Commentary - Hobbit Justin

It means "The Goonish Shive."

Moderators: DarkShive, corran_star, Berk

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby Huzzus on Tue Oct 28, 2008 1:52 pm

Dragonstar wrote:You hate it because of some Star Wars obsessed character in a movie hated it and completely mischaracterized the good professor's work?

No, but it makes me smile whenever I watch it.

Tricia wrote:*chuckles* Beat me to it...

If you're going to say you don't like it, that's great. But at least bring a good reason to the table.

Ha ^w^

My reason? To me, it's just boring. I have read some *not all* the books and my mom finally broke me down to watch the trilogy and nothing wow'ed me. If anything I was laughing my a** off cause I thought it was stupid. Don't ask me why I thought it was stupid, I'll just say I was watching while in the facepalm position and giggling. Afterword's, I told my mom she owes me half a day of my life back and walked a way. I meant not to anger anyone, just stating I don't like LotR and it's cool you people can enjoy it.
User avatar
Huzzus
Grand Poobah Keenspotter
 
Posts: 310
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 4:49 pm
Location: Near Susan but Unseen

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby Nightranger on Tue Oct 28, 2008 5:51 pm

LotR was a little slow at times, but I'd still say that they're good books. The movies were also very good, but they did change a number of things (oftan for no apparent reason), and left quite a bit of good parts out. The Old Forest, Tom Bombadil, the retaking of the Shire...

In my opinion, the Silmarillion was better than the Hobbit or any of the LotR trilogy. True, it did start rather slow, but once it gets to when Melkor and Ungoliant destroy the Two Trees and steal the titular gemstones, and the Kinslayings, it then speeds up. It tells a series of nice stories, and allows you to understand the Hobbit and the LotR trilogy much better.

Oh, as a note for Dan and anyone else who has seen the movies and not read the books: Frodo isn't nearly as much of a jerk to Sam in the book. I think he (Sam) gets to do more and gets more characterization. But then again, that could be said about most, if not all, of the characters.
MARTIN: What?
DANIEL: Okay. One, that's Star Trek; and two, it's ridiculous.
MARTIN: What's wrong with it?
CARTER: "The singularity is about to explode?"
MARTIN: Yes.
CARTER: Everything about that statement is wrong.
DANIEL: How exactly is having weapons at maximum going to help the situation?
MARTIN: The audience isn't going to know the difference. They love: "weapons at maximum."
MITCHELL: Never underestimate your audience. They're generally sensitive, intelligent people who respond positively to quality entertainment.
TEAL’C: I do not understand why everything in this script must inevitably explode.
MARTIN: Look, you guys may all know how things really work out there in the galaxy, but I know the film business. Explosions make great trailers. Simple fact. More explosions, better trailer. Better trailer, more viewers.


I have discovered that Death Note + Lucky Star = awsome.
Here's more proof.
User avatar
Nightranger
Keenspot Despot
 
Posts: 2830
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 1:53 pm
Location: where angels fear to tread

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby Darekun on Tue Oct 28, 2008 6:42 pm

I liked The Hobbit, both the book and the old Rankin & Bass movie, but the LOTR books mostly bored me. I slogged through three books in a sense, but it's the six-book sense. I've watched all three movies, but they took out some of the best and coolest bits of the books and left the boring in. They were okay as movies go, and the worst of them is definitely better than the best of the Star Wars prequel trilogy, but not worthy of following the Rankin & Bass Hobbit movie(and the book was better).

The Silmarillion... gah, it's like reading the bible without the "This is what christians actually believe" humor. Christian mythology is done so un-entertainingly by christians - makes sense, that's not what they're shooting for, but I still don't like it :J

And yes, Everyone Is Jesus In Purgatory! :wink:
If you must feed the troll, take it to PMs.
To help avoid feeding the troll, there's an ignore feature.

TFed male as "Darechan" for Sister II!
Best EGS video. Ever.
Whereas I... am not an artist.
Tricia wrote:No. There's no way in hell you're going to get away with shit like that. Go ahead and state those so-called "reasons".
User avatar
Darekun
Keenspot Despot
 
Posts: 1331
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 1:22 am

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby Nightranger on Tue Oct 28, 2008 7:52 pm

Rankin and Bass...ah, this one.

