Posted on 03/14/2002 5:07:26 AM PST by HairOfTheDog
This is a continuation of the infamous thread New Zealander Builds Hobbit Hole originally posted on January 26, 2001 by John Farson, who at the time undoubtedly thought he had found a rather obscure article that would elicit a few replies and die out. Without knowing it, he became the founder of the Hobbit Hole. For reasons incomprehensible to some, the thread grew to over 4100 replies. It became the place for hobbits and friends of hobbits to chit chat and share LoTR news and views, hang out, and talk amongst ourselves in the comfort of familiar surroundings.
In keeping with the new posting guidelines, the thread idea is continuing here, as will the Green Dragon Inn, our more structured spin-off thread, as soon as we figure out how to move all the good discussion that has been had there. As for the Hobbit Hole, we will just start fresh, bringing only a few mathoms such as the picture above with us to make it feel like home, and perhaps a walk down memory lane:
Our discussion has been light:
It very well may be that a thread named "New Zealander builds Hobbit hole" will end up being the longest Tolkien thread of them all, with some of the best heartfelt content... Sorry John, but I would have rather it had been one with a more distinguished title!… post 252 - HairOfTheDog
However, I can still celebrate, with quiet dignity, the fact that what started as a laugh about some wacko in New Zealand has mutated and grown into a multifaceted discussion of the art, literature, and philosophy that is Tolkien. And now that I've managed to write the most pompous sentence of my entire life, I agree, Rosie… post 506 - JenB
Hah! I was number 1000!! (Elvish victory dance... wait, no; that would be too flitty) … post 1001 - BibChr
Real men don't have to be afraid of being flitty! Go for it. – post 1011 – HairOfTheDog
Seventeen years to research one mystical object seems a bit excessive… post 1007 - JenB
Okay...who's the wise guy who didn't renew Gandalf's research grant?… post 1024 – Overtaxed
To the very philosophical:
…Judas Iscariot obviously was a good man, or he wouldn't have been chosen to be one of the Apostles. He loved Jesus, like all of the Apostles, but he betrayed him. Yet without his betrayal, the Passion and Crucifixion would never have occurred, and mankind would not have been redeemed. So without his self-destruction infinite good would not have been accomplished. I certainly do not mean this to be irreverant but it seems to me that this describes the character of Gollum, in the scenes so movingly portrayed above… Lucius Cornelius Sulla
To fun but heartfelt debates about the integrity and worth of some of the characters…
…Anyone else notice how Boromir treats the hobbits? He's very fond of them but he seems to think of them as children - ruffling Frodo's hair, calls them all 'little ones'. He likes them, but I don't think he really respects them… post 1536 - JenB
Yes... Tolkien told us not to trust Boromir right off the bat when he began to laugh at Bilbo, until he realized that the Council obviously held this hobbit in high esteem. What a pompous dolt… post 1538 - HairOfTheDog
…I think almost every fault of his can be traced directly back to his blindness to anything spiritual or unseen. He considers the halflings as children, because that is what they look like. He considers the only hope of the ring to be in taking it and using it for a victory in the physical realm. He cannot see what the hobbits are truly made of, he cannot see the unseen hope of what the destruction of the ring might mean--the destruction of Sauron himself, and he cannot see the unseen danger that lies in the use of the ring itself… I just feel sorry for Boromir--he is like a blind but honorable man, trying to take the right path on the road but missing the right path entirely because he simply cannot see it… post 1548 - Penny1
Boromir isn't a jerk, he's a jock… post 2401 – Overtaxed
-----------------------------------------
Oh, I think by the time Frodo reaches the Cracks, he's not even himself anymore! I think he's not only on the brink of a dangerous place physically, he's on the brink of losing himself completely during the exchange with Gollum. But for some reason, the take-over isn't complete till he actually has to throw the Ring in. The person speaking to Gollum is not Frodo, but the "Wheel of Fire" that Sam sees. After the Ring is destroyed, Frodo not only comes back to himself, but comes back with the unbearable (to him) knowledge of what it's like to be completely without compassion. I think that's why it's so important to him to be compassionate in the Shire… post 2506 - 2Jedismom
…Regarding Frodo's compassion... it's a little too much at the end. Even Merry tells him that he's going to have to quit being so darn nice. But you're right. He's learned a lesson about evil that very few ever learn since it wasn't an external lesson but an internal one. (Those kinds of lessons have the greatest impact) Not only did he totally succumb to it, but he was rather ruthless to my little Smeagol… post 2516 - carton253
Well that Frodo was a big mean bully! (to Smeagol)… post 2519 – Overtaxed
So as you can see, everything JRR Tolkien (and Peter Jackson) is welcome here in our New Row, our soon-to-be familiar New Hobbit Hole…; philosophy, opinion, good talk and frequent silliness.
The issue of Co-redemptorix as a dogmatic issue is still "up in the air," and has not been formally defined by the Church, so, I will not comment on this, except to say there are many good Catholics who have a popular notion of what should be declared. However, popular notions are not dogmatic and cannot be promulgated as such unless and until the Pope and Magesterium promulgate them officially as dogmas of the Church. But, the Church has not declared, dogmatically, anything on this issue as yet, if it ever will.You are, as a Catholic, obligated accept as matters of faith only what the Church officially teaches as dogmatic. For example, it would be appropriate to say -- We are required as Catholics to believe that Mary is co-medeatrix, that is that through her assistance and mediation, Christ becomes our Mediator, yet, this is not required to be believed for our salvation. Another example is that -- All the Marian apparations (Lourdes, Fatima, La Sallette, etc.) and other popular notions are not required beliefs for you to believe for your salvation. To not practice Marian piety is never a grounds for excommunication, nor does it make you a "bad Catholic."
Interesting. IMO, the nature of God eternal. His will is perfect. Submitting to God's will may be more effective than attempting to change Him.
We continue our The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers cast and crew interviews with John Rhys-Davies, who again plays Gimli and also voices Treebeard in the second film hitting theaters on December 18. The following is a paraphrased version of his question & answer session - He even answered one of the questions posted by a fan at the Coming Soon! message boards!:
Concerning the giant battle scene at Helm's Deep (click right image for a bigger version!) - That took months and months of preparation. It was filmmaking on a grand scale and also on the microscopic scale. There's several units (film extras) all being directed by Peter, sometimes remotely on a television set. And it was all based on the context of the battle that took three months to shoot.I watched it Friday night with my wife. Of course we watched it in Japanese with the subtitles turned on. I made the mistake of starting it at 11:00pm after I had had only 3 hours of sleep the night before. Needless to say I kept dozing off during the most important parts.
Saturday I put it on and watched it with the kids. Since they would have had a tough time following the subtitles I put the English track on. I stayed awake this time and got to see the whole thing through. I followed the storyline much better this time.
We all thoroughly enjoyed this movie, my wife included. It has a good storyline, it is well drawn (much better than Metropolis which I didn't like too much), and it has haunting music. Thanks for putting me on to that movie.
I was at Wal-Mart tonight after church and while I was looking for a DVD of It's a Wonderful Life I found that Wal-Mart has Escaflowne on sale for only $14.95. I may pick one up after Christmas. They also had Vampire Hunter D, one of the Gundam movies, and Jin-Roh as well as a few others.
You may need to start checking out Wal-Mart as your new Anime supplier. ;^)
By S.A. Faree
The power of the ring is real. Its evil is real. No, it’s not just in a story. Many Lord of the Rings fans have indulged the fantasy of the Ruling Ring and the vice-like grip it had on those around it while reading the books by JRR Tolkien. I’ve actually experienced it. Your skepticism is warranted but I think you’ll believe me once you’ve heard my twisted tale.
The ring had a power over me. I’ve spent lunch breaks & coffee breaks desiring the ring. I’ve searched on foot and by phone for the ring. I’ve thwarted my responsibility and shown true greed—all because of the ring. Read on …
About a year ago I decided that I’d like to read the Lord of the Rings by JRR Tolkien since I’ve heard so much about it and buzz was already starting to mount for the release of the filmed version by Peter Jackson. I consumed the book daily, and was fascinated by the object around which the entire story is based—the One Ring. The ring is all-powerful and would give its creator, the dark lord Sauron, the power to rule the world. Everyone who came into contact or close to the ring would desire it, a by-product of its evil. The desire would drive some to do foolish and irrational things to obtain the ring.
Soon I grew interested in having my own One Ring, which in the book is described simply as a plain gold band, similar to a wedding band. When exposed to fire, the ring would reveal an inscription in Tolkien’s fantasy script that read “One Ring To Rule Them All, One Ring To Find Them, One Ring To Bring Them All And In The Darkness Bind Them.” I thought it would be cool to have the seminal memento of these stories, which I had now grown to love though my daily reading. Its power is unassuming and vastly understated, neatly contained in such a small package. A quick Internet search led me to a jeweler, who had made his own One Ring and was selling replicas of it in gold, silver and gold-plated versions. After seeing some of the prices (the most expensive version costs around $1200 made entirely of platinum) I dismissed the thought of owning a One Ring and didn’t give it another thought. Soon though, I was back on the web at the same page looking at the ring, reading more about it then again dismissing the thought and the expense. Days passed, perhaps a week. Again I was back at the same web page. Why? Little did I know this was the real power of the ring beginning to work on me.
The release of the movie version of the Lord of the Rings was looming closer and the promotional products were already being released in anticipation of the film. Amid all the hype, the first trailer of the movie was released, and in it, audiences could catch their first glimpse of the movie-version of the One Ring—and it was beautiful. Suddenly my urges to have one were rekindled. I revisited the web page seeing that they had sold out of some of the rings. It didn’t matter, because after seeing the wonderfully plain yet hefty, digitally-enhanced version in the movie, suddenly this one would not do. I would have to seek one out just like the movie version. Since I was a stickler for detail, only it would now do.
After a trip or twenty to Ebay, I discovered that collectors were selling a promotional version of the ring that was more in tune with my budget, but it didn’t really resemble the one in the movie. I had to dismiss it.
My urges led me again to web, where to my surprise I found promotional replicas of the One Ring, licensed by New Line Cinema, being sold. These were manufactured by Applause Toys but looked just like the movie version and were not plastic but metal collector’s items. They even came with a chain (like Frodo wore in the film) and a cool collector case. These too didn’t seem too expensive and would seem to satisfy my urges. Only one problem: every web store that sold them was sold out and didn’t seem to be getting any more in since they were made in a limited run. Again I went to Ebay, and as luck would have it, found these rare rings being auctioned. I was appalled though at how much some of these were selling for (originally these sold for around $20 and were selling on Ebay for more than $100). There was no way that the small amount of principle I had left was going to let me pay that much for a $20 toy. Being the bargain-hunter that I am, I thought I could turn to toystores for the ring and cut Ebay and the greedy sellers out of the loop. Looking back at the irony of it all, I turned out to be greedy as well.
I spent what is close to many hours on the phones with toy stores and toy departments, putting up with overworked and sometimes hideously stupid workers who all had the same answer: they did not have the Applause version of the One Ring. They had the Applause figures, but not the ring. I thought that if I wanted the ring, I’d have to search for it myself. Whenever I went to a department store, I detoured to the toy department and found a fast way to disappointment. I spent an afternoon scouring the toy stores in my area. Time was wasted, but it didn’t seem to matter. I always justified it by saying the hunt was part of the fun. I wanted the ring. Its power was growing.
