The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I was watching LOTR on dvd today being nearly 3 hours and just though how brilliant it was. The special affects are something else and even though there are differences it is true to the book as much as possible. They cut out a lot of the first bit after the party ie Tom and the barrow wight. It was interesting to see the Balrog as there is know discription in the book. I though Liv was very good in her brief role as Arwin though if i remember Glofindel was the elf who met Frodo just before Rivendel. Lucky EW againd LTs chest hmmm worth a morgal knife for?
Page:
Yeah, I knew what Numenor was. I was saying "the island where Numenor was" but in confusing words. I'll heard some speculation that Bombadil could be Illuvator, yeah. You might be interested in this site:
http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm
It's got some good speculation on Bombadil, plus a load of other interesting Tolkien stuff. I found it yesterday.
http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm
It's got some good speculation on Bombadil, plus a load of other interesting Tolkien stuff. I found it yesterday.
Stryke wrote:
> Well I'll just hijack this thread then. I make no apologies.
>
> Firstly, I wanted to ask you what exactly is Middle-Earth. In
> Silmarillion, it clearly states the world as being called Arda. So is
> Middle-Earth the continent, with Arda being Middle-Earth plus the
> islands, like The Undying Lands and what was Numenor?
>
> Also, what is Tom Bombadil? Got to be a Valar, at the least, because
> of the lack of effect the ring has on him.
Middle Earth was always treated as being a Continent, although it was situated central to the layout of Arda, so it could have taken in other smaller continents, although it wasn't mentioned as plainly before.
As for Arda, I always thought it being similiar to the Layout of the modern world, which of course is quite correct, given that Tolkien stated that it is the World as we know it but in a different time.
So if you look at it from that perspective, you could make the conclusion that Middle Earth is like Europe- with a similiar Layout. It makes the concept easier to explain.
In the middle of the Sundering Seas lay Númenor, possibly a Continent in it's own right, again if I can remember, it was never fully stated as such, just that it was raised by the Valar for Men worthy of it.
But I would have classed it as a Continent, it certainly was large enough.
To the Left of Númenor lay the Continent: Plain of Valinor (Aman) loacation of modern day America 'to make it easier'.
Below Middle Earth (Quite Similiar to the Layout of Modern day Africa) is the Continent: Hither Lands. To the East is Continent: Rhun (Which would be in location of Modern Asia) to the South East of that is the Continent Island: Dark Land (Location of Modern Australasia).
As for Tom Bombadil and who he was, I don't know!
There was never anything mentioned of him and Tolkien himself refused to speculate on the matter.
Although, yes, we are of course are left to speculate, that I think was Tolkien's original intentions.
But being a Valar is possible, after all he Did slip the One Ring onto the end of his little finger and it HAD NO EFFECT on him, displaying an immunity to the very essence and power of the One Ring.
Either way he was of Some importance, Goldberry said of him as "He.. is" so could he have been the 'one' creator himself?
And Tom mentioned himself as being there "Before the Elves" so 'he was indeed' there before the first born.
Tom Bombadil is a mystery, always has been and always will.
Now where is my own Yellow Boots?
> Well I'll just hijack this thread then. I make no apologies.
>
> Firstly, I wanted to ask you what exactly is Middle-Earth. In
> Silmarillion, it clearly states the world as being called Arda. So is
> Middle-Earth the continent, with Arda being Middle-Earth plus the
> islands, like The Undying Lands and what was Numenor?
>
> Also, what is Tom Bombadil? Got to be a Valar, at the least, because
> of the lack of effect the ring has on him.
Middle Earth was always treated as being a Continent, although it was situated central to the layout of Arda, so it could have taken in other smaller continents, although it wasn't mentioned as plainly before.
As for Arda, I always thought it being similiar to the Layout of the modern world, which of course is quite correct, given that Tolkien stated that it is the World as we know it but in a different time.
So if you look at it from that perspective, you could make the conclusion that Middle Earth is like Europe- with a similiar Layout. It makes the concept easier to explain.
In the middle of the Sundering Seas lay Númenor, possibly a Continent in it's own right, again if I can remember, it was never fully stated as such, just that it was raised by the Valar for Men worthy of it.
But I would have classed it as a Continent, it certainly was large enough.
To the Left of Númenor lay the Continent: Plain of Valinor (Aman) loacation of modern day America 'to make it easier'.
Below Middle Earth (Quite Similiar to the Layout of Modern day Africa) is the Continent: Hither Lands. To the East is Continent: Rhun (Which would be in location of Modern Asia) to the South East of that is the Continent Island: Dark Land (Location of Modern Australasia).
As for Tom Bombadil and who he was, I don't know!
There was never anything mentioned of him and Tolkien himself refused to speculate on the matter.
Although, yes, we are of course are left to speculate, that I think was Tolkien's original intentions.
But being a Valar is possible, after all he Did slip the One Ring onto the end of his little finger and it HAD NO EFFECT on him, displaying an immunity to the very essence and power of the One Ring.