Yeah, that one is pretty great. I even have it on DVD. :)
MARTIN: What?
DANIEL: Okay. One, that's Star Trek; and two, it's ridiculous.
MARTIN: What's wrong with it?
CARTER: "The singularity is about to explode?"
MARTIN: Yes.
CARTER: Everything about that statement is wrong.
DANIEL: How exactly is having weapons at maximum going to help the situation?
MARTIN: The audience isn't going to know the difference. They love: "weapons at maximum."
MITCHELL: Never underestimate your audience. They're generally sensitive, intelligent people who respond positively to quality entertainment.
TEAL’C: I do not understand why everything in this script must inevitably explode.
MARTIN: Look, you guys may all know how things really work out there in the galaxy, but I know the film business. Explosions make great trailers. Simple fact. More explosions, better trailer. Better trailer, more viewers.


I have discovered that Death Note + Lucky Star = awsome.
Here's more proof.
User avatar
Nightranger
Keenspot Despot
 
Posts: 2830
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 1:53 pm
Location: where angels fear to tread

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby Illusionist on Wed Oct 29, 2008 1:12 am

Nightranger wrote:LotR was a little slow at times, but I'd still say that they're good books. The movies were also very good, but they did change a number of things (oftan for no apparent reason), and left quite a bit of good parts out. The Old Forest, Tom Bombadil, the retaking of the Shire...


NO. That's a bad Nightranger. We do NOT say Tom Bombadil was good. We do NOT praise the worst thing Tolkein ever wrote.
The book is almost always better than the movie. You could have no better case in point than FROM HELL, Alan Moore's best graphic novel to date, brilliantly illustrated by Eddie Campbell. It's hard to describe just how much better the book is. It's like, "If the movie was an episode of Battlestar Galactica with a guest appearance by the Smurfs and everyone spoke Dutch, the graphic novel is Citizen Kane with added sex scenes and music by your favourite ten bands and everyone in the world you ever hated dies at the end." That's how much better it is. - Warren Ellis.

Nobody ever told Picard that "Ye cannae change the laws of Physics!". They just DID it. - Vampiress Kat.
User avatar
Illusionist
Keenspot Juggernaut
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 9:26 am
Location: Probably not where I'm supposed to be

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby Raging Mouse on Wed Oct 29, 2008 1:43 am

Illusionist wrote:
Nightranger wrote:LotR was a little slow at times, but I'd still say that they're good books. The movies were also very good, but they did change a number of things (oftan for no apparent reason), and left quite a bit of good parts out. The Old Forest, Tom Bombadil, the retaking of the Shire...


NO. That's a bad Nightranger. We do NOT say Tom Bombadil was good. We do NOT praise the worst thing Tolkein ever wrote.


That's pretty harsh, Illusionist. Care to explain? Also, T O L K I E N
User avatar
Raging Mouse
Keenspot Despot
 
Posts: 1866
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 12:17 pm
Location: Finland

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby Illusionist on Wed Oct 29, 2008 1:57 am

I just plain don't like him. He slows down an already slow book (bear in mind I read the books after seeing the films), he doesn't really fit the tone of the books, he's a deus ex machina in his second appearance, etc.
The book is almost always better than the movie. You could have no better case in point than FROM HELL, Alan Moore's best graphic novel to date, brilliantly illustrated by Eddie Campbell. It's hard to describe just how much better the book is. It's like, "If the movie was an episode of Battlestar Galactica with a guest appearance by the Smurfs and everyone spoke Dutch, the graphic novel is Citizen Kane with added sex scenes and music by your favourite ten bands and everyone in the world you ever hated dies at the end." That's how much better it is. - Warren Ellis.

Nobody ever told Picard that "Ye cannae change the laws of Physics!". They just DID it. - Vampiress Kat.
User avatar
Illusionist
Keenspot Juggernaut
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 9:26 am
Location: Probably not where I'm supposed to be

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby vampiress_kat on Wed Oct 29, 2008 3:07 am

Really? I rather liked him. He... well, he's... gah. My lack of being able to explain it sucks.
But I think that The Sacking of the Shire being cut out sucks the worst. I mean, they didn't even do it in the original movie filming, then have it cut for time! I have the extended DVD! It's not there! Why? Why isn't it there?!

... Yeahanyway. It does suck that they cut out some of the really good bits.

AndholycrapI'vebeenquoted.
Johari/Nohari
Status: Rabbit-girl pirateninja.
Image
Image
User avatar
vampiress_kat
Keenspot Despot
 
Posts: 2665
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2005 3:27 am
Location: Candy Mountain... Oh @#^%, they took my kidney.

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby Illusionist on Wed Oct 29, 2008 7:14 am

Given the number of endings in the regular version, do you really want another sub-plot that needs to be tied up before it's all over? It's fine in a book, because you can read it in bursts, but in a film it would just be too much.
The book is almost always better than the movie. You could have no better case in point than FROM HELL, Alan Moore's best graphic novel to date, brilliantly illustrated by Eddie Campbell. It's hard to describe just how much better the book is. It's like, "If the movie was an episode of Battlestar Galactica with a guest appearance by the Smurfs and everyone spoke Dutch, the graphic novel is Citizen Kane with added sex scenes and music by your favourite ten bands and everyone in the world you ever hated dies at the end." That's how much better it is. - Warren Ellis.

Nobody ever told Picard that "Ye cannae change the laws of Physics!". They just DID it. - Vampiress Kat.
User avatar
Illusionist
Keenspot Juggernaut
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 9:26 am
Location: Probably not where I'm supposed to be

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby AFNB on Wed Oct 29, 2008 7:35 am

Illusionist, I agree with your second complaint about Bombadil. I like him just fine, but indeed, he didn't really fit in - probably because the character was not originally Middle-Earth native. Tom Bombadil was created in a seperate publication, in two poems that Prof. Tolkien had written (the first of which was better, in my opinion). I have them somewhere, and if anyone is interested, I can post them here later.

Kat, they did have a reason for not doing the Sacking - albeit, not a good reason.
PJ just doesn't like that part of the story.
But I'll agree. That was a part of it that I missed the most.

Dan: what you're missing is the fact that the people of Middle-Earth do NOT "magically" know the words. It's a bit more cumbersome in The Hobbit (which was originally just a bedtime story for Prof. Tolkien's kids), but Middle-Earth, and especially the Shire, was rich in folklore. The Free Peoples loved hearing stories and songs, and these stories and songs would pass down through generations, and sometimes spread out beyond the borders of their own lands.
If you've seen the extended version of Fellowship, you'll recall the scene in the Green Dragon Inn, where the Hobbits are basically having a massive boozeup, and singing a drinking song (with an improvized line from Pip). This is a prime example. They all knew the words, but a wizard didn't do it, word of mouth did.
He came, said his piece, then sodded off.

Callahan's Law:
Shared pain is lessened, shared joy is increased
(and bad puns are always appreciated).

A Friendly Neighborhood Bunny
User avatar
AFNB
Keenspot Despot
 
Posts: 1130
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 7:20 pm
Location: On my butt

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby horus on Wed Oct 29, 2008 9:10 am

Dragonstar wrote:
[snip: stuff I didn't want to speak to...]

(Allegory means there is a 1-to-1 relation between the story and what it is referencing. Aslan <-> Jesus, Peter <-> Peter, etc. Applicability, what Tolkien liked, is a 1-to-Many relation. Frodo is a Christ figure, but he can be applied to many folk heroes. (Note that the reason he failed in the end was because, while he was a Christ figure, he wasn't Christ himself so was not infallible) Sauron is a demonic figure (Not Satanic figure, as he was only a servant, not the master), but can be applied to many villains, etc.)

On an unrelated note, I like nested parentheses.


(Obligatory Notice: I haven't read the entire thread yet... time is short.)

I'm a parenthesis junkie, myself. I kind of thought that the reason Frodo failed in the end was to allow Gollum to achieve a sort of redemption by his final act of desperation? Maybe not. Maybe it was more about Gollum's lust for his "precious" being his undoing and the salvation of the world?

Later On,
D
Incarnating as Het-heru for the duration of the Sister II story arc.

"It is my firm belief that it is a mistake to hold firm beliefs."
A Proud Member of Quote Pyramid Demolition Workers' Union Local No. 72
XP: We don't need no stinkin' XP (yet)!
EGS Inventory: Standard Newbie Pack (1 dead fish, 6 cans of unlabeled soda, 1 TF gun, 1 Squirrel teddy, "1 Thing I've forgotten" (from who?), a copy of Cat Chicks Magazine, and a Grace VooDoo doll.
Image
Image Image
ImageImage
User avatar
horus
Grand Poobah Keenspotter
 
Posts: 439
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 3:07 pm
Location: Directly Above The Centre of The Earth

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby Dragonstar on Wed Oct 29, 2008 9:35 am

horus wrote:
Dragonstar wrote:
[snip: stuff I didn't want to speak to...]

(Allegory means there is a 1-to-1 relation between the story and what it is referencing. Aslan <-> Jesus, Peter <-> Peter, etc. Applicability, what Tolkien liked, is a 1-to-Many relation. Frodo is a Christ figure, but he can be applied to many folk heroes. (Note that the reason he failed in the end was because, while he was a Christ figure, he wasn't Christ himself so was not infallible) Sauron is a demonic figure (Not Satanic figure, as he was only a servant, not the master), but can be applied to many villains, etc.)

On an unrelated note, I like nested parentheses.


(Obligatory Notice: I haven't read the entire thread yet... time is short.)

I'm a parenthesis junkie, myself. I kind of thought that the reason Frodo failed in the end was to allow Gollum to achieve a sort of redemption by his final act of desperation? Maybe not. Maybe it was more about Gollum's lust for his "precious" being his undoing and the salvation of the world?

Later On,
D


The way he failed was to allow this, but, to Tolkien, Frodo HAD to fail. While strong-willed, hobbits are still not infallible.

Also, I should note, that while I normally like nested parentheses, I came to loathe the parenthetical nature of the Scheme programming language, which I had to learn in Undergrad.
Dragonstar
Grand Poobah Keenspotter
 
Posts: 418
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 8:35 pm

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby Nightranger on Wed Oct 29, 2008 1:41 pm

Illusionist wrote:I just plain don't like him. He slows down an already slow book (bear in mind I read the books after seeing the films), he doesn't really fit the tone of the books, he's a deus ex machina in his second appearance, etc.

A deus ex machina? Come on, next to what Yu-Gi-Oh the Abridged Series aptly named the LotR-Deus-ex-Machina Eagles, is he really that bad of one?

vampiress_kat wrote:Really? I rather liked him. He... well, he's... gah. My lack of being able to explain it sucks.
But I think that The Sacking of the Shire being cut out sucks the worst. I mean, they didn't even do it in the original movie filming, then have it cut for time! I have the extended DVD! It's not there! Why? Why isn't it there?!

... Yeahanyway. It does suck that they cut out some of the really good bits.

I just thought he was an interesting character (Tom Bombadil, I mean). I think that the reason, or at least one of them, for why they cut the Sacking of the Shire out would be that they didn't want to have the intensity kick back up after the climax. You know, how they teach you in lit. classes about the exposition, rising action, climax, falling action, all that. Which is one of the reasons I liked it; most of the time everything's smooth sailing after the climax of whatever quest the heroes are on. It also showed how much Merry and Pippin had changed and matured. And I just love the idea of a hobbit army. :P
MARTIN: What?
DANIEL: Okay. One, that's Star Trek; and two, it's ridiculous.
MARTIN: What's wrong with it?
CARTER: "The singularity is about to explode?"
MARTIN: Yes.
CARTER: Everything about that statement is wrong.
DANIEL: How exactly is having weapons at maximum going to help the situation?
MARTIN: The audience isn't going to know the difference. They love: "weapons at maximum."
MITCHELL: Never underestimate your audience. They're generally sensitive, intelligent people who respond positively to quality entertainment.
TEAL’C: I do not understand why everything in this script must inevitably explode.
MARTIN: Look, you guys may all know how things really work out there in the galaxy, but I know the film business. Explosions make great trailers. Simple fact. More explosions, better trailer. Better trailer, more viewers.


I have discovered that Death Note + Lucky Star = awsome.
Here's more proof.
User avatar
Nightranger
Keenspot Despot
 
Posts: 2830
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 1:53 pm
Location: where angels fear to tread

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby Raging Mouse on Wed Oct 29, 2008 2:30 pm

Tom Bombadil is likely the creator of the Hobbits. There are so many parallels between them.

Bombadil seems to embody youthful innocence, despite probably being one of the oldest beings in Middle-Earth. he is almost constantly merry, expressing it in song and dance. He lives very secluded, and most of the rest of the world is unaware of his presence. The One Ring has apparently no effect on him whatsoever.

The hobbits are diminutive compared to others, giving them the appearance of children in the eyes of others. They appreciate merrymaking, and parties in particular. They live in a part of Middle-Earth that is far from anywhere important, and most of the other races are unaware of them or ignore them. Hobbits, for whatever reason, are more resistant than the other races against the One Ring.

In the book, he's got a two important actions. First, he causes Frodo to put on the ring for the second time. Second, he rescues the hobbits from the barrow downs, and hands them the swords he scavenges from the dead kings that would have killed them, and this is important - in the book it's stated that the Witch King of Angmar cannot even be harmed by normal weapons due to his sorcery. The barrow blades figure in heavily, as they were forged to combat his kind of forces. All of this gets ignored in the film where Aragorn just hands them a couple of swords.
User avatar
Raging Mouse
Keenspot Despot
 
Posts: 1866
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 12:17 pm
Location: Finland

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby Nightranger on Wed Oct 29, 2008 7:15 pm

Well, hey, if they can cut out the gift-giving...

yes, I know it was in the extended version
MARTIN: What?
DANIEL: Okay. One, that's Star Trek; and two, it's ridiculous.
MARTIN: What's wrong with it?
CARTER: "The singularity is about to explode?"
MARTIN: Yes.
CARTER: Everything about that statement is wrong.
DANIEL: How exactly is having weapons at maximum going to help the situation?
MARTIN: The audience isn't going to know the difference. They love: "weapons at maximum."
MITCHELL: Never underestimate your audience. They're generally sensitive, intelligent people who respond positively to quality entertainment.
TEAL’C: I do not understand why everything in this script must inevitably explode.
MARTIN: Look, you guys may all know how things really work out there in the galaxy, but I know the film business. Explosions make great trailers. Simple fact. More explosions, better trailer. Better trailer, more viewers.


I have discovered that Death Note + Lucky Star = awsome.
Here's more proof.
User avatar
Nightranger
Keenspot Despot
 
Posts: 2830
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 1:53 pm
Location: where angels fear to tread

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby Dacheran on Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:13 pm

As a note, some hobbits do have roofs. Frodo's house had one, after he moved out of Bag End. Not to mention the hobbits of Bree.


Another part of my dislike from the movie comes from the treatment of Pippin I think... they totally flanderized him. Which is probably another reason that they couldn't do the shire sacking... pippin didn't mature as such in the movie, in comparison to the book.
Live defines itself, the rest is nothing more than cosmetics.
User avatar
Dacheran
Grand Poobah Keenspotter
 
Posts: 411
Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2003 5:19 pm

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby AFNB on Thu Oct 30, 2008 6:35 am

I feel ignored.
He came, said his piece, then sodded off.

Callahan's Law:
Shared pain is lessened, shared joy is increased
(and bad puns are always appreciated).

A Friendly Neighborhood Bunny
User avatar
AFNB
Keenspot Despot
 
Posts: 1130
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2004 7:20 pm
Location: On my butt

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby Illusionist on Thu Oct 30, 2008 6:37 am

Who said that? I see a post, but I can't see who made it!
The book is almost always better than the movie. You could have no better case in point than FROM HELL, Alan Moore's best graphic novel to date, brilliantly illustrated by Eddie Campbell. It's hard to describe just how much better the book is. It's like, "If the movie was an episode of Battlestar Galactica with a guest appearance by the Smurfs and everyone spoke Dutch, the graphic novel is Citizen Kane with added sex scenes and music by your favourite ten bands and everyone in the world you ever hated dies at the end." That's how much better it is. - Warren Ellis.

Nobody ever told Picard that "Ye cannae change the laws of Physics!". They just DID it. - Vampiress Kat.
User avatar
Illusionist
Keenspot Juggernaut
 
Posts: 4697
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 9:26 am
Location: Probably not where I'm supposed to be

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby broken_hero on Thu Oct 30, 2008 8:41 pm

The only real problem with LotR and The Hobbit I've ever had is a personal twitch. I hate it when poetry/songs are written in with the prose. The first time I read through LotR, I skipped past most of them (and the fact that this didn't really affect the story for me says something).

Re, the Sacking: When I first watched the movies, I was under the impression that Christopher Lee was dead, and that's why they didn't do that particular ending; pretty hard to do it when the actor who plays the mastermind is dead. But now I look it up, and realize he's still alive and kicking.
"There is no creativity in certainty" - Deepak Chopra
Temporarily broken_heroine for the duration of Sister II
broken_hero's bad drawings, via Deviant Art broken_hero's Mayhem wiki Image
broken_hero's rookie webcomic, Khatru
User avatar
broken_hero
Grand Poobah Keenspotter
 
Posts: 381
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2008 2:36 pm
Location: Chicago, IL, home of Da Bears, Da Bulls, Da Hawks, and some baseball teams.

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby horus on Thu Oct 30, 2008 10:36 pm

Dragonstar wrote:
The way he failed was to allow this, but, to Tolkien, Frodo HAD to fail. While strong-willed, hobbits are still not infallible.

Also, I should note, that while I normally like nested parentheses, I came to loathe the parenthetical nature of the Scheme programming language, which I had to learn in Undergrad.


Hmm... you speak as though you may have known the good Professor Tolkien, or at least had a window on his point of view?

I looked briefly at Scheme, and decided it wouldn't do anything I wanted to do any better than languages I was already familiar with or currently learning. Was there some Great Truth of computer science for which learning Scheme was necessary? (Um, hit me with that reply in PM, please - might get us off-topic otherwise...)

Later On,
D
Incarnating as Het-heru for the duration of the Sister II story arc.

"It is my firm belief that it is a mistake to hold firm beliefs."
A Proud Member of Quote Pyramid Demolition Workers' Union Local No. 72
XP: We don't need no stinkin' XP (yet)!
EGS Inventory: Standard Newbie Pack (1 dead fish, 6 cans of unlabeled soda, 1 TF gun, 1 Squirrel teddy, "1 Thing I've forgotten" (from who?), a copy of Cat Chicks Magazine, and a Grace VooDoo doll.
Image
Image Image
ImageImage
User avatar
horus
Grand Poobah Keenspotter
 
Posts: 439
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 3:07 pm
Location: Directly Above The Centre of The Earth

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby Dragonstar on Fri Oct 31, 2008 2:04 am

horus wrote:
Dragonstar wrote:
The way he failed was to allow this, but, to Tolkien, Frodo HAD to fail. While strong-willed, hobbits are still not infallible.

Also, I should note, that while I normally like nested parentheses, I came to loathe the parenthetical nature of the Scheme programming language, which I had to learn in Undergrad.


Hmm... you speak as though you may have known the good Professor Tolkien, or at least had a window on his point of view?

I looked briefly at Scheme, and decided it wouldn't do anything I wanted to do any better than languages I was already familiar with or currently learning. Was there some Great Truth of computer science for which learning Scheme was necessary? (Um, hit me with that reply in PM, please - might get us off-topic otherwise...)

Later On,
D


I did a lot of research on him for papers in high school (my senior AP English research paper was on him) and continued that research afterwards, especially as I was following the movies through production and such.


It shouldn't drift too far into OT territory, so I'll just say that Scheme is apparently really good for robotics and AI. The use of it in the class I took (Computer Science I) was partially to equalize incoming students (those with C/C++/Java/etc experience wouldn't have an automatic advantage) and partially to ween out those who truly shouldn't be majoring in CS.
Dragonstar
Grand Poobah Keenspotter
 
Posts: 418
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 8:35 pm

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby Proginoskes on Fri Oct 31, 2008 2:19 pm

AFNB wrote:Dan: what you're missing is the fact that the people of Middle-Earth do NOT "magically" know the words. It's a bit more cumbersome in The Hobbit (which was originally just a bedtime story for Prof. Tolkien's kids), but Middle-Earth, and especially the Shire, was rich in folklore. The Free Peoples loved hearing stories and songs, and these stories and songs would pass down through generations, and sometimes spread out beyond the borders of their own lands.
If you've seen the extended version of Fellowship, you'll recall the scene in the Green Dragon Inn, where the Hobbits are basically having a massive boozeup, and singing a drinking song (with an improvized line from Pip). This is a prime example. They all knew the words, but a wizard didn't do it, word of mouth did.

I think Dan was joking about a wizard doing it. Middle-Earth has such a strong folklore tradition because folklore and songs are far more available and lasting records than written documents at the technology level of Middle-Earth. One might argue that they remain more effective in teaching history to later generations: I wouldn't even know about the Cumberland Mine and its disastrous accident if it weren't for The Ballad of Springhill Disaster, the last stanza of which goes:
Peggy Seeger wrote:In the town of Springhill, Nova Scotia,
Late in the year of '58,
Day still comes, and the sun still shines,
But it's dark as the grave in the Cumberland Mine,
It's dark as the grave in the Cumberland Mine.


On the comic to which the commentary is attached: It took me this long to realize that hobbit-Susan's line in the last frame was written so you could obtain two meanings from it. A double entendre in that oldest and most literal of senses.
Call me Prodiraskes.
Is there any way to have inline fixed-width text in BBCode?
Favourite EGS:NP Headline: Uryuomoco Bill: Illegal to Have Non-Translated Signs?
User avatar
Proginoskes
Grand Poobah Keenspotter
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 4:12 pm
Location: When you're Canadian, you're from… Canadia?

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby Dragonstar on Fri Oct 31, 2008 2:30 pm

Oh, and, technically, the hill overhead of a hobbit hole would still be a roof, so it still works. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/roof%5B1%5D
Dragonstar
Grand Poobah Keenspotter
 
Posts: 418
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 8:35 pm

Re: Commentary - Hobbit Justin

Postby ChronosCat on Fri Oct 31, 2008 11:06 pm

I don't recall the Ocs singing in LotR (not counting the animated version). Also, if you can't even make it through LotR, do not even attempt the Silmarrilion.

While underground homes like Bag-End are traditional for Hobbits, "these days" (as of Hobbit/LotR) many live in scaled-down human-style houses as well.

Ineluki wrote:As for LotR... meh, for epic fantasy literature, you didn't miss anything. Tolkien's works sure ain't bad, but they are just very much outdated. The only reason why I read the hobbit some weeks ago was, because I needed to get a good example for omniscient narration, which that book is of course famous for.
For entertainment purpose, there's just so much better works available now.


I disagree. They are classic, and while several fantasy works I've read have been almost as good, I've never felt something I read in that genera was better.

Illusionist wrote:NO. That's a bad Nightranger. We do NOT say Tom Bombadil was good. We do NOT praise the worst thing Tolkein ever wrote.

Bombadil was awesome. Looking back on the story after completing it, he didn't really belong in LotR (and I fully support his removal from the movies), but he was still awesome.

vampiress_kat wrote:But I think that The Sacking of the Shire being cut out sucks the worst. I mean, they didn't even do it in the original movie filming, then have it cut for time! I have the extended DVD! It's not there! Why? Why isn't it there?!
The Sacking of the Shire was one of my favorite parts of the books. However, they had enough to fit in after the climax without adding in another adventure - I again agree with the moviemakers here.

(Incidentally, I don't agree with them on everything. There were a few added scenes I didn't think necessary, and some changes that didn't make sense - plus the Oiliphants were way too big... )

AFNB wrote:Dan: what you're missing is the fact that the people of Middle-Earth do NOT "magically" know the words. It's a bit more cumbersome in The Hobbit (which was originally just a bedtime story for Prof. Tolkien's kids), but Middle-Earth, and especially the Shire, was rich in folklore. The Free Peoples loved hearing stories and songs, and these stories and songs would pass down through generations, and sometimes spread out beyond the borders of their own lands.
Dan wasn't saying that he thought it was, he was saying he thought it wasn't (emphasis added):

The Commentary wrote:I don't think LOTR is prone to musical style singing where everybody just magically knows the words, at least not without a wizard's help, so these hobbit versions of Susan and Tedd must have sung this song together before.
Reverse-Gendered for Sister II! (Call me "Crystal"!)
Current form: blue anthro tigress
Equipped Items: TF Gun, Diamond Katana
Inventory
Image Image

Click the nifty little globe icon to the right to check out my website.
User avatar
ChronosCat
Grand Poobah Keenspotter
 
Posts: 695
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 2:45 am
Location: the timestream

 
Previous

Return to El Goonish Shive

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest