|
skasion posted:or his first attempt at writing Saruman’s appeal to Gandalf which is way creepier and subtler than the published version. ok now you've piqued my interest
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2018 23:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 11:26 |
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:ok now you've piqued my interest The substance is mostly the same but Saruman’s attitude is different and Gandalf’s snarky objections are cut down. At this point in the drafts he’s not obviously Gandalf’s boss, and he behaves more like a colleague making an argument than a superior demanding compliance. He’s also definitely in Sauron’s service rather than trying to set himself up as a rival power. His prepared speech about the benefits of turning evil is just a good bit more convincing. You can see why he would have thought he could sell Gandalf on this, as opposed to the Fellowship version where he’s obviously never going to make it work.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 00:15
|
|
|
It’s also a lot more directly referential of the kinds of collaborationist rhetoric that must have been flying around a lot in late 30s Britain. Really made my eyebrows fly up when I heard it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 01:02
|
|
|
Data Graham posted:It’s also a lot more directly referential of the kinds of collaborationist rhetoric that must have been flying around a lot in late 30s Britain. Really made my eyebrows fly up when I heard it. Indeed quote:“I have not brought you here to be instructed, but to give you a choice. A new power has arisen. Against it there is no hope. With it there is such hope as we never had before. The power is going to win. [Added in margin without direction for insertion: We fight against it in vain — and in any case foolishly; for we have looked always at it from the outside with hatred, and have not considered what are its further purposes. We have seen only the things done, often under necessity, or caused by resistance and foolish rebellion.] I shall grow as it grows, until all things are ours. In the end, I — or we, if you will join me — may in the end come to control that Power. Indeed why not? Could not we by this means accomplish all, and more than all, that we have striven for before with the help of the weak Men and fugitive Elves?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 01:10
|
|
|
skasion posted:I’ve been listening to his History of Middle-earth stuff instead. Treason of Isengard at the moment. It’s p good, I had never really paid attention to some of this early material like the bitchin’ early draft of “Earendil was a mariner” where he kills Ungoliant and flies off to the sun goddess(?) to become some kind of lightning deity, or his first attempt at writing Saruman’s appeal to Gandalf which is way creepier and subtler than the published version. Where is that stuff? I don't see anything tagged or named HoME in the podcast feed I'm using. I've been listening to the archived stuff from the beginning. Silmarillion Seminar was some very interesting discussion, I skipped the Faerie course and Riddles in the Dark, going to give the SilmFilm a shot but will probably skip it in favor of going directly to the Lord of the Rings series of episodes he's doing now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 03:15
|
|
|
It’s separate feed, under Mythgard rather than Tolkien Prof.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 04:56
|
|
|
So when does Amazon's LOTR series air? 2020 at the earliest?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 04:57
|
|
|
https://www.theverge.com/2018/2/4/16959406/j-r-r-tolkien-maps-middle-earth-england-national-parks-dan-bell-art
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2018 21:14
|
|
|
Previous page people mentioned ME podcasts. I'm not anywhere nearly as knowledgeable as you guys (I've read the Simarillion and Children of Hurin once, and LotR twice). Which podcast would be appropriate for my level of ME knowledge?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 17:57
|
|
|
Let me see if I can find you one that is good This series was excellent iirc. https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/mythgard-academy/id690277482?mt=2&i=1000229156712 Unfinished tales is pretty important. euphronius fucked around with this message at 18:03 on Feb 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 17:58
|
|
|
Ways back when he was first podcasting, the Tolkien Prof guy did a more basic podcast series about the published LOTR. It’s like 5-10 episodes per volume so way less in depth than the current insanely slow series, but that’s probably a good thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 18:03
|
|
|
Yeah that starts here https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/mythgard-academy/id690277482?mt=2&i=1000164456467 Definitely do not do his current exploring lord of the rings pod. It is for masochists with long commutes only
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 18:05
|
|
|
Perfect, thanks! I do read a ton of SF too so listening about Ender's Game should be interesting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 18:08
