Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Movies Media

Ancanar Teaser Trailer Available 135

Posted by michael from the support-independent-film dept.
Still Gainfully Unemployed writes "A teaser trailer for Ancanar, an indie Tolkien inspired fantasy film, has been released. Check it out. It's not a Tolkien story, but rather inspired by his works."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ancanar Teaser Trailer Available More

Ancanar Teaser Trailer Available

Comments Filter:

  • Ancanar has not the bandwidth of Tolkien (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 11, 2003 @08:30PM (#5064459)
    Give us a mirror to gaze upon, oh mighty wizzard! :)

  • Based on the works of Tolkien (Score:5, Funny)

    by Well... ( 246045 ) on Saturday January 11, 2003 @08:36PM (#5064490)
    Do you mean based on as in the way The Two Towers is based on Tolkien, or is it more accurate than that?
    • Do you mean based on as in the way The Two Towers is based on Tolkien, or is it more accurate than that?


      Well...
      Considering that The Two Towers is a book written by Tolkien, I think it will be a little less accurate...

    • Re:Based on the works of Tolkien (Score:4, Funny)

      by Paolomania ( 160098 ) on Saturday January 11, 2003 @08:48PM (#5064540) Homepage
      i guess that to some, anything less than scrolling the text of LOTR over the movie screen would not constitute as a "movie adaptation".

      • I suppose, but my complaint was more about the choices they made - action-dude Legolas snowboarding on his shield, for instance. It wasn't what was taken out, it's what was added.

        • Re:Based on the works of Tolkien (Score:1, Interesting)

          by Anonymous Coward
          Tolkien didn't detail the fight scenes. He practically wrote "a fight ensued". So sliding, or glding, around seems somewhat appropriate.

          If middle earth it were reality, there would have been much more detail than what was written. I think there's no choice but to extrapolate, or to keep the scenes unsatisfying.

        • Re:Based on the works of Tolkien (Score:4, Interesting)

          by NaturePhotog ( 317732 ) on Saturday January 11, 2003 @09:38PM (#5064690) Homepage

          It wasn't what was taken out, it's what was added.

          I didn't mind surfer-dude Legolas, but the "Mr. Frodo, we shouldn't even be here!" line from Sam when they're taken to Osgiliath makes my wife and I chuckle each of the times we've seen Two Towers. And we missed the huorns taking out the orcs at Helm's Deep. The extra footage on the DVD for Fellowship says a lot of the changes they made there were to 'keep the ring moving towards Mordor', and I could apprecitate them. But in Two Towers, the side trip to Osgiliath / making Farimir into a Boromir clone in terms of ring-lust, and Aragorn's tumble over the cliff just made no sense to us.

          But back on topic, I'm happy to see more fantasy films inspired by Tolkien's work. I just hope (as an earlier poster said) that it's not like Red Sonja or some of the other action-fantasy movies of the 70's and 80's.

          • I'm not really a PJ apologist but I do play one on Slashdot.

            I too was quite taken aback by Faramir's apparent boneheadedness. Later I did some reading, both Tolkien and forums, and found quite satisfactory explanation for the "changes".

            To many people, including myself, Faramir was defined by single event and a quality shown in that event. He lets the ring go, thus he is wise, especially compared to Boromir. But that's not the whole story, he is also captain of Gondor and a shrewd interrogator. Further, his relationship with his father is strained. Read the book, those things are in there, At points, early in his interrogation of Frodo, Faramir is actually quite un-symphatetic.

            Faramir of the movie is actually closer to Faramir of the book than Faramir in my memory was. I think this is true for many people. Faramir is the good guy, and his darker side, or character development, is forgotten. In the movie Faramir is left half-done, his story and development has just begun (see ROTK for the end :-)) and so-far the darker side is more prominent.

            It isn't so much changing Faramir's character than it is changing the details of the plot. In the movie Faramir doesn't try to take the ring for himself, he tries to please his father, but in the end he sees that ringbearer must be allowed to go to Mordor. That's not out-of-character for Faramir described in the book. Side-trip to Osgiliath is a detail of the plot and it remains to be seen how that change is spinned in ROTK. What is the importance of Nazgul seeing Frodo (the Ring?) in Osgiliath? It's not in the book but might be used to justify something in ROTK, like the whole Sauron's ill-judged (too hasty) offense on Gondor.

            Aragorn goes of the cliff because

            1) somebody has to and
            2) he is about to get a second flash-back.

            It's a pretty good fight with the worg-riders, but it would be (mostly) pointless unless it has impact to the story/movie in the whole. If nobody important gets hurt then the fight is meaningless (ok, there are other ways to have meaningful fights but that's not the point). Aragorn has already had a flash-back. Hearing little voices in your head are you, schizo? Ok, it wouldn't actually be that bad, but being knocked-out is always a good excuse for a flash-back.Also, Aragorn going MIA and then coming back, lets Eowyn do those wonderful looks. You know, all that heavy breathing is now expression and not just asthma.

            --Flam

            • If nobody important gets hurt then the fight is meaningless

              Got the nail on the head, there! The worg-rider fight is meaningless. Having a character falling off a cliff and surviving is so ridiculously cliched that even the filmmakers didn't take it seriously -- compare the treatment of that scene to Gandalf's. (Using the same device twice was a serious mistake, especially when the execution was less cliched the first time.) The fact that "being knocked out is always a good excuse for a flashback" is exactly why a good author won't use it casually... but then, no one's claimed that the scriptwriters for the movie were good authors.
          • I don't think Faramir expressed great ring lust this time. The scene with him and the sword seemed more like intimidation, trying to make Frodo talk. It replaces long dialog between Frodo and Faramir, where the details come out slowly.

            Faramir never, even after seeing it, makes a personal grab for the ring, as he would if overcome by it. I think they just felt that with the screen time given, for him to see it (something they have shown repeatedly is very seductive) and then turn it down, is unreasonable. Even in the book this action is taken only after a fair bit of time. His decision was to take the hobbits, leaving them with the object - a very smart move if he even guessed at it's seductive power, and take them home where a better decision could be made. It's not until he realizes the urgency of the situation, and how ultimately important the ring is to the dark lord, via the (overdone) nazgul scene, that he decides he needs to make an immediate decision.

            And really, to say that Faramir was immune to the call of the ring in the book is a little misguided. He never handled it, or had it offered to him. He was smart enough to know to stay away from it, but that doesn't imply he could have turned it down. He also had the benefit of knowing Boromir was dead, and that he had to be more careful now.

            The battle scenes were my peeve with the movie. Particularly Aragorn going over the edge. Also, the split-second timing saving Aragorn (and Helm's Deep) from the hordes of Orcs by Gandalf. But, I realize that this last bit is in the book and it's pretty much standard, nobody believes you can have tension without everything coming down to the last second.
        • Actually, I discovered recently that the "snowboarding" thing isn't necessarily as "anachronistic" as we might have thought.

          As a friend pointed out, Petrarch wrote about germanic tribes surfing/sledding on their shields (naked!) down snowy embankments into battle -- that was 2000 years ago. So shield-surfing is a pretty old idea.
      • i guess that to some, anything less than scrolling the text of LOTR over the movie screen would not constitute as a "movie adaptation".

        Ha ha ha! You think that would suffice?

        If they did that, there'd be violent protests that the text was not the right version...

        ``
        Clearly, there should an extra comma on page 453, line 10, after the word "Alpo." I can't believe that awful hack Peter Jackson left it out! bastard. Bastard! YARRRRG!!!!''
      • Tolkien provided a vast ammount of information for the directors to choose from. They don't have to include it all, I'll be the first to admit that Tom Bombadil really didn't do much for the story as a whole. Why do you need to change something in the story? Great works are great works for a reason. People like Peter Jackson get caught up and want to make the movie their movie, not Tolkien's book made into a movie.

        An "movie adaptation" would be rewriting the book into a movie form. NOT basterdizing the story by moving things, adding and deleting things. By dumbing down stories and adding things such as comic relief every minute or so you make dumb movies. (dumb in the sense that the film is dumb and watching the movie seems to make you dumber)

        That said I did see
        • The Two Towers
        opening day and I have read Tolkien's books. I own the
        • Fellowship of the Ring
        on DVD and I will most likely get the other two when they come out. They are great as eye candy movies, they look neat. Certain elements of the book really come alive and as a companion to the book, but if I never read the book, I'd think it was a funny love story, something it's not.
        -Chris
    • Do you mean based on as in the way The Two Towers is based on Tolkien, or is it more accurate than that?

      Woah. I thought the movie was based on the book.

  • Tolkei n inspired ? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by EpsCylonB ( 307640 ) <eps&epscylonb,com> on Saturday January 11, 2003 @08:42PM (#5064514) Homepage
    It's not a Tolkien story, but rather inspired by his works.

    Doesn't that describe the vast majority of fantasy novels ?

    • Heh, True. I was gonna say the same thing.
      The Dogma [imdb.com] movie was probably, somehow, inspired by the bible. Yet I know plenty of church-going people that just don;t like it.
      I wonder how many Tolkien lovers are gonna hate it becuse it ain't Tolkien.
      • As a Christian (don't really like binding myself to a specific religion) and a Sporadic church goer (at least once a month more than just C&E)
        Church isnt really a bad thing, but it is wherever any gather in his name..sorry, off on a tagent...back to the topic, dogma.

        I think it's a great satire piece on religion (especially Catholicism)and is something funny. As far as Catholicism goes, I think the movie really shows the fallacies of not only that religion, but pretty much organized religion in general. Now, I'm not saying organized religion is a bad thing, as it does bring people together for a common good (for the most part) but it is subject to being something percieved by humans from a literary work that was written from a human standpoint. As anything else, it's open to interpretation, and yes, a lot of things in the bible can be bent in many many ways - My favorite being that God gave man all plants bearing seed (save the apple), for which they could use.

        Ok, I'm way off topic now....

        so go ahead and laugh..it's ok, honest! im sure God isn't going to smite you due to your finding humor in something just because it's a spoof on something sacred.

