Why does everybody hate the Rankin-Bass "RotK"?? (a video review)
tcl...@postoffice.pacbell.net
in which the existing Tolkien movies are disliked. Let's have them in
reverse order, like David Letterman:
3) Rankin-Bass's "The Hobbit" (flawed, but many people admit to
enjoying it)
2) Bakshi's "The Lord of the Rings" (still enjoyed by many, but
roundly ridiculed for, among other things, telling only half of the
story)
....and....a drumroll, please, Paul....
1) Rankin-Bass's "The Return of the King"! (Nobody likes this
turkey. Nobody. Nadie. N'il y a personne. Nobody in the whole universe.)
But, you guys, the thing is....I ordered both Rankin-Bass movies
from reel.com and I just watched "Return of the King" and, uh, I kinda
(gulp) liked it! Don't flame me, my brothers, give me a chance to
explain.
There is a scene in the R-B RotK that is justifiably condemned
by all: the scene in which Frodo and Sam wave to a couple of passing
orcs. But, you know, that scene is all the more shocking when you
realize that it is the ONLY such lapse in the entire movie! The rest of
it is remarkably faithful, with no other egregious errors.
(Besides, a lot of secret orc sympathizers may delight in
thinking that their favorite monsters are only a product of a bad
upbringing and are, perhaps, just genetically twisted elves who need
love. So there.)
Like I was saying, Rankin-Bass is remarkably faithful, even to
the extent of repeating some original dialogue. Since this is only the
last third of the story, it would have been the easiest thing in the
world to insult the audience's intelligence, cutting out major story
elements and combining or eliminating characters. But Rankin-Bass
doesn't, for the most part.
The only sacrificial lambs in this case are Faramir, Arwen and
that whole thing about "Sharkey" invading the Shire. That's right,
campers, no Faramir for Eowyn to fall in love with, no Arwen for Aragorn
to marry, no big mess when the hobbits get home. HOWEVER....they do NOT
make up for it by combining the female characters and having Aragorn
fall for the battle-maiden who killed the Nazgul. (Which is exactly what
I'm afraid Peter Jackson is going to do. That's why there's been no
casting announcement for Eowyn yet: Arwen is going to usurp her role.)
I think the Rankin-Bass screenwriters just made a tactical
decision to not have any romance, that's all. Otherwise, the integrity
of the characters is preserved. Eowyn rides behind Aragorn in the
triumphal parade, but not beside him. Actually, it was probably a brave
decision to give the fans some credit and include most of the characters
and story elements whether they were fully explained or not. They're all
there: Denethor, Theoden, Elrond, Aragorn, Gandalf, Merry, Pippin,
Gollum, the Witch-King, the Black Fleet, the "watchers" at Cirith Ungol,
even the Mouth of Sauron. Maybe they left so much in because they were
sensitive to criticism over leaving Beorn, the Arkenstone and Lobelia
Sackville-Baggins out of the other movie.
(Maybe if Rankin-Bass had done "FotR," they would have been the
ONLY Tolkien filmmakers to put Tom Bombadil in the story, hmmm?)
Also, to Rankin-Bass's credit, they dispensed with that "Hobbit"
thingy, of showing battle by one character timidly poking his sword at
the camera and the enemy seeming to shrink or spin away. They don't pull
punches in this one. People actually slash with their swords, and their
enemies actually go "Urk" and fall over like they've really been
stabbed. (Of course they don't show actual gore.) What's more, they show
Frodo's bleeding whip-wounds and (gasp!) the stump of his bitten-off
finger! I don't think we're in Saturday-morning cartoonland anymore,
Toto.
Some of the scenes and songs are actually pretty great: the
whole scene at Minas Tirith and the Pelennor Fields, with Grond the
battering-ram, the Witch-King facing off with Gandalf, the death of
Theoden and the Witch-King's destruction at the hands of Eowyn and
Merry. (Would have been easy for Rankin-Bass to eliminate or combine
some hobbit-characters, too. But they didn't!) Another great scene: the
orcs being whipped along as they sing "Where There's a Whip, There's a
Way," acting like unwilling draftees. (Hmmmm, more secret orc
sympathies?) The stratagem Frodo and Sam use to get out of that
situation is not in Tolkien, but it's brilliant and Tolkien-worthy!
Plus, Rankin-Bass doesn't stint on character development--lots
of good dialogue and even psychology, especially between Frodo and Sam.