|
|
|
The Dune one was fantastic iirc. He did it only from the POV of that one book and eschewed all the later stuff which was pretty cool.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 18:10
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Yeah that starts here https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/mythgard-academy/id690277482?mt=2&i=1000164456467 Though I should note that I'm now so deep in the habit that I purposely have to interleave it with stuff like the Mythgard Movie Club and the HHGTTG series and old back-episodes of SilmFilm just because it takes a lot less than a week for me to consume a single LotR session. Thanks a lot you guys
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2018 18:10
|
|
|
Furism posted:Previous page people mentioned ME podcasts. I'm not anywhere nearly as knowledgeable as you guys (I've read the Simarillion and Children of Hurin once, and LotR twice). Which podcast would be appropriate for my level of ME knowledge? I would like to say a couple of things about Corey Olsen, who is being recommended. First, that he was previously a professor at a reputable university and then left to set up a sub-degree mill vanity project which literally uses the same method as Free Republic for raising funds. There used to be a page on its website bloviating about how they were totally going to become a real school, but it turns out that they never made it past the getting non-profit status hurdle, presumably because the IRS refused to clap for Tinker Bell. Second, this is the level of the insight you can expect from him, over 40,000 90-minute episodes. This is, verbatim, his analysis of the "One ring to rule them all" poem, and what it tells us about Mordor and Sauron in chapter 2 LotR, from 30 minutes of episode 4 about LotR. quote:Let's review. What do we know about Mordor? We know that shadows lie there, and that presumably that's where the...binding goes on, that's where you'll be brought when you're ruled by the Dark Lord, and found by the Dark Lord, brought by the Dark Lord, and bound, and presumably all of these things, the end destination of all these things is the Land of Mordor. Where the shadows lie. And yes, we have the Dark Lord on his dark throne. In the Land of Mordor. So we have it associated with "the Dark Lord", "his dark throne", uh, "shadows lying"...and by the way, I just love that, you know, "where the shadows lie." What a perfect line that is! It's like, it's not just where the shadows lurk, or the shadows are. Like, they lie there. Like, they're just...waiting...for something. Who knows! I just love the verb "lie", about the shadows. Those are the rumours we as readers have heard. So when it's invoked, it's not a complete blank for us. We don't know that much, we don't know who the Dark Lord is, we don't...but it doesn't sound good, right? The finding, and the binding, and all that stuff, sounds kinda bad. "Mentioning the binding by the ring with no explanation is just totally creepy." I totally agree!  If Tom Bombadil is a nature spirit, then Corey Olsen is a Painful Academic Prose spirit. Occasionally he hits on something genuinely interesting in the manner of a broken clock being correct twice a day, but like the broken clock, it doesn't last more than a minute.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 19:58
|
|
|
How much money did you give him ?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 20:01
|
|
|
I don't really care about the guy's dumb education scam or whatever it is but that "analysis" is, uh, real bad. I've been thinking about diving into his LOTR casts and now I am...hesitant. Is that really the best to expect from him? Is there a better Middle Earth podcast series that has some depth to it, then?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 20:03
|
|
|
euphronius posted:How much money did you give him ?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 20:04
|
|
|
Btw that is iirc exegesis from the pov of a new reader which is a common theme or tool of analysis.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 20:17
|
|
|
my bony fealty posted:I don't really care about the guy's dumb education scam or whatever it is but that "analysis" is, uh, real bad. I've been thinking about diving into his LOTR casts and now I am...hesitant. Is that really the best to expect from him? It’s cherry picked example, but not insanely so: he does have good analysis on occasion, but you can also expect fannish waffling of the “wow so cool” variety. I also don’t care about his academic pretensions, it’s basically just a book club podcast (or two) and I neither expect nor receive super hot takes from it. I think mostly the appeal of the show is that it goes over the text slowly and in detail and lets you think about it rather than just taking stuff for granted or glossing over it. The Exploring LotR series though has the problem that it goes so slowly and with so much audience input that any individual episode covers almost nothing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2018 20:21
|
|
|
