dog-days Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 He"d seemed immortal. I suppose that he was the last of Tolkien's children to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Marquis de Leech Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 1 hour ago, dog-days said: He"d seemed immortal. I suppose that he was the last of Tolkien's children to go. Tolkien's daughter Priscilla is still alive at 90. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Marquis de Leech Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 “In the twilight of autumn [the ship:] sailed out of Mithlond, until the seas of of the Bent World fell away beneath it, and the winds of the round sky troubled it no more, and borne upon the high airs above the mists of the world it passed into the Ancient West, and an end was come for the Eldar of story and of song.” R.I.P. Christopher, and thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Drewy Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 Saw this blog post being posted around since his passing: http://theblogthattimeforgot.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-lord-of-rings-alternate-timeline.html It's essentially both a defence of Christopher Tolkien's treatment of his father's work - around the time he was taking pelters for his criticisms of Jackson - and an alternate history positing if he really had been the money-minded figure critics have made him out to be. It effectively shows the scholarly respect he treated his father's creation with. He really was a fantasy and literary saint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 18 minutes ago, Ser Drewy said: Saw this blog post being posted around since his passing: http://theblogthattimeforgot.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-lord-of-rings-alternate-timeline.html It's essentially both a defence of Christopher Tolkien's treatment of his father's work - around the time he was taking pelters for his criticisms of Jackson - and an alternate history positing if he really had been the money-minded figure critics have made him out to be. It effectively shows the scholarly respect he treated his father's creation with. He really was a fantasy and literary saint. Very imaginative, and spot on about how CT was a caretaker, not a money-grubber. He treated it as a scholar would, for the most part. This should be praised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 4 hours ago, Ser Drewy said: Saw this blog post being posted around since his passing: http://theblogthattimeforgot.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-lord-of-rings-alternate-timeline.html It's essentially both a defence of Christopher Tolkien's treatment of his father's work - around the time he was taking pelters for his criticisms of Jackson - and an alternate history positing if he really had been the money-minded figure critics have made him out to be. It effectively shows the scholarly respect he treated his father's creation with. He really was a fantasy and literary saint. Well, the Jackson movies are basically travesties - never liked those, especially because of the good scenes they had which indicate how great those movies could have been if they had been faithful. Considering the New Zealand landscape those could have been so much more ... yet they weren't. The only versions I can watch these days are fan cuts which cut all the shitty non-Tolkien stuff - which are actually surprisingly good. Christopher certainly did an amazing job keeping the movie people off his father's work - but they also did make a lot of money. Really a lot, if you look at the settlements they made after the movies and the new TV show. But he isn't just a saint but effectively an angel when compared to, say, Brian Herbert. 8 hours ago, The Marquis de Leech said: Tolkien's daughter Priscilla is still alive at 90. Yeah, when I last attended the Oxonmoot she was still meeting the new people. She is a very nice old lady. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlyaP Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 8 hours ago, Lord Varys said: The only versions I can watch these days are fan cuts which cut all the shitty non-Tolkien stuff - which are actually surprisingly good. Interest piqued. What's this now? Toss a coin to your boarder and show him some links! #sorrynotsorry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Varys Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 8 minutes ago, IlyaP said: Interest piqued. What's this now? Toss a coin to your boarder and show him some links! #sorrynotsorry Oh, sorry, don't have some right now. I got them over fanedit.org, I think, years ago. But they no longer or never hosted the stuff (which makes some sense) but back then one could get links or hints there where to look for places to download them. Can say, though, the versions I watched were six movies rather than three, recreating the very setting and scenes of the six books of the Red Book of the Westmarch. Some cuts are clunky (if I recall correctly the pointless 'Sam go home' shit doesn't disappear without a trace from the movie, for example) but it is actually surprising how easy it is to remove a lot of the shit and how well it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlyaP Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 What exactly are they? Fan edits of Jackson's movies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 5 minutes ago, IlyaP said: What exactly are they? Fan edits of Jackson's movies? angry fans edited out stuff that wasn’t in the book I guess? I know there’s one for the hobbit which trims it down to 3 hours but those had a LOT of stuff added. I mean the third film is like 22 pages of the book? I digress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlyaP Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 Just now, Darth Richard II said: I know there’s one for the hobbit which trims it down to 3 hours but those had a LOT of stuff added. There's a cut which my fiancee and I watched, called 'The Hobbit: There and Back Again', which features scenes that only appear in the book. ...And it doesn't work. It's 3 hours long, which was fine. But it revealed the obvious problem of doing a direct book-to-film adaptation: there's not much development room given to the 14 principal characters. Which speaks to the known challenge of adapting a book that's only 300 or so pages in length, features 14 main characters, and a climax where the lead character is unconscious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 I dunno the old cartoon did a good job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlyaP Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 Can't say I've seen it, so won't comment on it. But if they've managed to do justice to the source material, then hats of to them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Richard II Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 It’s from the late hmmmm 60s? 70s? It’s been ages. I’d also argue against saying all the dwarves are main characters but holy shit I haven’t read the book in a long tine either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Marquis de Leech Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 It's the Rankin-Bass Hobbit from 1977, and, yes, it remains the best adaptation of the book - even though it cuts Beorn and the Arkenstone. The competitors are a 12 minute cartoon from 1966, that has no Elves or Dwarves in it, a Soviet adaptation from 1985 with lots of dancing, and Peter Jackson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yet another Arya ! Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 RIP Christopher Tolkien, son of JRR-Beren and Edith-Luthien... I will always be grateful for the sorting, assembling, writing (for a few parts) and publishing of the Silmarillon, and for the respect he showed for his father work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HexMachina Posted January 18, 2020 Share Posted January 18, 2020 19 hours ago, IlyaP said: There's a cut which my fiancee and I watched, called 'The Hobbit: There and Back Again', which features scenes that only appear in the book. ...And it doesn't work. It's 3 hours long, which was fine. But it revealed the obvious problem of doing a direct book-to-film adaptation: there's not much development room given to the 14 principal characters. Which speaks to the known challenge of adapting a book that's only 300 or so pages in length, features 14 main characters, and a climax where the lead character is unconscious. The challenge is spreading 300 pages of a children’s book over 3 feature length films. Like butter spread over too much bread...There is nothing particularly difficult about the adaptation itself if you stick to a reasonable timescale. And i note that the issue of little to no development for most characters...was not dealt with in the films. 9 hours, or However long those stupid films dragged on for, and nothing really distinguishes any of the dwarves except that terrible romance subplot. This is not a difficulty with adapting, its just poor decision making. And of course snipping scenes from a longer film and taping them together isn’t going to work, because all the added fluff in between changes thing. Bringing this back to Christopher Tolkien, it strangely never connected in my mind that he was, i guess, one of the inspirations for the Hobbit - Tolkien writing the book for his children. Obviously i knew he was Tolkien’s son but i just never linked the two in my mind. A curious thought Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ants Posted January 22, 2020 Share Posted January 22, 2020 RIP, a sorry day. (on the side discussion, is there a reason more than 3-4 of the dwarves need development? Between Gandalf, Bilbo, Balin and Thorin you're fine for key characters to carry the story). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlyaP Posted January 22, 2020 Share Posted January 22, 2020 9 minutes ago, ants said: is there a reason more than 3-4 of the dwarves need development? Between Gandalf, Bilbo, Balin and Thorin you're fine for key characters to carry the story Well, they're introduced, and they're on the same physical journey as the main character, so, y'know - it'd be nice to know a bit more about them, given that they're along for the whole story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhom Posted January 22, 2020 Share Posted January 22, 2020 12 hours ago, ants said: RIP, a sorry day. (on the side discussion, is there a reason more than 3-4 of the dwarves need development? Between Gandalf, Bilbo, Balin and Thorin you're fine for key characters to carry the story). I tend to agree with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.