Either way he was of Some importance, Goldberry said of him as "He.. is" so could he have been the 'one' creator himself?
And Tom mentioned himself as being there "Before the Elves" so 'he was indeed' there before the first born.
Tom Bombadil is a mystery, always has been and always will.
Now where is my own Yellow Boots?
Well I'll just hijack this thread then. I make no apologies.
Firstly, I wanted to ask you what exactly is Middle-Earth. In Silmarillion, it clearly states the world as being called Arda. So is Middle-Earth the continent, with Arda being Middle-Earth plus the islands, like The Undying Lands and what was Numenor?
Also, what is Tom Bombadil? Got to be a Valar, at the least, because of the lack of effect the ring has on him.
Firstly, I wanted to ask you what exactly is Middle-Earth. In Silmarillion, it clearly states the world as being called Arda. So is Middle-Earth the continent, with Arda being Middle-Earth plus the islands, like The Undying Lands and what was Numenor?
Also, what is Tom Bombadil? Got to be a Valar, at the least, because of the lack of effect the ring has on him.
Nope, I don't sorry.
The reasons are beyond my control.
The reasons are beyond my control.
They'll be stuff on the extended version that'll only make sense if you know your Tolkein well.
Oi, Smeagol/Gollum/WolfHound, I need to chat to you about some stuff to do with Tolkein. You got MSN?
Oi, Smeagol/Gollum/WolfHound, I need to chat to you about some stuff to do with Tolkein. You got MSN?
Listen to Stryke : )
Also....
And for those who say they are only getting the Special Edition DVD: BE WARNED!!
Why you ask? It was specifically created for Tokienite's, i.e people who are massive fan's of the books (People who have read Tokiens works 10 times over). So it might be a little over the top and overly long in dedication for most people...and it has the DVD extras that the Theatrical Version already has.
Also....
And for those who say they are only getting the Special Edition DVD: BE WARNED!!
Why you ask? It was specifically created for Tokienite's, i.e people who are massive fan's of the books (People who have read Tokiens works 10 times over). So it might be a little over the top and overly long in dedication for most people...and it has the DVD extras that the Theatrical Version already has.
> Anamorphic means that it is designed to change shape to match the tv
> without loss of picture or clarity. It should not make a difference
> to the size of the picture. Widescreen films can be fiddled with on a
> half decent dvd player to fit the TV.
Oh i see. But i set the player to "Pan scan", the instruction book says that this should make the picture fill the tv screen, whilst cutting off a little of the sides. But when i played the dvd it was still the same.
Im stumped.
> without loss of picture or clarity. It should not make a difference
> to the size of the picture. Widescreen films can be fiddled with on a
> half decent dvd player to fit the TV.
Oh i see. But i set the player to "Pan scan", the instruction book says that this should make the picture fill the tv screen, whilst cutting off a little of the sides. But when i played the dvd it was still the same.
Im stumped.
And he said "Arwin."
Arwen. Shame on you.
Arwen. Shame on you.
cookie monster wrote:
> SmokedKipper wrote:
> Would you rather they released a fullscreen version so that almost
> half the picture is off the sides of the screen?
>
> Yes i would. The picture is little more than 15cms tall. It sucks.
Anamorphic means that it is designed to change shape to match the tv without loss of picture or clarity. It should not make a difference to the size of the picture. Widescreen films can be fiddled with on a half decent dvd player to fit the TV.
Videos can be more of a problem, but why buy videos at all these days? They can only manage surround and deteriorate with time, starting off with a worse picture than DVD and getting worse as they get older. It's false economy to get a video when you have a DVD player, as the DVD will last longer with no loss of sound or picture.
I got the LOTR DVD the other day, it was offered to me for a price that matched the video price, but it's worth getting on top of the 4 disc version as they are technically different productions. The film has been totally re-edited, with different shots and timing used for the special edition, including new music.
> SmokedKipper wrote:
> Would you rather they released a fullscreen version so that almost
> half the picture is off the sides of the screen?
>
> Yes i would. The picture is little more than 15cms tall. It sucks.
Anamorphic means that it is designed to change shape to match the tv without loss of picture or clarity. It should not make a difference to the size of the picture. Widescreen films can be fiddled with on a half decent dvd player to fit the TV.
Videos can be more of a problem, but why buy videos at all these days? They can only manage surround and deteriorate with time, starting off with a worse picture than DVD and getting worse as they get older. It's false economy to get a video when you have a DVD player, as the DVD will last longer with no loss of sound or picture.
I got the LOTR DVD the other day, it was offered to me for a price that matched the video price, but it's worth getting on top of the 4 disc version as they are technically different productions. The film has been totally re-edited, with different shots and timing used for the special edition, including new music.
SmokedKipper wrote:
> Would you rather they released a fullscreen version so that almost
> half the picture is off the sides of the screen?
Yes i would. The picture is little more than 15cms tall. It sucks.
> Would you rather they released a fullscreen version so that almost
> half the picture is off the sides of the screen?
Yes i would. The picture is little more than 15cms tall. It sucks.
Page: