- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim- expectations?
Posted on 12/11/24 at 9:48 pm to SammyTiger
Posted on 12/11/24 at 9:48 pm to SammyTiger
quote:
starting to wonder if trying to build an LOTR verse without the rights to any of his actual books is going to work out.
Warner Bros has the rights. They made this cheaply and quickly specifically to retain the rights while getting new Lord of the Rings projects up and running.
Which, to me, seems like a better reason to be wary of this than the "they put a girl in middle earth" nonsense.
0
Posted on 12/11/24 at 10:37 pm to SammyTiger
quote:I think this is the issue, more than anything else.
starting to wonder if trying to build an LOTR verse without the rights to any of his actual books is going to work out
quote:They can't, because they don't have the rights. Nobody has the rights to the First Age.
I’m hoping if it does well it will lead to a film treatment of the Silmarrilion
That's the true problem making anything Tolkien- book fans know the stories, and there can be no substitute.
I want to see Gondolin, Doriath, Nargothrond.... Angband. Not some pale unnamed semblance, but the actual places done justice. I really don't care that much about Rohan, to be honest. Even done well, it's only mildly interesting to me.
Morgoth laughs at the puny scale of the Third Age. He commanded armies of Balrogs and dragons, and the Valar had to wreck an entire continent to defeat him.
Posted on 12/13/24 at 9:34 pm to rebelrouser
quote:
Peter Jackson made the Hobbit trilogy garbage. His opinion is now worthless.
To each their own. I’ll watch the shite out of all three.
The lord of the rings trilogy is arguably the best all time. You don’t just replicate that. A movie/trilogy can be good and entertaining without being tGOAT. Get past Legolas defying physics, those were entertaining films
This post was edited on 12/13/24 at 9:36 pm
Posted on 1/8/25 at 11:28 am to Riseupfromtherubble
Finally got around to watching this last night and was pleasantly surprised. The portrayal of Helm was awesome, and Wulf was a good antagonist
The siege scenes were my favorite part.
Id give it a 7/10
The siege scenes were my favorite part.
Id give it a 7/10
This post was edited on 1/8/25 at 11:30 am
Posted on 1/8/25 at 11:32 am to SouthEasternKaiju
quote:
I was willing to look past the animation style, but the story isn't doing it for me. Full on girl bossery for a character Tolkien himself didn't get around to even naming.
Helm Hammerhand? THAT is what I was hoping to see, a story of his legend being told. Not freaking Hera Sue: Warrior Princess of Rohan.
Hard pass.
This is NOT Tolkien
Funny looking back on this post after seeing the movie. Helm was a full on badass in this movie, and Hera barely even saw combat
Posted on 1/8/25 at 6:20 pm to Corinthians420
quote:
Id give it a 7/10
C-
Posted on 1/8/25 at 7:12 pm to Corinthians420
quote:
Corinthians420
quote:
Id give it a 7/10
Were you baked when you watched it?
It's another pathetic woke shadow of greatness that the Professor would burn down Lothlorien over to keep from seeing a screen.
Posted on 1/8/25 at 9:46 pm to TygerTyger
quote:
Were you baked when you watched it?
It's another pathetic woke shadow of greatness
the movie wasn't woke at all. actually the general concensus is the movie is about a 7/10 and it has an 83% audience score on RT.
the wokeness that was sky screamed about before release failed to appear in the movie. It was just a movie about the end of the first line of kings of Rohan.
Helm Hammerhand lived up to his reputation as the baddest mofo in the movie entirely.
This post was edited on 1/8/25 at 9:54 pm
Posted on 1/9/25 at 9:14 am to Corinthians420
quote:
and it has an 83% audience score on RT
If you trust Rotten Tomatoes then you're certainly baked
How much screen time did Helm have compared to the character that only existed in the original text as a mention and didn't even have a name?
Why was she even in the movie? You have Helm and his sons as ACTUAL characters from the story. Why do you think the writers felt the need to add her, and make her the main character?
(here's a hint, it rhymes with "poke")
Didn't the "baddest mofo in the movie" have to be saved by the stunning and brave unnamed character?
Wasn't that character a Mary Sue who was always right, saved everyone, and was a SLAY QUEEN!!! ?
Nah, it'll be fine.
Posted on 1/9/25 at 9:21 am to TygerTyger
quote:
Why was she even in the movie? You have Helm and his sons as ACTUAL characters from the story. Why do you think the writers felt the need to add her, and make her the main character?
She was the only person present for the entire siege.
quote:
Didn't the "baddest mofo in the movie" have to be saved by the stunning and brave unnamed character?
He saved her.
This post was edited on 1/9/25 at 9:24 am
Posted on 1/9/25 at 9:27 am to TygerTyger
quote:
Didn't the "baddest mofo in the movie" have to be saved by the stunning and brave unnamed character?
Not at all. You must not have watched the movie
Posted on 1/9/25 at 1:38 pm to Corinthians420
quote:
You must not have watched the movie
Correct.
And I won’t.
So, what reason do you think they decided to feature a character that wasn’t even named in the book?
Be honest.
Posted on 1/9/25 at 1:56 pm to TygerTyger
quote:
Didn't the "baddest mofo in the movie" have to be saved by the stunning and brave unnamed character?
Wasn't that character a Mary Sue who was always right, saved everyone, and was a SLAY QUEEN!!! ?
Maybe read up on it a little more before you try and own someone that has actually watched the movie
Posted on 1/9/25 at 2:04 pm to iwyLSUiwy
I was t trying to “own” him. I was asking questions.
I still see no reason to create a main character that doesn’t exist when you have true main characters available.
Unless you have an ulterior motive….
I still see no reason to create a main character that doesn’t exist when you have true main characters available.
Unless you have an ulterior motive….
Posted on 1/9/25 at 2:11 pm to Corinthians420
quote:
Id give it a 7/10
which means it was a 4/10 thanks for helping us know not to watch this.
Posted on 1/9/25 at 2:13 pm to TygerTyger
This very well might have an ulterior motive, I don't know. Seems like there were certainly other options they could have chosen for a main character. I said I was going to see it but when it came down to it I rewatched the trailer and decided against it. Probably catch it with streaming.
But it does seem like it's not the Mary Sue character everyone was making it out to be pre release.
But it does seem like it's not the Mary Sue character everyone was making it out to be pre release.
Posted on 1/9/25 at 2:13 pm to TygerTyger
quote:
Were you baked when you watched it?
He's on drugs for majority of his posts.
Posted on 1/9/25 at 2:14 pm to TygerTyger
quote:
I still see no reason to create a main character that doesn’t exist when you have true main characters available.
Narratively it seemed they wanted to have a character that lived to see the fall of the first line of kings and introduction of the second line of kings.
If she had been a son she wouldn't have survived that transition.
Posted on 1/9/25 at 2:18 pm to Corinthians420
Did they kill every male in Helm’s Deep?
It could have been a random guy right?
It could have been a random guy right?
Posted on 1/9/25 at 2:19 pm to TygerTyger
quote:
It could have been a random guy right?
Sure but why would that be better than the kings daughter?
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News