Yes, plenty of quality time with the Mordor scenes. And Gollum cringes
very convincingly. (Some of the time Sam spends imagining himself as the
ring-wielding Lord of Mordor is clearly unnecessary, but still
interesting. Who else but Sam would contemplate using black magic to
turn Mordor into a garden?)
I liked the suggestion at the end, that hobbits would eventually
evolve into full-sized humans so that future generations would ask
themselves, "Do I have hobbit in me?" Absolutely faithful to J.R.R.!
Lots of flashbacks and flashforwards are employed throughout the
movie--partly explanatory, partly for mood, partly to segue into the
other half of this bifurcated story. Some may not like it, but I do.
Very postmodern.
As a schoolteacher, I think I could certainly use both of the
Rankin-Bass movies to get kids interested in Tolkien. Once they saw
these, they'd forget all about Pokemon. (I'd use the Bakshi version to
put them to sleep.)
So what do you think, my brothers? Give Rankin-Bass another
chance?
Michael Martinez
> It seems that among self-styled Tolkien fans, there is an order
>in which the existing Tolkien movies are disliked. Let's have them in
>reverse order, like David Letterman:
Why do you call us "self-styled Tolkien fans"? Do you understand what
"self-styled" means? Many other people acknowledge us as Tolkien fans, so
we're hardly "self-styled".
> But, you guys, the thing is....I ordered both Rankin-Bass movies
>from reel.com and I just watched "Return of the King" and, uh, I kinda
>(gulp) liked it! Don't flame me, my brothers, give me a chance to
>explain.
It's a horrible mangling of the story, but what's worse, it has happily
singing Orcs. Barf.
'Nuff said.
--
\\ // Science Fiction and Fantasy in...@xenite.org
\\// The 21st century starts January 1, 2001.
//\\ Prepare for another year of sales ads.
// \\ENITE.org...............................................
Skieblue
only thing I didn't really like about the movie was some of the animation.
tcl...@postoffice.pacbell.net
Michael Martinez wrote:
> Why do you call us "self-styled Tolkien fans"? Do you understand what
> "self-styled" means? Many other people acknowledge us as Tolkien fans, so
> we're hardly "self-styled".
>
I didn't mean any harm or insult by saying "self-styled", I only meant we call
ourselves Tolkien fans. I also style myself a Tolkien fan. And I have nothing but
respect for Mr. Martinez's web site and the essays he's written.
Hell, maybe I should just buy a Thesaurus....
> It's a horrible mangling of the story, but what's worse, it has happily
> singing Orcs. Barf.
The original book of "The Hobbit" also has happily singing orcs. Even worse, it has
happily singing elves, going "tra-la-la-lally"! I guess that was before ol' JRRT
found out that they were "Noldorians," and hence more deserving of respect.
Michael Martinez
>Michael Martinez wrote:
>> It's a horrible mangling of the story, but what's worse, it has happily
>> singing Orcs. Barf.
>
>The original book of "The Hobbit" also has happily singing orcs. Even worse, it
>has happily singing elves, going "tra-la-la-lally"! I guess that was before ol'
>JRRT found out that they were "Noldorians," and hence more deserving of respect.
Yes, THE HOBBIT has happily singing Orcs. Orcs who just happen to be on their
way downstairs to eat a tasty dinner and see some prisoners tortured. That's
a far cry from the Orcs of Mordor who are being force-marched to war and
whipped singing, "Where's there's a whip there's a way!" Ugh.
Frankly, I have no problem with the Elves of Rivendell going
"tra-la-la-lally!" They were, after all, Elves, and that means people with a
sense of humor....
Brinyjoe
not to like them
Elves...the most beautiful of all races portrayed as grey skinned lankey
half-orc looking creatures devoid of all beauty...
Brinyjoe
<tcl...@postoffice.pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:3869E6AF...@postoffice.pacbell.net...
Michael Martinez
>The HORRIBLE portrayal of elves in the ranking and bass movies is enought
>not to like them
>
>Elves...the most beautiful of all races portrayed as grey skinned lankey
>half-orc looking creatures devoid of all beauty...
They were just having bad hair days.
Simon Paquet
wrote:
>HOWEVER....they do NOT
>make up for it by combining the female characters and having Aragorn
>fall for the battle-maiden who killed the Nazgul. (Which is exactly what
>I'm afraid Peter Jackson is going to do. That's why there's been no
>casting announcement for Eowyn yet: Arwen is going to usurp her role.)
There has been a casting announcement for Eowyn. Uma Thurman (Pulp
Fiction, Gattaca) will play Eowyn.
CU
Simon
--
Übermut. Chaos. Seife
Ermanna
tcl...@postoffice.pacbell.net wrote:
<shnip>
> The only sacrificial lambs in this case are Faramir, Arwen and
> that whole thing about "Sharkey" invading the Shire. That's right,
> campers, no Faramir for Eowyn to fall in love with, no Arwen for Aragorn
> to marry, no big mess when the hobbits get home.
No Eomer to renew oaths with Aragorn, and to rule in his uncle's stead,
no Legolas and Gimli, no Imrahil, and they sucked almost all personality
and skills from Aragorn. I frankly can't imagine the book Aragorn calling
Gandalf "wizard". And I hated the part where they are saying that Hobbits
became part of the human race. That goes against Tolkien's words. And
they messed up the times of the events.
<shnip>
> They're all
> there: Denethor, Theoden, Elrond, Aragorn, Gandalf, Merry, Pippin,
> Gollum, the Witch-King, the Black Fleet, the "watchers" at Cirith Ungol,
> even the Mouth of Sauron. Maybe they left so much in because they were
> sensitive to criticism over leaving Beorn, the Arkenstone and Lobelia
> Sackville-Baggins out of the other movie.
But not Eomer, Legolas, Gimli, Imrahil, and very few people weren't
changed.
<shnip>
> Some of the scenes and songs are actually pretty great:
I'll grant the songs.
<shnip>
> I liked the suggestion at the end, that hobbits would eventually
> evolve into full-sized humans so that future generations would ask
> themselves, "Do I have hobbit in me?" Absolutely faithful to J.R.R.!
No, JRRT said in the LotR "Even in ancient days they were, as a rule,
shy of the 'Big Folk', as they call us, and now they avoid us with dismay
and are becoming hard to find."
<shnip>
> So what do you think, my brothers? Give Rankin-Bass another
> chance?
Mmm... no.
Ermanna the Elven Jedi Knight
Ewoks are Hobbits!
grimgard
tcl...@postoffice.pacbell.net wrote:
> Hell, maybe I should just buy a Thesaurus....
>
I thought they were extinct. >-/
grimgard
Michael Urban
<tcl...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
>
>Michael Martinez wrote:
>
>> "self-styled" means? Many other people acknowledge us as Tolkien fans, so
>> we're hardly "self-styled".
>>
>
>I didn't mean any harm or insult by saying "self-styled", I only meant we call
>ourselves Tolkien fans. I also style myself a Tolkien fan. And I have nothing but
>respect for Mr. Martinez's web site and the essays he's written.
>
>
>> singing Orcs. Barf.
>
>The original book of "The Hobbit" also has happily singing orcs. Even worse, it has
>happily singing elves, going "tra-la-la-lally"! I guess that was before ol' JRRT
>found out that they were "Noldorians," and hence more deserving of respect.
>
"Tra la la lally" could well be Bilbo's interpretation of Quenya, a
language with which he was, at the time he wrote his journal, unfamiliar.
Alan Graham
Michael Urban wrote in message <84g3gj$oc9$1...@nntp2.atl.mindspring.net>...
>>
>>The original book of "The Hobbit" also has happily singing orcs. Even
worse, it has
>>happily singing elves, going "tra-la-la-lally"! I guess that was before
ol' JRRT
>>found out that they were "Noldorians," and hence more deserving of
respect.
>>
>
>"Tra la la lally" could well be Bilbo's interpretation of Quenya, a
>language with which he was, at the time he wrote his journal, unfamiliar.
I'd never thought of that interpretation, but I think it works
I like it
Al
Nystulc
<simon.s...@gmx.de> writes:
>There has been a casting announcement for Eowyn. Uma Thurman (Pulp
>Fiction, Gattaca) will play Eowyn.
Unless I missed something recent (last two weeks) this has not happened.
Thurman's involvement remains officially unconfirmed.
Eowyn definitely has a role in the film though. The failure to make a casting
announcement relates to the fact that they will not begin filming her role for
some time yet. (Reputedly she has an appearance in Part I, but as it takes
place in Rohan, it will presumably be filmed at the same time as the other
Rohan scenes). There has also not been an official casting announcement for
Theoden, Denethor, or Faramir, and we should not therefore conclude that they
are not in the movie. All 4 roles are described in the casting release
intended to indicate to actors that roles are available.
