'Shrek' Opens Big

[Planogirl]

I'm someone who can't stand potty jokes or "dumb" humor and I loved Shrek. I think that the annoying childish moments were rare and the actual story was touching and taught an important lesson. The dialogue was witty and the animation was very eye-pleasing. No, it didn't look like Disney but why should it? I like the idea of a studio making a quality product that is different.

Now, my question is if anyone here knows who is working on the Lord of the Rings Trilogy? Will this be completely or partially animated? This might really be the really big upcoming blockbuster if it's well made.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

… And in the darkness bind them”

Ahhhh! A "plain ole" girl after my own heart. New Line Cinema is producing the trilogy. And it is ALL live action. No animation at all. When I first heard about it I looked on the web for some site. My oh my!! There are a lot of them. But they all reported pretty much the same stuff, so I kept the one that I found easiest to navigate. Tolkien on line is the name of the site. I think you’ll find out all sorts of neat things about the film and it has some links too.

One cool thing they’ve got going on there is what they call a Tolkien Virgin. It’s this guy who’s never read The Lord of the Rings. So, he’s reading it now and he gives chapter by chapter reactions. You can kind of relive the experience through him. He’s on the Two Towers now where Frodo, Sam and Gollum are making their way into Mordor.

Have fun exploring, and e-mail me and tell me know what you think.

 

[YoHo]

www.lordoftheringsmovie.com

Finally, Landbaron and I can be on the same side of something.

Incidently, the site above has forums much like this, although they are a bit more fanboyish, so its as bad as going to a Star Wars one. (If you ever think someone on the DIS is rude, ignorant or just downright scum. cruise on over to www.jedicouncil.net and be educated on why the Net is all about the Lowest common denominator)

At any rtae, they already did lord of the rings/ The hobbit and return of the King as animation and they sucked.


Now then Landbaron, I know your not much for speculation on Park rides, but I'm surprised you never commented on my Soarin over Sauron ride concept (or did you and my feeble brain has forgotten?).

 

[Planogirl]

Ah, someone who finally caught the tongue-in-cheek play on words in my name. I thought that a person had to be a local to notice that. Just in time too since I am trying to think of a more Disneyesque name right now.

Thanks for the website. I've definitely been looking in all the wrong places.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

YoHo!!

I did indeed post a reply to your Soarin' over Sauron. I thought it was a great idea. However, I do recall raining on your parade somewhat. I posted that I remembered reading once that the Disney company and Tolkien (or perhaps his estate) had a relationship. I can't remember where I heard this. It was either in a Tolkien or Disney biography. But Disney had the rights for a time (or came very close) but I can't for the life of me remember all the details. Anyway, the deal fell through and they parted ways.

I was particularly struck when I read that (at about the time the animated feature came out) in thinking in terms of attractions for Disney. But on the hand, I was a little relieved that the deal did fall through. I think Disney would have "Disneyfied" the story too much. And I'm a bit of a purest when it comes to MY "Lord of the Rings". It is, after all, required reading in my household. ALL my kids, when they were old enough, and even my wife, had to read it or face the father's wrath!!! I read "The Hobbit", chapter at a time, to my younger ones in place of bed time stories.

 

[YoHo]

Instead Disney got the Book Of three franchise and confused the heck out of me by making the Black cauldron which does a poor job of following any of the books.

Anyway, yes, I agree Disney would he Disneyied it too much as animation although now adays, if it could get past the budgets and pufed chests, they have the resources and the willingness to make non-disney traditional films to NOt mess it up.

the down side is that if it had been released as a Disney animated, it would likely not have sucked so bad.
(the Animation from LotR i good, except or the Orcs, the Animation for the Hobbit and Return of the king reminded me of Puff the magic dragon. (Where there's a Whip, there's a way is enjoyable to me for some sick and twisted reason)

but tell me, at what age are they required to read the Sillmarillion and do you give them cheat sheets? I've never met anyone who could read it and understand it the first time. At least two readings is required to get a handle on all the intersecting places and times.

 

[DVC-Landbaron]

My oldest daughter is 19 and she has yet to dive into the "First Age" of the Sillmarillion. No, just the Hobbit, which I read to them, and the Lord of the Rings, a journey through middle-earth which they are required to make on their own. My eighth grader (13) has yet to read it, although this year she reread the Hobbit by herself. I think that sixteen is a good age.

And BTW, I've done the Sillmarillion twice and half (got bored with it about five years ago), and I'm still not clear on some things. Hmmm. Maybe it's time to take a walk through middle-earth again? Before the Christmas release!!

At the risk of going WAY off topic (even for me!!) - Do you think the new film will be good? And do you think it'll be the blockbuster they're hoping for?

 

[YoHo]

Everything I've heard on the film paints a rosey picture. There are more LOTRs Fanboys out there right now then star Wars, so I expect it will be huge at least on opening weekend. what worries me is that it, like many fantasy films may have trouble breaking the mold. I worry that all you'll see is rows and rows of the Comic book guy from the Simpsons. NOt a good way to make money. Lets face it, outside of literary circles and (for lack of a better word) geeks like us, LOTRs is going to be a tough sell.



Actually, I'm not answering your question. Yes, I think it looks like a good film. I caught the trailer at the beginning of Crouching Tiger hidden Dragon ad was astounded (my puny quicktime version doesn't do it justice) I'm not the kind of person to complain about Tom bombdil, nor Arwen's expanded role, although I worry that its a waste of time to tailor in these little things to bump up broad appeal. With this one, they have to pull them into the theaters, because of the great story, not despite it.


Tom doesn't bother me so much, because he is an enigma. Likely included for Tolkien's children.

As for the Silmarillion, whatever you do, don't pick up one of the Lost tale books or Unfinshed tales these are studies in Tolkien's creative processes and you'll never understand the first age til you get a handle on the original published version. that being said, i highly recommend the unfinished tales as a source on many of the whos and whys especially the Wizards.



Finally, they just recently released a blow blow commentary on the LOTRs by of course Peter its like 12 books long nd goes chapter by chapter with Tolkiens notes and comments by Peter. I suppose its interesting, but at the same tim, I wonder if its time Peter let it go and made money a different way.