Tizoc
Member
Aha, so that was in the book only, the movie seemed to speed it up to a shorter period, thanks.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The Literary Works of J.R.R. Tolkien Megathread |OT| Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo
- Thread starter Loxley
- Start date
Aha, so that was in the book only, the movie seemed to speed it up to a shorter period, thanks.
I might be misremembering, but I think they discuss this in the commentary. 17 years do pass, but it wasn't something they narratively wanted to dwell on.
If that's the case, did they do anything to Elijah to make him look slightly older?
I know hobbits age slower but they still age.
The Artful Dodger
Member
My only answer is that the The Ring also slows down aging. That was something emphasized with Bilbo was how he was (relatively) young looking. Idk, it's one of those things there is no real answer for, I guess.
Honestly, I think it was just them acknowledging that it was a consideration, similar to how they liked to imagine that the meeting with Tom Bombadil occurs, but just off screen.
I'd have to listen to it again to really provide anything else (it was Fran, Peter and Philippa, by the way).
GorillaWithDandruff
Member
Yeah, they condensed the timeline in the films. When Frodo has the Ring after Bilbo leaves for Rivendell, it's meant to only have been a few weeks instead of 17 years. Granted, the way the film is cut it almost seems like it's just a few days, but Jackson & Co do say in the commentary that they meant for it to be weeks (*edit - it may have actually been months, but I think it was weeks).
I actually go by Kementári now
Nice, those are both great editions.
I actually go by Kementári now
I got these two in the mail. <3
Nice, those are both great editions.
peanutbutterlatte
Member
The Extended Edition makes it a lot clearer. You wouldn't be judged for thinking a day or so passes between Gandalf leaving and returning all jacked up on ring paranoia.
They did not include the 17 year gap. The other Hobbits did not age (especially Pippin, who would have been 12 during the party in the book). The films also gave Gandalf a sense of urgency after the party that is incompatible with the timeskip. Any lingering doubts were removed by The Hobbit, which established that Aragorn was already a ranger, which would not have been possible in an unmodified time line because he would have been 10.
ComputerMKII
Banned
A new French translation of the Lord of The Rings was published last October. The previous translation, by Daniel Ledoux, was published one year after Tolkien's death (in 1973) so he obviously didn't benefit from enough immersion in the Tolkien universe, the decades of erudite debates on the Internet, Tolkien's notes to translators and other posthumous texts.
As a result, a new translation was necessary and it was made by French Canadian philologist Daniel Lauzon: http://www.amazon.fr/dp/2267027003/
As a result, a new translation was necessary and it was made by French Canadian philologist Daniel Lauzon: http://www.amazon.fr/dp/2267027003/
bengraven
Member
I mentioned something on Reddit about wishing I could step back in time and experience the fandom around LOTR when it was really big in the 60s and 70s, when famous musicians were being inspired by it and entire genres being created, drug culture, etc.
I got "schooled" by someone who was apparently around in those days, telling me that history is completely wrong, that the titles were popular but it wasn't a pop culture phenomenon like it is today.
Was I wrong? Is it more popular today, due to the movies? Have I created a fictional United States circa the 60s based on documentaries, articles, and my 12th grade hippy computer lab manager who claimed this?
I got "schooled" by someone who was apparently around in those days, telling me that history is completely wrong, that the titles were popular but it wasn't a pop culture phenomenon like it is today.
Was I wrong? Is it more popular today, due to the movies? Have I created a fictional United States circa the 60s based on documentaries, articles, and my 12th grade hippy computer lab manager who claimed this?
I always got the impression that the Tolkien "phenomenon" of the 60's and 70's in the US was more of an underground youth thing, and not a complete cultural smash like, say, Star Wars. It was often referred to as, "The cult of Tolkien". This BBC documentary (from the 60's) briefly discusses it.
bengraven
Member
I thought it was a bit more than that, like how even your mom was reading Potter. I suppose it makes sense it was more of the social impact of, say, punk music and not rock and roll.
Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku!
Member
Why is Gandalf so mean to Pippin? He seems almost overly nice to every other Hobbit in the Tolkien books.
Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku!
Member
I just finished re-reading ROTK and I'm sort of confused by the timing of the ending. The Hobbits and Gandalf pass Saruman on the way back home, stop in Rivendell to see Bilbo, and then go back to the Shire to see that he's taken it over.
I understand that they spent some time in Rivendell, but it seems like an awfully quick amount of time for Saruman (who was obviously traveling much slower) to get to the Shire, recruit a bunch of Ruffins, and then take it over. When they get to Bree he's clearly already taken over based on what the bartender tells them. How long were they in Rivendell?
I was looking at the new hardcover the other day at Barnes and Noble and it looked really good if you are looking for a nice version:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0618517650/?tag=neogaf0e-20
I understand that they spent some time in Rivendell, but it seems like an awfully quick amount of time for Saruman (who was obviously traveling much slower) to get to the Shire, recruit a bunch of Ruffins, and then take it over. When they get to Bree he's clearly already taken over based on what the bartender tells them. How long were they in Rivendell?
I was looking at the new hardcover the other day at Barnes and Noble and it looked really good if you are looking for a nice version:
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0618517650/?tag=neogaf0e-20
Megalosaro
Banned
Satu man took over the shire shortly after the hobbits left the shire. He used Lotho Sackville Baggins was used as a puppet Until Saruman was let out of orthanc.
The leather-bound 50th Anniversary Edition is one of the nicest versions of LOTR ever printed. The Alan Lee illustrated edition from 1992 (the centenary of Tolkien's birth) is also fantastic. Just last year, they combined the two for the 60th Anniversary Edition. However, I'm not sure if the 60th includes the full-color facsimile pages of Tolkien's paintings of the Book of Mazarbul, which he wanted included in the book but never were until the 50th due to the cost.
Amazon links:
Tolkien centenary edition
60th anniversary edition
Tizoc
Member
Thanks, an extra copy of the Hobbit never hurts, thanks.
And so, the Fourth Age of Tolkien discussion began.
Thank you to everyone for making this thread such an awesome place. Hopefully our new home will be able to match it
Is that the "paperback" version?
I've wanted to get this hardcover set but.... 1,172 dollars.....
I've got the 3 LOTR books in that image, and they are DELICIOUS, really nice paper stock very light and easy to turn. i'm actually really scared to read the whole books from them in case i fuck the spines up so will just keep reading through my chewed up paper backs from 1997!
DrForester
Kills Photobucket
crap, there's a newer thread. Sorry for the bump.