I might mention that Eomer was cut from the first 2-movie draft of the script,
and replaced by Eowyn as the leader of the Orc-Hunters. Whether this remains
the case I do not know.
-- John Whelan
Nystulc
>The HORRIBLE portrayal of elves in the ranking and bass movies is enought
>not to like them
I rather liked them, though I doubt they were what tolkien intended.
>Elves...the most beautiful of all races portrayed as grey skinned lankey
>half-orc looking creatures devoid of all beauty...
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
-- John Whelan
Nystulc
>> I liked the suggestion at the end, that hobbits would eventually
>> evolve into full-sized humans so that future generations would ask
>> themselves, "Do I have hobbit in me?" Absolutely faithful to J.R.R.!
Most of your review I agree with, but not this part. It is quite unfaithful to
Tolkien, who imagined hobbits getting smaller, not bigger, to improve their
ability to hid from humans. Tolkien has explained that the hobbits of Bilbo's
time were never less than 3' high. The 2'-4' range that is given in the intro
to LOTR is intended to include modern hobbits.
They are the ancestors, not of humans, but of "leprechauns" and other such
"little folk" that reputedly haunt the Irish and British countrysides. He even
implies that the "pot of gold" legend may have descended from the Mad Baggins
legends (at least -- that was my interpretation).
-- John Whelan
Nystulc
Martinez) writes:
>Yes, THE HOBBIT has happily singing Orcs. Orcs who just happen to be on
>their
>way downstairs to eat a tasty dinner and see some prisoners tortured. That's
>a far cry from the Orcs of Mordor who are being force-marched to war and
>whipped singing, "Where's there's a whip there's a way!" Ugh.
They didn't seem all that happy to me, which was the point of the song. One
must give some leeway to musical productions. Personally, I liked this bit,
and feel that the songs are the best contribution of both Rankin/Bass
productions. The animation and story treatment left me cold for the most part
-- pale shadows of the book (one can hardly expect more). But the music an
songs remain a worthy contribution to Tolkien culture (though even here, the
Hobbit was more successful).
-- John Whelan
William H. Hsu
>In article <s6l2erc...@corp.supernews.com>, "Brinyjoe" <brin...@mounet.com> wrote:
>>The HORRIBLE portrayal of elves in the ranking and bass movies is enought
>>not to like them
>>
>>Elves...the most beautiful of all races portrayed as grey skinned lankey
>>half-orc looking creatures devoid of all beauty...
>They were just having bad hair days.
I'd say they were having bad TOE days too, Michael. Thranduil, for
example, is either in tights or has NO toes...
-Bill
>--
> \\ // Science Fiction and Fantasy in...@xenite.org
> \\// The 21st century starts January 1, 2001.
> //\\ Prepare for another year of sales ads.
> // \\ENITE.org...............................................
=======================================================
William H. Hsu ICQ: 28651394
bh...@cis.uiuc.edu
Lightsaber Resources: Humor, Games, Discussions
http://lightsaber.ncsa.uiuc.edu
=======================================================
Andrea Wojtewicz
Andrea
William H. Hsu
>I'll give you guys three guesses as to what I got for Christmas.
We don't wanna watch cartoons today
But the lord of the gifts [1] says, "Nay, Nay, Nay!"
We're gonna watch that ol' R-O-T-K!
Where there's a tape, there's a way!
Where there's a tape, (remote click), there's a way!
Where there's a tape, (VCR whir), there's a way!
[1] "Annatar"... Sindarin for "Yo Mama!"
>Andrea
-Bill
Michael Martinez
>I'll give you guys three guesses as to what I got for Christmas.
It's the love behind the gift that matters, not the gift itself. Every time I
bash David Day in response to someone's mention that they just got one of his
books as a gift I feel a little bad for doing so. I'd like to enlighten
people but not diminish their joy at receiving a very thoughtful gift.
It's been said, however, Go not to Michael Martinez for enlightenment, for he
shall both illucidate and piss you off.
--
\\ // Science Fiction and Fantasy in...@xenite.org
\\// I need a new .sig. This space for rent.
//\\
// \\ENITE.org...............................................
William H. Hsu
>In article <T1yb4.5110$Ce.3...@monger.newsread.com>, "Andrea Wojtewicz" <and...@tm.net> wrote:
>>I'll give you guys three guesses as to what I got for Christmas.
>It's the love behind the gift that matters, not the gift itself. Every time I
>bash David Day in response to someone's mention that they just got one of his
>books as a gift I feel a little bad for doing so. I'd like to enlighten
>people but not diminish their joy at receiving a very thoughtful gift.
True! Besides, Rankin-Bass's "Return of the King" is almost as
good as a "Mystery Science Theater 3000" topic as Bakshi's LoTR.
Par example:
GANDALF: Is there hobbit in me? <turns to camera> Is there?
CROW T. ROBOT: <Homer Simpson voice> Mmm... HOB-BIT...
>It's been said, however, Go not to Michael Martinez for enlightenment, for he
>shall both illucidate and piss you off.
ROTFL!
-Bill
>--
> \\ // Science Fiction and Fantasy in...@xenite.org
> \\// I need a new .sig. This space for rent.
> //\\
> // \\ENITE.org...............................................
=======================================================
Michael Martinez
>Mic...@xenite.org (Michael Martinez) writes:
>
>>It's been said, however, Go not to Michael Martinez for enlightenment, for he
>>shall both illucidate and piss you off.
I just wish I'd spelled "elucidate" correctly before you cross-posted that to
the mst3k groups.
Still, I wonder why the show never took on the Bakshi film....
Andrea Wojtewicz
"William H. Hsu" <bh...@ringil.ncsa.uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:84mqfo$8e3$1...@cnn.ksu.ksu.edu...
> Mic...@xenite.org (Michael Martinez) writes:
> >It's the love behind the gift that matters, not the gift itself. Every
time I
> >bash David Day in response to someone's mention that they just got one of
his
> >books as a gift I feel a little bad for doing so. I'd like to enlighten
> >people but not diminish their joy at receiving a very thoughtful gift.
You're absolutely right! My brother knows the only things I collect are
Tolkien related, so he got me "The Hobbit", and Bakshi's "Lord of the
Rings". Can't stand the first one, but I never minded Bakshi's version too
much (ducks quickly to avoid all objects being thrown). I'll show them to
my kids, since they're too young for the books, and someday they'll see how
great the books are when they can read them.
>
Andrea
Jereeza
> but I never minded Bakshi's version too
> much (ducks quickly to avoid all objects being thrown)
Bakshi's LotR was always one of my fav cartoons because of the way they drew Frodo. No
pic of him I ever saw, by any artist, came as close to my mental image of Frodo as
Bakshi's team did. <- 100% subjective opinion
PS. the Town Archive of Rijeka is now finally restaurated and moved to a new building
- hopefully I'll have some results soon :)
--
jereeza(at)yahoo.com http://www.angelfire.com/ri/jereeza
"Human actions do not merit hell or heaven." - J. L. Borges
Jereeza
>
> I'll give you guys three guesses as to what I got for Christmas.
The BBC LotR on CD?
Andrew Wells
>Andrea Wojtewicz wrote:
>>
>> I'll give you guys three guesses as to what I got for Christmas.
>
>The BBC LotR on CD?
A copy of "Songs for the Philologists"?
Andrew
--
Andrew Wells
Change 10 to 9 to reach me
Paul S. Person
> It seems that among self-styled Tolkien fans, there is an order
>in which the existing Tolkien movies are disliked. Let's have them in
>reverse order, like David Letterman:
> 3) Rankin-Bass's "The Hobbit" (flawed, but many people admit to
>enjoying it)
> 2) Bakshi's "The Lord of the Rings" (still enjoyed by many, but
>roundly ridiculed for, among other things, telling only half of the
>story)
> ....and....a drumroll, please, Paul....
> 1) Rankin-Bass's "The Return of the King"! (Nobody likes this
>turkey. Nobody. Nadie. N'il y a personne. Nobody in the whole universe.)
I saw it once. Once was enough.
Merry and Pippin are portrayed as far too immature. Yes, they were
young hobbits. But by the time of the film they had been through a
great deal. They should be much further along the path to how they act
in the Shire at the end (in the book): as people who understand the
concept of authority and who are accustomed to wielding it.
I was amazed, though, to see Frodo and Gollum wrestling each other
adjacent to the Crack of Doom. Given the other events which were
portrayed as occurring while they were restling, how many weeks do you
suppose this "match of the Third Age" took?
Andrea Wojtewicz
"Jereeza" <jer...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:386FEA...@yahoo.com...
> PS. the Town Archive of Rijeka is now finally restaurated and moved to a
new building
> - hopefully I'll have some results soon :)
>
Thanks! And I just got Family Tree Maker for Christmas.
Andrea
Tessa Soderberg
storm troopers to much. I happened to have enjoyed this movie as well,
"where there's a whip there's a way" has stayed with me for years. Sure
there's lots missing like 2/3 of the book, but it's interesting to see
someone elses idea of things. Sam does if I remember right say something
about "a small garden is all my need and do" but his vission of the greening
of mordor is certainly interesting, it certainly makes Sam a very real
person/hobbit.
<tcl...@postoffice.pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:3869E6AF...@postoffice.pacbell.net...
> It seems that among self-styled Tolkien fans, there is an order
> in which the existing Tolkien movies are disliked. Let's have them in
> reverse order, like David Letterman:
> 3) Rankin-Bass's "The Hobbit" (flawed, but many people admit to
> enjoying it)
> 2) Bakshi's "The Lord of the Rings" (still enjoyed by many, but
> roundly ridiculed for, among other things, telling only half of the
> story)
> ....and....a drumroll, please, Paul....
> 1) Rankin-Bass's "The Return of the King"! (Nobody likes this
> turkey. Nobody. Nadie. N'il y a personne. Nobody in the whole universe.)
>
> But, you guys, the thing is....I ordered both Rankin-Bass movies
> from reel.com and I just watched "Return of the King" and, uh, I kinda
> (gulp) liked it! Don't flame me, my brothers, give me a chance to
> explain.
> There is a scene in the R-B RotK that is justifiably condemned
> by all: the scene in which Frodo and Sam wave to a couple of passing
> orcs. But, you know, that scene is all the more shocking when you
> realize that it is the ONLY such lapse in the entire movie! The rest of
> it is remarkably faithful, with no other egregious errors.
> (Besides, a lot of secret orc sympathizers may delight in
> thinking that their favorite monsters are only a product of a bad
> upbringing and are, perhaps, just genetically twisted elves who need
> love. So there.)
> Like I was saying, Rankin-Bass is remarkably faithful, even to
> the extent of repeating some original dialogue. Since this is only the
> last third of the story, it would have been the easiest thing in the
> world to insult the audience's intelligence, cutting out major story
> elements and combining or eliminating characters. But Rankin-Bass
> doesn't, for the most part.
> The only sacrificial lambs in this case are Faramir, Arwen and
> that whole thing about "Sharkey" invading the Shire. That's right,
> campers, no Faramir for Eowyn to fall in love with, no Arwen for Aragorn
> to marry, no big mess when the hobbits get home. HOWEVER....they do NOT
> make up for it by combining the female characters and having Aragorn
> fall for the battle-maiden who killed the Nazgul. (Which is exactly what
> I'm afraid Peter Jackson is going to do. That's why there's been no
> casting announcement for Eowyn yet: Arwen is going to usurp her role.)
> I think the Rankin-Bass screenwriters just made a tactical
> decision to not have any romance, that's all. Otherwise, the integrity
> of the characters is preserved. Eowyn rides behind Aragorn in the
> triumphal parade, but not beside him. Actually, it was probably a brave
> decision to give the fans some credit and include most of the characters
> and story elements whether they were fully explained or not. They're all
> there: Denethor, Theoden, Elrond, Aragorn, Gandalf, Merry, Pippin,
> Gollum, the Witch-King, the Black Fleet, the "watchers" at Cirith Ungol,
> even the Mouth of Sauron. Maybe they left so much in because they were
> sensitive to criticism over leaving Beorn, the Arkenstone and Lobelia
> Sackville-Baggins out of the other movie.
> I liked the suggestion at the end, that hobbits would eventually
> evolve into full-sized humans so that future generations would ask
> themselves, "Do I have hobbit in me?" Absolutely faithful to J.R.R.!
> Lots of flashbacks and flashforwards are employed throughout the
> movie--partly explanatory, partly for mood, partly to segue into the
> other half of this bifurcated story. Some may not like it, but I do.
> Very postmodern.
> As a schoolteacher, I think I could certainly use both of the
> Rankin-Bass movies to get kids interested in Tolkien. Once they saw
> these, they'd forget all about Pokemon. (I'd use the Bakshi version to
> put them to sleep.)
Ermanna
Tessa Soderberg wrote:
> First, ewaks aren't hobbits, forgive the spelling.
Ewoks are! They are, they are! They've just changed!
furry ewok has confirmed this!
> They enjoyed killing the
> storm troopers to much.
Read the Scouring of the Shire! The Hobbits wanted blood!