PDA

View Full Version : The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King


Sir Penguin
17-03-2003, 04:31:53
Apparently the effects people are having trouble producing the special effects for ROTK on 32-bit processors:


With The Return of the King, Massive is apparently being stretched to its limits. Peter Jackson is saying that the great battle must be several times larger than that of Helmís Deep. This is not only stretching Massive to itís limits but also the Intel 32bit processor architecture as well and Weta is looking at replacing the processors with 64bit ones. Whatever they do, RoTK is set to be pretty spectacular.

"Massive" being the "computer software that was developed on site to do all that large battle scenes that rage in both FotR and TTT."

http://www.theonering.net/perl/newsview/8/1047582857

Neat. :D

SP

BigGameHunter
18-03-2003, 16:15:00
I just read the whole series last year and I cannot remember what happens next at all. Man, my brain is really slipping.
Will someone give me a synopsis of ROTK?

maroule
18-03-2003, 16:35:23
aragorn and his party return to gondor, but he goes the dead men's way, denethor goes bananas and try to immolate faramir, hobbit couple continue their travel towards doom mountain, lmost die to giant spider and orc capture, first massive battle under gondor's city walls, won in extremis thanks to aragorn return by the river, human leaders gather and decide to attack mordor gate to distract sauron's attention, victory, return of hobbits and final sub plot/showdown with saruman, very long and sad farewell till the grey havens


more or less
I've only read it 5 times, so my memory is patchy

Sean
18-03-2003, 16:54:49
Only the Scouring of the Shire will not be in the film.

Mightytree
18-03-2003, 17:22:43
... which is a good thing.

Resource Consumer
19-03-2003, 09:35:15
Bloody cleaning, I hate it. And brillo pads...

maroule
19-03-2003, 09:42:06
Originally posted by Sean
Only the Scouring of the Shire will not be in the film.

interesting, where did you get the info?

Sir Penguin
19-03-2003, 09:49:18
About half a billion websites?

SP

maroule
19-03-2003, 10:05:15
get me a link then, underpants ninja

Mightytree
19-03-2003, 12:11:45
You know, not only have half a million websites announced that ... it also makes sense!

Funkodrom
19-03-2003, 12:25:00
I don't follow geek websites so I only know about stuff if it's posted here. Why cut it? Link to any of the 500,000 websites please.

maroule
19-03-2003, 12:30:02
MT, it makes sense, in a way, because it would be difficult to add a second tiny climax after the big battle

yet in the book it's very important, it shows how the hobbits have grown, especially Froddo, who spares Saruman, as Saruman himself acknowledges (before being killed by wormtongue).

Mightytree
19-03-2003, 13:23:24
http://www.theonering.net/perl/newsview/2/1014427449

All I could find quickly ... note that this is from over a year ago so the news is actually quite old and hard to dig up.

I don't even find the Scouring important in the book. In fact I think it's totally unnecessary and boring. The story is over at that point.

maroule
19-03-2003, 13:29:41
the story is not IMHO about defeating Sauron, that's just a pretext

the story is about how power corrupts, and how the wise stay true to themselves by refusing power

at least that's how I understand it, but everybody is free to enjoy it as he/she sees fit. or .fir

Mightytree
19-03-2003, 13:47:23
I don't think that's the point, maroule.

The main climax is actually fairly early in Book Six, and after that you have quite a few more slowed down chapters all pointing towards the end to the story. And all of a sudden you have the Scouring bringing in a conflict on a whole different level. I mean, while reading that chapter I always felt that now that we've saved the world from Sauron, why would I want to read of the troubles in the shire again? It just doesn't fit. To me it's always like Tolkien's trying to tell me 'Wait a minute, that before was nothing, here's the real climax!', except that it really isn't. It's boring in comparison to the rest of the story.

It's as if you've just watched Bruce Willis save the world and in the end you have a 10 minute scene in which he catches a guy that's stolen some old lady's purse. WTF.

Funkodrom
19-03-2003, 13:53:22
I agree with Maroule on this one.

Plus there is the issue of Saruman to be resolved. It's like the bad guy coming back to life for one more time at the end.

Mightytree
19-03-2003, 13:58:33
Originally posted by Funkodrom
I agree with Maroule on this one.

Plus there is the issue of Saruman to be resolved. It's like the bad guy coming back to life for one more time at the end.

It doesn't really matter what the story is about. We already know the hobbits are great. I don't have to read it a 4563rd time, especially not like that. My point is simply that the book is badly structured in the end. And Saruman could've been killed by Wormtongue just as easily at the end of Book Four or the beginning of Book Five, just like it will probably be in the movie.

Funkodrom
19-03-2003, 14:18:09
It doesn't matter what the story is about? :confused:

There are loads of places in the book where it's badly structured and paced though not sure why that would change at the end. The beginning and end are both very, very slow.

maroule
19-03-2003, 14:18:57
again, I don't want to question your reading of the book, or your enjoyment of it, opinions are like assholes, everybody has one, and that's fair enough

The book doesn't have a typical hollywood structure (where you need to climax by killing the bad guy very spectacularly, with a 2 mn happy ending epilogue afterwards) for a reason, and the reason is that the conflict with sauron is a pretext to many underlying themes that were, to Tolkien, much more important.

LOTR has a very long and bitter, melancolic ending, (and not a short climax fitting a movie), because it's about a dying world, the world of elves and wisards coming to an end, and the age of men starting. Victory is bitter in LOTR, and this bitterness is essential to the almost painful charm of the last book.

The scouring of the shire seems redundant to you (and to many others) but it's the necessary climax to the growing up of the hobbits. Again, Froddo decision not to kill Saruman, and Saruman's bitterness at not being killed by Froddo (he says reluctanctly something like 'you've grown up more than I though, halfling'), is pivotal, even if the point has been already made several times. The point is that it takes more courage to refuse power than to yield it

(there are other themes, of course, like 'our real live are elsewhere', let's not forget Tolkien was a very devout catholic, and his book is stuffed with references to his faith even though not once does he talk about God in it)

maroule
19-03-2003, 14:20:42
ok, I've used my pompous post quota for the day

Funkodrom
19-03-2003, 14:23:45
I still agree with the cheese eater. :cry:

maroule
19-03-2003, 14:31:40
you're falling to the garlic side

Mightytree
19-03-2003, 14:46:30
Let's just agree to disagree then, maroule. :)

One question though ... do you enjoy reading the Scouring?

Originally posted by Funkodrom
It doesn't matter what the story is about? :confused:

What I meant by that is that in this discussion it doesn't matter what the theme of the story is or whatever. I just said that because maroule kept mentioning it. Tolkien doesn't have to emphasize his theme in the end for the 1000th time by adding the Scouring. That's just makes the end worse than it could be IMHO. Don't misunderstand me, I think that the theme of the story is important. The Scouring is overkill in this regard though. It's nice if there's stuff to think about but I want a book to be fun to read too.

And BTW Mike ... you suck. :D

maroule
19-03-2003, 14:51:02
what? agree to disagree? that's all? no insult, no death threat, no loathing of all things french?

I'm talking to the wrong persons or I'm losing my golden touch :cry:

Mightytree
19-03-2003, 14:56:10
Ok then ...

Maroule, you suck too.

maroule
19-03-2003, 15:09:16
I feel I belong now...

King_Ghidra
19-03-2003, 15:11:07
Originally posted by Funkodrom
It doesn't matter what the story is about? :confused:


Actually i agree. I see LOTR as a kind of literary force of nature Š la the bible, joyce's ullyses, etc.

the fact that it exists and that it is written in a certain way is more important than whether or not it is all well written or has a great story or whatever.

maroule
19-03-2003, 15:16:29
well, the Silmarilion is as boring as the bible (except for the Turin Turambar story)

Mightytree
19-03-2003, 15:29:11
The purpose of the Silmarillion is that it makes LotR a whole lot more interesting and widens your view sigificantly.

Mightytree
19-03-2003, 15:31:10
Originally posted by King_Ghidra
Actually i agree. I see LOTR as a kind of literary force of nature Š la the bible, joyce's ullyses, etc.

the fact that it exists and that it is written in a certain way is more important than whether or not it is all well written or has a great story or whatever.

That's not really how I meant it ... but whatever ... :)

Funkodrom
19-03-2003, 16:01:46
Originally posted by King_Ghidra
Actually i agree. I see LOTR as a kind of literary force of nature Š la the bible, joyce's ullyses, etc.

the fact that it exists and that it is written in a certain way is more important than whether or not it is all well written or has a great story or whatever.

It has got a great story, which is why it's good despite being badly told. I dunno, I just think if you ignore the point of the story then just having it exist isn't really worth anything. It's the difference between The Hobbit and The Lord of The Rings. The Hobbit is a fun story about a little hairy guy who has an adventure and meets a dragon. The point of LotR is as a replacement for the mythology of Britain, so it has to end with the magic creatures on the wane and the non-magic creatures starting to take control of the destiny of their world. That's what the hobbits defeating Saruman is about.

Like if the Bible just existed as a collection of stories about the middle east written a few thousand years ago then I don't think it'd be as important as it being a collection of stories designed to pass on the teachings of God.

BigGameHunter
19-03-2003, 16:14:24
If only you had taken your schoolwork so seriously!

SATAN
19-03-2003, 19:20:10
Originally posted by Mightytree
That's not really how I meant it ... but whatever ... :)

:D sorry, i mean to say 'i agree with mightytree's words, but not what he means' :)

[edit: uurrgh wrong ae again :(]

maroule
19-03-2003, 19:25:56
I knew K_G was an avatar of Satan!! you're uncovered, prince of darkness, this human character you tried to build was too ridiculous to be believable

Sir Penguin
19-03-2003, 19:30:43
Originally posted by Mightytree
The purpose of the Silmarillion is that it makes LotR a whole lot more interesting and widens your view sigificantly.

And lets you get around at nerd conventions.

SP

King_Ghidra@home
19-03-2003, 19:57:50
Originally posted by Funkodrom
It has got a great story, which is why it's good despite being badly told. I dunno, I just think if you ignore the point of the story then just having it exist isn't really worth anything. It's the difference between The Hobbit and The Lord of The Rings. The Hobbit is a fun story about a little hairy guy who has an adventure and meets a dragon. The point of LotR is as a replacement for the mythology of Britain, so it has to end with the magic creatures on the wane and the non-magic creatures starting to take control of the destiny of their world. That's what the hobbits defeating Saruman is about.

i'm not sure what 'if you ignore the point of the story then just having it exist isn't really worth anything' really means, but i think that i'm entitled to value the work for my own reasons and not on the basis of what anyone (including the author) tells me it is about - especially when i see an explanation like 'The point of LotR is as a replacement for the mythology of Britain' which i'm not convinced by and which i find pretty irrelevant to the literary and cultural value of the book

however i might add that i do agree that the fate of saruman is fairly important to the story arc, because it is partly tolkien's perception of the grey area between good and evil which makes LOTR more than just the first d&d novel

although in the sense of the movie version this is less important than the main bits of the story arc, because let's face it, most of the characterisation and political subtlety of the novel has been subsumed under the weight of the (admittedly awesome) visual effects and the epic realisation of middle earth

maroule
19-03-2003, 20:50:37
satan is often depicted as a cat

King_Ghidra@home
19-03-2003, 20:59:39
:lol:

away with you! cursed mortal!

BigGameHunter
19-03-2003, 21:58:32
For fuck's sake, it's about midgets and wizards...no need to go and get all deep.
Now, if you want to talk about subtext, we can discuss C.S. Lewis.

maroule
20-03-2003, 09:40:43
midgets deep fucking wizards? The presence of satan obviously makes you lose all common sense... be gone, devil!

Venom
20-03-2003, 13:47:10
That last I had heard was that the scouring was not going to be in The Two Towers, which we all know it wasn't....I'm so out of the loop now....WAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH

Resource Consumer
20-03-2003, 14:22:02
was that a 100-0 attempt?

DaShi
20-03-2003, 14:35:18
I thought it was about destroying weapons of mass destruction.