Hey, glad to see there's a Tolkien thread. I got really into the books by reading the Atlas of Middle Earth and looking at the maps approximately 8 million times as a kid, butI've never read The Silmarillion because it's a bit too intimidating for me, so I apologize if this is a stupid question. How is Melkor/Morgoth scarier than Sauron? Or rather why did Melkor get thrown into oblivion while they leave Sauron (and Shelob and Durin's Bane) alone? It seems like he was just "Sauron, but in the First Age" and doesn't seem all that different from Sauron but with things like armies of Balrogs instead of armies of orcs. Am I missing something?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 21:41
|
|
|
axeil posted:Hey, glad to see there's a Tolkien thread. I got really into the books by reading the Atlas of Middle Earth and looking at the maps approximately 8 million times as a kid, butI've never read The Silmarillion because it's a bit too intimidating for me, so I apologize if this is a stupid question. Sauron is to Melkor as Wormtongue is to Saruman, basically. Melkor was an archangel/"Valar," whereas Sauron is just a "Maiar," i.e., just a normal angel, the same order of being as Gandalf and Saruman (although far stronger than either of those two). He was basically Melkor's henchman/Igor/minion. I believe he pretended to "turn good" so the Valar gave him probation instead of exile (which turned out to be a mistake!), but i'd need to look that up to be sure. This is also why Gandalf and the wizards are all that show up to fight Sauron, instead of the Valar showing up in force to stomp him out. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 21:52 on Feb 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 21:47
|
|
|
Melkor came from before there was time or space. (He's a Lucifer metaphor.) He was evil before the Fall of Man (and probably caused it though we don't see this in any form) and part of that is he took the beauty of Creation and spoiled it in a massive tantrum simply because he didn't come up with it first. I don't think Melkor or Sauron are supposed to be frightening necessarily. They are evil which makes them petty, spiteful, and sullen. They do horrible things but as individuals they're really just pitiful because everything they do is motivated by resentment. Melkor got thrown into oblivion because everyone got tired of his poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 21:49
|
|
|
In the second age, they didn't know Sauron was even there until he was practically already beaten, and in the third, they were reluctant to intervene directly after things turned out so badly the last time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 21:50
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Sauron is to Melkor as Wormtongue is to Saruman, basically. HIJK posted:Melkor came from before there was time or space. (He's a Lucifer metaphor.) He was evil before the Fall of Man (and probably caused it though we don't see this in any form) and part of that is he took the beauty of Creation and spoiled it in a massive tantrum simply because he didn't come up with it first. Ah thank you for this. Yeah the thing for me is that once I started reading the Atlas I was made aware that Sauron wasn't even the real Lucifer analogy but yet he seemed powerful enough to fit the bill. So this clears it up a bit. It's not that Melkor was more powerful than Sauron necessarily but rather that he came first (I never got the Maia-Valar distinction either ) and inspired all the evil in Sauron.Bongo Bill posted:In the second age, they didn't know Sauron was even there until he was practically already beaten, and in the third, they were reluctant to intervene directly after things turned out so badly the last time. Is this a reference to the Silmarillion or something else? I feel like I really should read the Silmarillion but just looking at wikis and the Atlas and other things I have a real, real hard time keeping all the name straight and I fear that I'm going to get confused or not like it that much. I think its that all the Elvish(?) names are so strange and hard to ground in reality. I had a really hard time following the plot of Final Fantasy Tactics for the same reason because all the translated names were almost but not quite standard names and I just ended up confused the whole time. edit: Also is it explained at any point why people like Boromir/Saruman think the Ring will give them immense power and allow them to defeat Sauron? It certainly doesn't let anyone shoot lightning out of their hands or any such nonsense, nor does it make you impervious to harm. Is it just that the ring has such a poisoning effect on the mind that it makes you think it can accomplish anything you want it to? Basically, it seems like the Ring doesn't have much power that anyone not-named Sauron can use except for its ability to make you live unnaturally long, so it always confused me as to why people thought there was any power worth using in the Ring. It always seemed like it had power...but only if Sauron had it. axeil fucked around with this message at 22:06 on Feb 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 21:59