My hideous desire for the Applause ring often led me back to the web and Ebay simply looking at the many sellers who were selling the ring. I was fanatical. I was like a gambler playing the slots, hoping that this would be his lucky shot that would make up for everything. But rather than pulling the one armed bandit, I was clicking the links. I used search engines to scour the web for the one ring at every opportunity—lunch breaks, coffee breaks, it didn’t matter. Eventually, an opportunity came about to own the elusive ring at a rather reasonable price. It felt like a coup. I almost felt I had to keep it secret. Never mind the cost of the time and energy I had spent searching for it, it was cheaper than Ebay, damn it, and I had to have it. I bought it and anxiously awaited its arrival in my mailbox. It took what seemed like forever to get to me. Even though I was still waiting for it to arrive, I should have been, by all evidence, finally satisfied. But I wasn’t. I was still playing the links, clicking my way to the rings. I saw all the replicas from the cheap to the expensive. Some I’d seen before, some I hadn’t. When the opportunity came to buy another Applause version, I bought another. Why? The ring had a power over me. I caved. It was greed pure and simple. All manifested by the Ring.
I even had the opportunity to own a replica of the original ring used in the movie, and almost forked over $400 to own it. I needed help. Should I have destroyed the Ring like Frodo? I don’t know if that would have helped or made matters worse.
Time has passed and like Frodo, I’ve been strong. I’ve resisted searching for the One Ring on the web. I’ve gone on with my life and I feel much better now. But sometimes, when its dark and no one’s looking, I still contemplate checking Ebay.
'Lord' Film Runs Rings Around Rest Because of Words
Movies have their own special magic, of course, but it helps a lot to have a great book and great words behind them.
A supreme recent case in point: the visually spectacular and absolutely mesmerizing "The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers," a state-of-the-art epic opening Dec. 18 that surpasses its predecessor (last years "The Fellowship of the Ring") for sheer thrills and visual splendor.
Yet, packed with technological marvels and rousing scenes and characters as it is, "Two Towers" could not have spirited us away to all those lands of wonder if it weren't for the shy Oxford professor of Old and Middle English who dreamed it all up: John Ronald Reuel Tolkien.
The Head of the Class
No recent movie exploits all the various modern resources of cinema - from computerized effects, animation, sound recording and crystalline location shooting - with more flair than Peter Jackson's film of the adventures of Frodo Baggins and the Fellowship of the Ring.
Few movies this year have been more faithful to their source - in this case, one so universally familiar. Yet few have a source more consciously literary, more drenched in academia and learning, than Tolkien's fantasy novel cycle.
Tolkien hardly seems a likely candidate for cinema canonization. He was a lifelong academic; student of literary texts and comparative linguistics; and a devotee of Norse, English and Icelandic epics who put his vast knowledge to use creating his own world and inventing the history, languages and people - and wizards, orcs, and hobbits - who flourished there. Though Tolkien may have lived in a kind of sequestered academic paradise, the three linked novels of ""The Lord of the Rings" ("The Fellowship of the Ring," "The Two Towers", and "The Return of the King") are a sustained feat of imagination that has entranced millions since their British publication in 1954 and '55 - especially since their explosion of American popularity in the mid-1960s.
Tolkien conceived and wrote the books seemingly as much for his own pleasure as for the financial success that was at first slow in coming: planning and writing them in a 15-year period beginning in 1937, composing much of the work during the Second World War in segments he sent to his soldier son Christopher. The novel's huge battle between good and evil probably reflected his and his son's WWII experience (and the elder Tolkien's service in the Boer War.) (huh?)
But they were also part of an even longer sustained effort of imagination. The author, born in 1892, spent most of his life (to his death in 1973) creating and describing the imaginary fairy-tale world and history of which the "Rings" cycle is only a part, inventing at least four languages, hundreds of characters and a voluminous history and archeology stretching over many centuries. That's what lies behind the onscreen richness of the movie "Rings".
Difficult to Fathom
Can you imagine the pipe-puffing, hugely well-read, devoutly Catholic Tolkien, who liked to compare himself to his home-loving hobbits, hobnobbing with the big-movie sophisticates who put his novel so smashingly on film: the wildman New Zealand writer-director Jackson (whose first features were the gorefests "Bad Taste" and "Dead Alive") and high-flying New Line executives Bob Shaye and Mark Ordesky? Or trading quips with the studio people to whom Jackson went first: Miramax's Weinstein brothers? ("J.R.R., baby, here's how I see Bilbo: Robin Williams crossed with Herve Villechaize. By the way, I'll tell you upfront: We've got to cut it.")
Incongruously or not, "Lord of the Rings," which survived an earlier failed attempt at filming by animator Ralph Bakshi, has proven ideal movie material - and more than that, ideal material for the technologies and special strengths of movies today. A "Lord of the Rings" movie made in the '50s, '60s, or even the early '90s, probable couldn't have had this opulence and fantastic spectacle. It couldn't have given us so intensely the huge bloody battle of Helm's Deep, couldn't have visualized so perfectly the hobbits' loathsome guide Gollum or transported us so convincingly to the ancient land of good and bad wizards Gandalf and Sauron, with its cathedral-like caves and talking trees, its vaulting towers and horrific, mysterious dark riders.
There are silent epics that have something like the special majesty and magic of "Towers," including the Babylonian sequences of D.W. Griffith's "Intolerance," and the quest scenes of Raoul Walsh and Doug Fairbanks' "Thief of Baghdad" and the forest scenes of Fritz Lang's "Die Niebelungen": three movies that might have influenced Tolkien. But we're lucky that it took all these years to realize "The Rings" - and that Jackson and his New Line bosses eventually committed to making three movies instead of two, that he made them altogether in one shoot - and that, despite some liberties, he committed himself so fully to Tolkien's original vision.
Like all moviemakers, Jackson makes changes - even major ones. (Liv Tyler's character Arwen comes not from the story but from a footnote, obviously a ravaging one.) But if you see the movies right after rereading the novels - which I did - you may be shocked at how close they are.
Topped Reader Polls
That's only Tolkien's due, I think. After all, he spent a lifetime imagining Middle Earth, Bilbo, Frodo, Gandalf, Gimli, Aragorn, the Gollum and all their voluminous back story - which is exactly why "The Lord of the Rings," despite a notable lack of enthusiasm from Tolkien's colleagues in university literature departments, long have topped reader's polls for the 20th Century's best novel.
Jackson deserves his success partly because he did what most cinematic adapters should: stick to the test. Certain authors - Charles Dickens, William Shakespeare, Jane Austen, Tennessee Williams and John Steinbeck for example - translate very well because their works were imagined with cinematic richness and because their adapters usually film them faithfully. (Robbing Henry James' novels of their convoluted interior narration, which usually happens in the movies, may seem justified but it reduces their impact and shrivels their meaning.)
Consider David O. Selznick, a producer notorious for his endless memos and high standards of quality - and a man who firmly believed that any movie adapted from a popular novel should retain as much as possible the original story and characters or risk alienating devoted fans. Selznick should know. In his heyday, he produced scores of successful films, from classics such as, "David Copperfield" or best sellers such as, "Duel in the Sun" - and he always stuck to the book.
Two towering cases in point: his Oscar-winning films of "Gone with the Wind" and "Rebecca," two film that pleased (and continue to please) audiences who knew the novels well and audiences who didn't know them at all.
I think Selznick is right - and that those modern-day producers who ignore his advice and trash or radically change their novels-into-film often do so at peril. Sometimes it works. Often it doesn't. But with "Hamlet" or "David Copperfield" or "Don Quixote" - or with Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings" - you want the words to inspire the image, because it was those words that first inspired us.
By Michael Wilmington
[Chicago] Tribune Movie Critic
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| 'LORD' OF THE LADIES Mortensen nearly passed on the role of Aragorn, his son set him straight |
When ''Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers'' opens Dec. 18, women everywhere will swoon simultaneously as hunky Aragorn (otherwise known as Viggo Mortensen) swashbuckles his way through fields of Orcs and other Middle-earth baddies. EW.com talked to Mortensen, 44, about getting too committed to the role, supporting your local Hobbit, and why he's not the hottie we think he is.
How is ''The Two Towers'' different from ''The Fellowship of the Ring''?
It's a harder story. The landscapes are still beautiful, but the odds are much higher. The enemy is closer. And Aragorn's role is changing as well.
How?
