Hill is Gandalf

Hill, because of her comeback penchant, has been unkindly compared to Glen Close in ‘Fatal Attraction’ and the Terminator. I would think more in terms of the famous literary returns from the apparent dead of Gandalf (Moria) and Sherlock Holmes (Reichenbach Falls).

:scared:

:rofl:

hahahahahah in some twisted way. LOL ah nothing like a good chuckle in the morning.

Hillary Clinton, preparing to eat the brains of one of her supporters...

There will be no comeback, it's over. Realise what SD's are realising all across the country. It's over.

If only the Ents would come and do their thing...

:-)

:smoke:

She will befriend you and then betray you if it will get her clutches on the Ring.

If we're going to use LoTR --then Hillary is clearly Eowyn.

Obama is Faramir. (this does not imply that Hillary and Obama will be wed --though it could indicate a "Dream Ticket" in the offing)

Al Gore is Aragorn (The reluctant ruler)

Minas Tirith is The White House

Bush has always been Denethor.

Rove is Wormtongue and Cheney is Saruman.

Dennis Kucinich is of course --Frodo Baggins.

neither did Denethor. That crumb-bumb. Oooooh he makes me so mad.

I'd go with an uruk-hai.

prior to the First Age.

Hence the *

Asterisk's mom is an orc so I'm sticking to my narrative.

Denethor is way unfairly maligned! In particular Jackson's idiotic representation of him in those STUPID films is just a travesty.

Denethor was a noble and proud, but misguided leader who made some really bad choices while blinded by pride.

Bush is just an idiot! Kinda like Peter Jackson!

David

I laugh at you --nobody forced him to embrace Saruman's evil or to gaze into the Palantir!

It was Denethor's pride in his nobility by birth that was his undoing. Boromir suffered from this too, but unlike his father redeemed himself.

I think you mean Sauron not Saruman, but I understand.

But anyway, of course nobody forced him, but he was in a corner with NO friends and essentially the weight of the world on his head. He turned to the weapons he had within his grasp and did the best that he could. He never embraced Sauron's evil, he fought it, but failed, and his ultimate undoing was despair because he couldn't see outside the box. Because he couldn't see the the new, but tried vainly to hold on to the old, and believed that only with the old could the world be saved, and damn the torpedoes!

That is why he could not be trusted with the ring.

Even were it burried beneath Mindolluin, still it would burn your mind away.

Anyway, I believe, you, like so many others, have misunderstood Denethor.

(of course eveyrone is entitled to their interpretation! That's what makes it art!!! :) )

It's so much fun to have arguments about fictional characters.

Boromir is also very unfairly maligned, but you raise a good issue about his redemption. He was a true son and no wizard's pupil.

David

I meant Sauron --I do that when I'm in a hurry.

In any event --we should move this to GD:T

Lotho Sackville-Baggins

Hobbit who declared himself Chief of the Shire during the War of the Ring. Lotho was born in 2964. He had sandy hair.
Lotho's father Otho Sackville-Baggins was the cousin of Bilbo Baggins and was the next in line to become head of the Baggins family. Otho and Lobelia Sackville-Baggins dreamed of the day when they would move into Bag End, but their hopes were dashed in 2989 when Bilbo made Frodo Baggins his heir. Lotho and his family attended Bilbo's Farewell Party in 3001.

When Otho died in 3012, Lotho inherited his father's pipe-weed plantations in the Southfarthing. Not content with the revenue he earned within the Shire, Lotho also exported pipe-weed. His biggest customer was Saruman,the traitorous Wizard, who had learned of pipe-weed from Gandalf. Saruman was suspicious of Gandalf's interest in the Shire and he sent agents there to purchase leaf and other goods and to gather information. Lotho and others were corrupted by Saruman and gave details about their land and their fellow Hobbits in exchange for payment.

John Edwards = Bilbo' maybe?

Condi as Shelob?

Now I wonder who Gollum is?

That's not even debatable really.

I see Edwards more as Boromir.


To my mind, Bilbo would be Jimmy Carter.


Ron Paul is Gollum.

Other roles to consider.

Ted Kennedy is Theoden.

Jack Murtha is Treebeard.

Wes Clark is Eomer.

So the question is --who is actually Gandalf?

I believe it's Howard Dean..

There's even a resemblance....

That would make Obama son of Bush...no, no, no. Al Gore is Elrond (could rule but doesn't want to and is really more into nature than politics) and Obama is Aragorn (looks younger than he is, is striving for his goal because there's nobody else who can, etc.)

Dennis may be Frodo but he wound up marrying an elf.

but I still maintain that Obama is not Aragorn.

he's definately Faramir.

Wonderful comparison.


I notice the ugliness of character in some of the usual suspects on this thread. It's sad how some Obama people carry a hatred such as to putrefy their own insides, and find themselves so consumed they have to dump their noxious bile in what is by design a positive thread that does not concern them.

Maybe some of us are simplty really pissed off at the contradictions between Clinton's history and her present "populist" imitation and her smoke and mirror "solutions" and her claimed "experience."

And some of us got even more pissed off at her attacks on "elitists" and her sudden contradiction transformation into a Right Wing Goddess and Populist Champion of the working class who she and her husband spent eight years undermining.

or high or both when you posted this?

Please leave Sherlock Holmes out of this.... He was brought back by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle because of the outcry of those who read the stories in The Strand Magazine and who wanted MORE after Doyle killed him off. Who is going to be screaming for more from Senator Clinton? More what? More bodacious stories of sniper fire? More stupid gas holiday shit? More help for more corporations? More talk about nuking Iran?

she's more this.

of the Maid of Orleans --I'll accept that.

(or did you not notice the "Joan" in my name)

Ever he clutched me and ever I hewed him far beneath the living earth...

Sounds a lot like the Democratic fight too!

(of course Obama is Gandalf and Hillary is the Balrog, though! ) :)

David

"Shelob."

Hillary, not so much.

and Penn is Grima wormtounge

Aragorn got to be king, ya know, whereas Gandalf returns to the undying lands.

http://bp0.blogger.com/_-bi8uJLDOmE/SAKz64iNLSI/AAAAAAAAAOM/G9zvWNLscvU/s1600-h/NDVD_219.BMP

No questions asked.

David

Noooooooooooooooo!

Jackson's Aragorn, OMG! Viggo couldn't track his way out of a paper sack! John Hurt otoh!

"For if I wanted the Ring for myself, I could have it. Now!"

The ONLY true Aragorn (besides Obama!)

David

PLEASE tell me most Obama supporters don't find Bakshi's version to be better. PLEASE!!! Yes, I LOVE Bakshi's Fire and Ice, but LOTR???? Um, no....Jackson RULZ!!! As does Viggo.

I am, I believe, the only person on the planet who VASTLY prefers Bakshi's movie to Jackson's. I think Jackson's movies are utter crap. Only the Extended FotR is even worth watching asside from a MST3K style viewing.

Bakshi's film, in contast, is a wonderful piece of art, light years ahead of its time, and actually based on the novels!

Again, though, NOBODY agrees with me, so no need to fear. That big propane eye in the sky won't hunt you down, and good ol' Strider won't chop off your emissary's head at the Black Gate, and Saruman won't have a WWE style smack down drag out with you (now armed with TWO STAVES!!!).

David

"I SEEEEEEEEEEEEE YOOOOOOOOOOOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU..."

Closer to the original??? Ugh...you've GOT to be kidding me! Make no mistake, I do love some of Bakshi's stuff (Primarily Fire & Ice, which has Frazetta's most awesome background drawings), and I don't begrudge you for liking that style, but the Jackson movies are so far more a work of art than anything else in fantasy.

The Rotoscoping approach works well in some movies (I LOVE the recent French cyberpunk movie Renaissance, for instance), but the insanely terrific craftmanship in every part of the Jackson movie is literally unrivaled. They got world class craftsmen to make virtually all the weapons with medieval forges running 24/7 for 3 years. The detail on the Bigatures is incredible (did you perhance see the traveling exhibit that came a few years back?), and the costumes...WOW. Looking at Galadriel's outfit close up was just incredible!

but I credit most of that to John Howe and Alan Lee. Jackson essentially hired them as consultants and then had his expert craftsmen (granted!!!) build them. I commend Jackson's taste in choosing whose images to use in making his films,and being able to translate them to the screen.

But that's where I leave it.

I have TONS of sour grapes on this whole issue, so maybe it's not really fair. I was really expecting Jackson's movies to be the greatest films of all time, and I was let down - HARD. I thought FotR was satisfactory, the theatrical TTT was a complete mess and RotK was an embarassing train wreck.

Further for 25 years people had been ridiculing Bakshi's movie, and then compeltely turn a blind eye when Jackson makes very similar "mistakes", amplifies them and then runs rampant "improving" the story. That is not to say that Bakshi's movie is perfect! It's biggest problem, IMO, is that it's incomplete. And Saruman wearing red, and not being able to decide if he's "Saruman" or "Aruman", and the overuse of rotoscoping at the end. Serious problems all, and more, but nothing even on the same level, IMO as what Jackson did to my books. I'd give 108,000 Jackson films for a Bakshi LotR Pt II.

Personally, I like Rotoscoping, and I'm sad that it never really developed into its proper right along the path that Bakshi was going with LotR, Wizards and to a lesser extent, Fire and Ice. (not that Fire & Ice isn't great, but it's more traditional animation w/rotoscope than rotoscope in and of itself like we see with the Nazi/stock footage in Wizards, and the Nazgul & orcs in LotR). I'm a HUGE animation fan, and have no need to see a lot of these stories ripped out of animation and tossed into live action. I think Bakshi's LotR captured the essence of Middle Earth far better than Jackson's. I feel similar loathing for Disney's Lion+Witch+Wardrobe as opposed to the Bill Melendez animated version with alomst all of its text directly from the novel.

Sure Bombadill wasn't in Bakshi's movie either, but that was a cut I don't hold against either of them. After watching FotR, I thought Jackson should have cut Lothlorien rather than deal with it in the hack and slash way he did (much better in the extended version). I can forgive cuts in a film, what I don't forgive easily is adds, particularly when you're making unnecessary cuts,supposedly in the interest of time!

And the text is what's most important to me. IMO, the langugae of LotR is what is paramount. Bakshi with Peter S. Beagle, presented very few lines which were not directly out of the novel. Jackson essentially dumped all the text from the novel and put in whatever he thought would be fun to say.

It comes in pints?

It comes in pints?

It comes in pints?

Your love of the halfling's leaf has muddled your brain.

etc. etc. etc.

It comes in pints?

Sorry! I'm going off again. But I again, I agree on the detail and the sets. Gorgeous! I just wish I could watch them!!! And I'll have to check out Renaissance!

David

It comes in pints?

IIIIIII SEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE YOOOOOOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

You really have to expect changes when going from a book to the movie. Its a different medium, which really does necessitate changes. In some cases (Blade Runner and Ghost in the Shell, for instance), the changes in movie far exceed the books. In others, I find it to be an absolutely WONDERFUL compliment. Jackson's LOTR movies come across that way for me - and of course, I consider the Extended Editions the movies. The TEs were just trailers.

I do have a few quibbles with Jackson's movies, but that's only because he came so close to perfection. The trip from the Shire to Bree in one night was truly annoying, as was the Galadriel as ghoul thing when tempted by the ring. The TTT EE where Gimli embeds his axe in someone's "nervous system" was pretty bad, but again, these are truly MINOR quibbles (not to mention Denathor's leap). And yes, Merry and Pippen were fairly off in scenes, but finished strong I thought.

And yeah, he added some romance, but truly the women parts in LOTR were probably too small anyways, so I didn't mind this. Nor did I really mind Legolas as Nintendo hero.

More to the point,

Bad End was Awesome (I truly got tingles seeing this for the first time)

Gandalf and most characters were terrific (Gollum was beyond belief!)

The villians, with the exception of Shelob were MORE than terrific (especially the Urak Hai)

The Nazgul were fucking far out.

The similation engine for the battles was truly revolutionary, as were the battle scenes (tell me that the Ride of the Rhohirim was better in the books, I dare you!)

A good deal of the scenes and dialogue from the books still made it, so its not like they flat out discounted it. So yeah, "It comes in pints" might be a stretch, but its only because the rest was done so awesomely that we can even complain. :)

And simply expecting the set pieces to be awesome is a stretch, considering most sword and sorcery/epic fantasy movies. Yes, Jackson hired John Howe and Alan Lee, but he also hired hundreds of expert artisans who completely gave their soul to this project. This is truly magnanimous on his part. ROTK deserved all the oscars it received.

I went to the theater to see the films, and didn't expect to have to wait for the DVDs! But I take your meaning, and I really do appreciate the EEs. I thought TTT was coherent, if still awful, EE where it wasn't in the theater. RotK EE added the only scene worth watching back in, though it sucked ass out loud - except for visually, where it was beautiful (where Gandalf faces off against the Witch King - incidentally - one of THE MOST impressive and important scenes in the book, cut out of the theatrical version :boggle: )

I don't hate changes, I just hate bad changes. I could name 100 bad changes EASILY in the Jackson movies. Reasonable changes, like cutting Bombadil, and increasing some tension here and there, adding some exposition, I can understand, but others (for example 45 minutes WASTED on the silly journey to Helm's Deep with Aragorn falling off a cliff), Strider decapitating the Mouth of Sauron, Elves at Helm's Deep, stupid, stupid, stupid possession of Theoden by Sauruman, complete misrepresentation of Saruman's motives, just sad WWE fight between Gandalf and Saruman, Silly jumping around in Moria, Rediculous Frodo turning against Sam at Cirith Ungol, Eye See You, Burning Nazgul having sword fights at Weathertop, Arwen saving Frodo at the Ford aka "Give up the halfling, she-elf!", Mr. Anderson Elrond, suicide bomber at Helm's Deep, Super-Legolas, Stay-Pufft Marshmallow men on the battle of the Pelanor Fields, portrayal of Denethor as a bumbling idiot, Faramir arresting Frodo, Flying Nazgul letting them go at Osgiliath, tricking the Ents,...

OMG, so many painful memories!)

Sorry, sorry, this was supposed to be my reconciliation reply!

Bag End - Agreed - AWESOME, very very cool.

I thought Christopher Lee was phenomenial at whomever he was trying to portray, if only it were Saruman, it woulda been great! Ian McKellen was superb, What's his Frodoness was bad, Sam was so-so, Merry+Pippin were so-so. Galadriel was totally awful. Mr. Anderson was horrible. Gimli was good! I didn't like Gollum, but I can understand why some people did.

Shelob sucked, IMO, way too much just a normal spider, and not enough the last child of Ungoliant - swollen until the mountains could no longer hold her up and the darkness could not contain her.

The Nazgul in the 1st half were lame, IMO, with their non-fire retardant, yet completely regenerating cloaks. The orcs were pretty good.

I really liked Minas Ithil, and the shot of the flying nazgul when Frodo and Sam are climbing the stairs was very, very cool - one of the highlights.

Sauron's eye sucked ass out loud. I hated it every time I saw it, suspecially when it was on top of the tower, and doubly-suspecially when it talked.

The love stories didn't really bother me per se, it's just that they really seemed gratuitous, like Phillippa Boyens said "Hmmmm, how can we make girls want to see this movie too?"

And I will absolutely say that the Charge of the Rohirrim was better in the book!

"And away in some courtyard of the city a cock crowed. Shrill and clear it crowed, recking nothing of wizardry or war, welcoming only the light that far beyond the shadows of death was coming with the dawn. And then, as if in answer, horns, horns horns. In dark Mindollouin's sides, they dimly echoed. Great horns of the North wildly blowing. Rohan had come at last." Though the little pep rally before the charge was pretty good.

Hey, they did add a scene in TTT that I actually liked between Grima and Eowyn! That was the only addition I think I cared for. Wormtongue was, IMO, the best representation of a character in the film.

Agreed also that the battle scenes were very impressive and revolutionary. Try to do that in 1978! And I did like the visuals very, very much for the prologue, though Jackson feel for the same cop-out that Bakshi did, by having Sauron vanquished by chopping off his finger. Can you imagine what a crappy ring that is, that if you take it off you explode?

My favorite shot in the movie is the recap in the prologue with Gollum in the cave. I also liked the Gollum design all through FotR - A shame they changed it by the time they got to TTT.

Anyway, I'm sorry to go on, I really don't mean to be a jerk about it, and it's SOOO out of place here. I just haven't had a good Bakshi v. Jackson argument in a long time, and I couldn't pass up the opportunity!

Thanks for indulging me!

David

Edit: name typo

Mr. Anderson was the good guy (Neo). And yeah, I LOVED Revolutions, thank you :)

And I do agree that Shelob sucked. I didn't get the "10,000 year-old sentient demi-god" vibe when looking at her.

Smigel...once a normal nice person turned crazy by her prusuit of the Precious...

Or, Anna Karenina in her "victim" moments.

or maybe Gollum, constantly after "her precious".

full of hubris, Denethor was and Hillary is.

He was blinded by pride, and an inability to let go of the past. So, while not insane, your analogy is a good one!

Unwilling to embrace the new and willing to use the power of the enemy (Rovian tactics or The Ring) against her enemy.

Trying desperately to hold on to power at the expense of the future.

Short sighted.

And her kitchen sink strategy is a lot like Denethor wishing he and the ring to use "in our final need".

David

Awesome! :)

David

Much like Carville is aligned with Hillary...

because he was crazy.

I know who rides with this... Barack, Son of Barack, and I tell you now:

I will not bow to this Illinois Senator from the north, last of a ragged
progressive caucus, long bereft of lordship!

Some of her earliest work. This was a screentest - Carpenter made her wear a mask in the actual filming since he wanted to withhold the biggest scare for a sequel.

when he goes bat-shit crazy and tries to eat frodo.

You DO realize that Gandalf was just a male witch, right?

and you guys in your tragic and transparent state of brainwashedness are his ring wraiths. A few drops of kool aid confers lifelong immunity to rational argument.

Those guys were awesome.

I just don't trust her at all.

At the last possible second, she might recognize her folly and then do everything possible to help us win!

It could happen...in Middle Earth, anyways...:(

Mesus have presssssident....my PRECIOUSSSSSSSS!