|
|
|
The Silmarillion is easier then you might think, the characters are slowly introduced and they are given very vivid descriptions and personalities so it's pretty easy to tell them apart. The wiki format would divest them of their personalities so it would be easy to lose track. The difference between Valar and Maiar is the difference between Seraphs and Cherubs. Both are angels, they just have different jobs and are only given power to accomplish those jobs. axeil posted:edit: Also is it explained at any point why people like Boromir/Saruman think the Ring will give them immense power and allow them to defeat Sauron? It certainly doesn't let anyone shoot lightning out of their hands or any such nonsense, nor does it make you impervious to harm. Is it just that the ring has such a poisoning effect on the mind that it makes you think it can accomplish anything you want it to? Galadriel explains a little bit about this to Frodo in Lorien but the gist is that a mortal can in fact use the One Ring. The idea is that the One Ring takes a measure of how much power you can handle and it gives you that much. Boromir could not use it to kill people with his brain but if Galadriel used it then she could tear down a mountain with it because she is more powerful than Boromir. The other thing you have to understand is that the One Ring lies in order to trick people into using it. The One Ring is a parasitical object that utterly destroys its current owner. It twists you into a ghoul of sorts that is totally obsessed with the Ring and totally subservient to it. The One Ring is sentient and tortures people with temptation. HIJK fucked around with this message at 22:10 on Feb 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 22:06
|
|
|
HIJK posted:The Silmarillion is easier then you might think, the characters are slowly introduced and they are given very vivid descriptions and personalities so it's pretty easy to tell them apart. The wiki format would divest them of their personalities so it would be easy to lose track. Oh this is encouraging! Maybe I'll give it a try then. The amount of world-building and the detail has always impressed me but I've been intimidated that having it all as a history, rather than a narrative might make me dislike it and poison my enjoyment  Is there a recommended edition? Do any of them come with good maps/glossaries/list of characters? The maps really helped me with my first read-through of the trilogy back before the movies came out. edit: I've also never read The Hobbit  . Is that recommended as well? I've seen all three movies and I feel like I felt a lot more  about them than the typical ire I've seen from folks because I never read the source material. For example, I really liked the stuff about Dol Guldur since I had seen it mentioned in The Atlas and now I finally understood what exactly was going on with The Necromancer.
axeil fucked around with this message at 22:13 on Feb 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 22:07
|
|
|
axeil posted:Hey, glad to see there's a Tolkien thread. I got really into the books by reading the Atlas of Middle Earth and looking at the maps approximately 8 million times as a kid, butI've never read The Silmarillion because it's a bit too intimidating for me, so I apologize if this is a stupid question. So Sauron ends up being a bigger threat to the people of Middle-Earth, but never even tried to do anything about Valinor/Aman, while Morgoth represented a threat (sort of, he could never have won) to all of Arda and maybe Ea. edit: Ea is all of creation, Arda is all of the world, Middle-Earth is the continent that LotR and some of the Silmarillion takes place in. The Valar are akin to demi-gods while the Maiar are closer to angels. The creation of Ea is portrayed as a song that Morgoth tries to corrupt, which is something that fundamentally, Sauron can't even begin to do. He's part and parcel of the world, though a very powerful figure in it (in part because he is very clever with his power), while Morgoth is powerful enough to think that he could take complete control of creation from, essentially, God. (He can't.) Ravenfood fucked around with this message at 22:18 on Feb 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 22:12
|
|
|
axeil posted:Oh this is encouraging! Maybe I'll give it a try then. The amount of world-building and the detail has always impressed me but I've been intimidated that having it all as a history, rather than a narrative might make me dislike it and poison my enjoyment I don't know about editions but I can tell you that it doesn't read like a history book. There is a narrative but it's a slow one built over thousands of years and each chapter of the Silmarillion is a self contained story. You could pull it out and read a random story around a campfire and not miss all that much.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 22:12
|
|
|
I don't like the Hobbit at all. To each his own.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 22:13
|
|
|
axeil posted:Oh this is encouraging! Maybe I'll give it a try then. The amount of world-building and the detail has always impressed me but I've been intimidated that having it all as a history, rather than a narrative might make me dislike it and poison my enjoyment heyo dude, start off with The Hobbit! There are some really nice editions available for cheap, so you should start there and see what you think, don't try to piece the material together from the Internet, that won't give you the whole picture.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 22:15
|
|
|
Ravenfood posted:This is probably all very wrong, but here was my stab at this. There are two main features at play here. Everything was grander in the First Age, for one thing. Galadriel and Elrond are two of the major players opposing Sauron in the Second and Third Ages, but in the First, Galadriel doesn't do much in part because she thinks that Morgoth is beyond the might of the Eldar (this despite her being Feanor's niece) and Elrond does't even feature that I remember. Second, Morgoth also spends a ton of his power trying to directly control and create things that aren't his right to do so, while Sauron spends his time manipulating and corrupting, so he punches above his "weight" so to speak. I also think I remember getting the idea that while Sauron tried to concentrate his power into himself and rule over the people of Middle-Earth, Morgoth tried to assert lordship over Arda itself. Morgoth was actively trying to change the fundamental nature of creation, Sauron just wanted to use it for temporal power, if that makes sense. Ah this also is very helpful, thanks! HIJK posted:I don't know about editions but I can tell you that it doesn't read like a history book. There is a narrative but it's a slow one built over thousands of years and each chapter of the Silmarillion is a self contained story. You could pull it out and read a random story around a campfire and not miss all that much. Oh interesting. I'll have to do some browsing. I'll also include the edit I put in my earlier post here. axeil posted:edit: I've also never read The Hobbit I really wish I understood the anger people had at The Hobbit movies. Clearly there's a reason people reacted so negatively but without having read the book I can't figure out why. I remember being very annoyed at how the LOTR movies handled Faramir since his whole point was to show that not all men would be corrupted by the Ring and the movie made him seem just like his brother, but other than that things lined up pretty much with how I imagined them as I read the series.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 22:16
|
|
|
Faramir was tempted in the book. I think right ?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 22:19
|
|
|
The Hobbit is an excellent and short children's book that got stretched out into three dumb movies that shoehorned in pointless action sequences and massive battle scenes because thats what people remember from the Lord of the Rings films
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 22:19
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Faramir was tempted in the book. He is tempted, but resists and immediately helps Frodo. In the movies we have that long arduous sequence where he takes Sam and Frodo to Osgiliath. HerraS posted:The Hobbit is an excellent and short children's book that got stretched out into three dumb movies that shoehorned in pointless action sequences and massive battle scenes because thats what people remember from the Lord of the Rings films There aren't action sequences/battle scenes in the book like the big battle at the end or the escape from Goblintown? Not trolling, I'm legitimately asking. I'm watching a fan edit of the Hobbit films now and I'm about halfway through and have found things much easier to follow. So it was all about bloat and turning things that were a sentence or two into half an hour set pieces?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 22:22
|
|
|
HerraS posted:The Hobbit is an excellent and short children's book that got stretched out into three dumb movies that shoehorned in pointless action sequences and massive battle scenes because thats what people remember from the Lord of the Rings films axeil posted:
Ok HOO BOOYY Hobbit opinions INCOMING: I really hated the hobbit films for two reasons: 1) They were *drastically* overstretched. There's one movie's worth of story stretched out over like nine hours of film. I could literally read The Hobbit in less time than it takes to watch the Hobbit films, and I know this because I tested, and it wasn't even close. 2) They fundamentally change the story. In the book, Bilbo is, ultimately, the one person responsible for defeating Smaug: Bilbo figures out how to get into the Mountain's secret door, Bilbo tricks Smaug into revealing his weak spot, Bilbo tells the thrush, the thrush tells Bard, Bard shoots dragon. In the movies, Bard somehow just magically *knows* about the weak spot, irrelevant to Bilbo's actions, and shoots Smaug in a giant action sequence that's mostly about how badass Bard is. To bring those two points together: ultimately, the book of The Hobbit is about power in the small, the humble, the hardworking, the friendly; the power that a good humble person has to defeat evil. That's why the book is titled The Hobbit and not The Downfall of Smaug or Dragon Mountain or something else equally dumb. It's the story of a small person who did great things. The movies, plural, are mostly about mega epic action sequences that look more directly inspired by Warhammer than by anything in Tolkien. It's not un-watchable or anything in the abstract, but it's not about the actual hobbit any more, it's about sexy elf-on-dwarf love and hot Bard action and, gently caress it, let's throw Legolas in there, etc. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 22:31 on Feb 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 22:27
|
|
|
The big battle scene that is basically all of the third Hobbit movie (I think? I don't remember much about them tbh) is in the book. Except Bilbo gets knocked out at the beginning and all of it happens off-page, lol. The Silmarillion gets a "arghh this is hard to read" reputation but it's really not too bad. The hardest part is the Ainulindalë in the beginning, it's quite a good story that I think turns people off since it's very religious & abstract. The Quenta Silmarillion proper is really exciting and metal as gently caress, don't let the formal writing fool ya.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 22:28
|
|
|
axeil posted:Ah thank you for this. Yeah the thing for me is that once I started reading the Atlas I was made aware that Sauron wasn't even the real Lucifer analogy but yet he seemed powerful enough to fit the bill. So this clears it up a bit. It's not that Melkor was more powerful than Sauron necessarily but rather that he came first (I never got the Maia-Valar distinction either He's way more powerful than Sauron. And Sauron, by the Third Age, is a near-total wreck - he got splatted when Numenor fell on him at the end of the Second Age, and then the whole "losing the Ring he'd stored most of his power in" thing is why he's never much of a physical presence in LotR. It's one of the reasons I enjoy Melkor so much in the Silmarillion. He's getting out there, doing stuff - he has so much more of a personality than Sauron ever gets to show. axeil posted:Is this a reference to the Silmarillion or something else? Yeah, it's the Sil. The Sil's a pretty chewy read in bits - it was never really intended to be a cohesive book; it's a rough timeline of bits from JRR's notebooks that his son thought people would find interesting. This guy on Tor is doing a read-through which gives you the high points: https://www.tor.com/series/the-silmarillion-primer/. The first couple of bits are light stuff; the Ainulindale is "how the universe got made (and how Melkor first hosed it up)" and the Valaquenta is about the Valar who decided to move into said universe and which bits they picked to look after, so it's names and attributes and a bit of history. Then it gets into the chewy stuff and the this elves and the that elves and how they all head West at varying speeds except the ones who don't and it's all genealogy and geography with occasional bits of horrible murder and Melkor being an rear end in a top hat*. The main good things in that are the story of Beren and Luthien, and the story of Turin Turambar - there are separate book versions of both now too; The Children of Hurin is a more complete version found later, and Beren and Luthien is a compilation of the various versions Tolkien wrote. They're both great fun - it does help if you know a bit of the history that led up to them, but the primer there can give you enough. Then it goes into the Second Age stuff a bit - the First Age ended when the Valar nabbed Morgoth, the Second Age is when Numenor existed, and eventually got hosed up by Sauron is sneaky-bastard mode. If it still seems a bit much to tackle you can try Unfinished Tales instead - the First and Second Age stuff won't mean much without Silmarillion background, but the Third Age section has some interesting expansion on stuff in LotR that never made it into the book, so you can see if that gives you a taste for the whole History of Middle-Earth thing. *[Ed And Feanor being an rear end in a top hat. Most of the later First Age is Melkor and Feanor battling it out to be the most epic rear end in a top hat. It's a hard fight.] Runcible Cat fucked around with this message at 22:36 on Feb 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 22:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 11:26 |
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Ok HOO BOOYY Hobbit opinions INCOMING: Yeah this one is one that I noticed. Things just dragged on and on. I'm really enjoying the fan edit I'm watching in the evenings. It's 4.5 hours long and seems to really cut out a lot of stuff. The creator even put the Dol Guldur/Necromancer stuff in a companion short film that's about an hour long. It seems to flow much, much better. I didn't realize the book was so short you can finish reading it in 9 hours. That's crazy to try and stretch something that short into a 9 hour trilogy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2018 22:32
|
|