of the Peter Jackson LotR trilogy. Each moment of grace in the Hobbit trilogy is paid for by ten bad video game sequences (the escape from the Goblins' tunnels is particularly awful), Legolas defying gravity, action movie clichés and the mandatory bad guy who dies, comes back, dies again and comes back again. There was no magic in those film; only a sense of a franchise being milked for all it was worth -it was like a Middle Earth Transfomers movie. The cast was all right and I enjoyed the Dwarves' visit at Bag End, and it was admittedly cool to see Elijah Wood as Frodo again, but the whole thing went downhill from there. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 26, 2021 9:20:46 GMT -5
A lot of people have mentioned those Goblin tunnels. I did Google an image. Goblin tunnels? More like a Goblin nation!
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob Allen on Nov 26, 2021 12:35:33 GMT -5
At first I thought they might be writing about this book:  |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,218
|
Post by Confessor on Nov 26, 2021 12:50:42 GMT -5
At first I thought they might be writing about this book: Ha ha...yeah, I thought of that book too! I used to have a copy, which I picked up secondhand in the late 90s. It was, as I'm sure you know, published in the late '60s and I'm guessing that it must've been rather amusing at the time. Certainly, it tied in with the explosion of popularity that LoTRs was enjoying with college-age kids and counter-culture Hippies. But I have to say that reading it some 30 years later, I found a lot of its humour to be really dated and not terribly funny. In the end I let it go to a local used book store. Bored of the Rings was still in print as recently as the cinematic release of The Hobbit trilogy, I believe, but, as far as I'm concerned, it's only real worth is as a curio of the tremendous underground popularity of Tolkien's masterpiece in the late 60s and early 70s. |
|