He ends up taking on more responsibility. There's more pressure on him to lead by example and think on his feet, and he has to draw on his knowledge of different cultures to survive. More than any other character in the movie he's a bridge, culturally speaking. He's worked with all these different peoples, so that's made him uniquely qualified to lead at this stage.
Would you say this is Aragorn's movie, as ''Fellowship'' was Frodo Baggins'?
The truth is, there isn't any one hero in the whole story, and that's what I like about it. It's a group of people of different races who are flawed, or have their moments of doubt, and they have to overcome those problems individually in order to give themselves to the group. The idea is, Do what you can to be of service to society first and foremost, and that's what's great about it.
It's been reported that you went a little overboard getting into character, sleeping in the woods with your sword and never changing out of wardrobe. Very method of you.
The way it was written, it sounded like I was doing that all the time, which I wasn't. I wanted to take advantage of being in New Zealand, so sometimes I'd go hiking or fishing and would stay overnight in some places. And people thought I was always in my wardrobe just because I was filming all the time. Because I didn't have the rehearsal time everyone else did, I was immersed from the beginning, and I just kind of stayed that way.
Did you really buy the horse you rode in the movie? Most people just steal wardrobe.
Yeah, the one I rode and another one. I haven't brought them over here yet because they keep using them for reshoots. It ended up being a good thing I bought them, because they sold some of the other horses and then they weren't available when the filmmakers needed them. So it turned out to be a practical purchase, but I just really liked them. We went through a lot together.
 |
|
| 'RING' MAN Aragorn becomes leader of the pack in the next ''Rings'' installment. Is that a bigger sword, too? |
Was the shoot as grueling as it seemed to be, with all the muddy, slimy battle scenes?
Someone might say, ''Oh, my life is tough, making movies.'' But that's bullshit. It's luxurious. Still, there were periods that would be difficult for anyone, crew or cast. It was a long haul, and if somebody was going to be really out of line and a spoiled brat, they wouldn't have lasted long. You'd get that attitude beaten out of you just by the circumstances of being there. I'm sure everyone had a down period at some point, where we were ill or tired or it just wasn't happening, but we all had each other's back.
You've mentioned that you debated taking the role of Aragorn after Stuart Townsend dropped out. What worried you?
There was no way of knowing the movies would be a hit. They weren't chock full of movie stars and the subject matter wasn't a proven seller, as far as movies go. But because of the timing, I had to make a decision on the spot, and I had never read the books. But this seemed to be something that, given what my son Henry said about the character and the story, that if I didn't try it I would regret not having gone through the experience. And I know now that that was true.
Henry visited you on the set. Did that make you the coolest dad in the world?
He was very interested in the weaponry and all that. He and two other boys were enlisted to fight in one of the battles, and he just loved it. He recently did some of the reshoots of that scene, so I guess he technically played another kid, because he had grown in the year and a half since the first shoot.
Did you show him your fancy sword-flinging moves?
I think there are certain moves he can do faster. He's constantly working on it. A few times he turned to me and said, ''Dad, I think you're getting a little rusty. Aragorn's quicker than that.''
You're currently working on ''Hidalgo,'' a period movie about Pony Express rider Frank T. Hopkins who competes in a dangerous horse race in Saudi Arabia. Why do another movie on horseback?
What I liked about this story is, even though it's this big studio movie, it's not about an American going overseas to tell people how to do things or kick some ass. This guy goes over to Arabia and his eyes are opened wide, like, ''Wow, what am I dealing with here? And what are these people and these horses and this way of doing things all about?'' He learns a lot about them, and consequently learns a lot about himself in the process. I think that's a healthy thing for Americans to see, especially right now.
You were recently named one of People magazine's 50 most beautiful people. Can we call you Lord of the Shwing?
Oh, it's all marketing. You could do the fifty most beautiful plumbers of Madison, Wisconsin, and you could make a case for that. But it's a celebrity driven culture. If it wasn't for ''The Lord of the Rings,'' I certainly wouldn't be in that magazine, and I'm well aware of that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.