        PS: I'm not trolling I swear...I guess the combination of my tendancy
    • http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0345 314255/103-9283348-9273448?vi=glance

      Sword of Shannara.

      It's about a humble farmer dude who is told to leave his home by a great and powerful old wizard so that he can fulfill his destiny of destroying an evil phantom-like wizard, something which can only be done with the help of a magical artifact (this case it's a sword, not a ring).

      Other intersting points in the story:
      the king of one group of people is having his judgement clouded by a wicked chancellor who is actually working for the evil one. This is undone by the heroes, and the king helps defend against the onslaught of the army of evil orcs.

      That army of orcs almost breaks through the inner part of the castle by going through the only available opening: the sewers. They know about this because the chancellor escaped and told them.

      The epic battle to seize the castle encompasses four waves - three inner battlements are conquered, and a fourth when the orcs are defeated by a reenforcement force .

      Sound familiar? 'Cause I had to keep checking the title to make sure I wasn't reading Two Towers.

      • Re:Some A LOT more than others. (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Twirlip of the Mists ( 615030 ) <twirlipofthemists@yahoo.com> on Saturday January 11, 2003 @10:15PM (#5064794)
        the king of one group of people is having his judgement clouded by a wicked chancellor who is actually working for the evil one.

        Yeah, not like that particular story element goes back to the Bible or Homer or anything.
      • *nod* Sword is definitely a mediocre knock-off of LOTR, no denying it, but Terry Brook's later works quickly shift from mediocre xerox to interesting, well developed fantasy. I would strongly suggest to anyone interested in reading Brooks' Shannara series that you only bother skiming through Sword to get to the other two books in the first trilogy (Sword, Elfstones, and Wishsong) or skip the first trilogy and go straight into the 4 part Heritage of Shannara series (Scions, Druid, Elf Queen, and Talismans). Just remember, skipping books in a long running series is generally a bad thing to do if there's a certain chronology at work: you can skip the original trilogy entirely and not be too out of place but if you ever go back to read those first books certain things which are stated openly in later books are big nasty spoilers for those earlier books. The most recent Shannara series (The Voyage of the Jeryl Shannara) is hands down my favorite fantasy to have come out over the past few years, and I anxiously await the next series. Brooks' non-Shanarra series are also good for a read: Magical Kingdom of Landover is good for a laugh early on and gets more serious towards books 4 and 5 after the cheep gags are mostly over and done with while this interesting setting has been developed somewhat, while his Word and Void trilogy is just captivating. Basically what I'm saying is, don't ignore the guy just because his first book, from some 25 years ago, was a bad Tolkien knock-off. He's consistently gotten more skilled in his craft with each book he's released, and with a quarter century of steady improvement he's simply at the top of his game and while still no Tolkien, he's simply one of the best fantasy authors writing today.
        • I admire your stamina. Brooks lost me as a reader after less than 200 pages of Sword of Shannara, not because the plot reminded me of anything I'd previously read but simply because his writing style was so pathetically weak and I couldn't see anything developing in the plot to make up for it. If he has become more skilled with his craft, he should consider himself lucky to have been given that chance.
          Having said that, most fantasy books these days are weak. Most are also too long. Lord of the Rings is as long as any story needs to be.
      • You forgot about the mystic Allanon, who comes and goes with the party. But these, while obviously inspired by, stand alone well enough on their own - and after the first book are even more on their own.

        Try

        http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/045145810 9/ qid=1042486751/sr=2-2/ref=sr_2_2/104-3437608-64655 32

        The Iron Tower: The Dark Tide/Shadows of Doom/the Darkest Day
        by Dennis L. McKiernan

        These books so closely parallel LotR it's not even funny - even having short people as part of the main story, a watcher in the water right before they go into some forgotten underworld, etc...

        In his defense, he does say in the preface how he loves LotR and wrote these because he couldn't find any other epic fantasy like it. While they are decent books, he could have not copied it so closely.

    • "After the King" (Score:4, Interesting)

      by devphil ( 51341 ) on Saturday January 11, 2003 @10:12PM (#5064786) Homepage


      is a collection of short stories, all inspired by Tolkien and written to honor him. Some major fantasy/SF authors participated. One of the stories even has Bilbo make an uncredited cameo. I highly recommend it.

    • No, I read one once without a dwarf in it.

  • I know nothing of Anacar... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by stefanlasiewski ( 63134 ) <slashdotNO@SPAMstefanco.com> on Saturday January 11, 2003 @08:44PM (#5064526) Homepage Journal
    The LotR series is so popular, I'm sure we will see many LotR-inspired films in the next few years.

    Hopefully this round will be better then "Conan" & "Heavy Metal" clones like "Beastmaster", "Red Sonja", etc. from the 70's and 80's

    This looks like a lower budget movie, which should be entertaining.
    • Hey mac, Red Sonja was a good movie! The beastmaster - never saw any movie, but the series is mostly good.
    • Is this just a general fantasy movie, or does it use Tolkien characters or races? I guess they would have to be careful to not step on copyrights etc. owned by the Tolkien estate, who are notorious for shutting down productions that they don't like.
    • Dude, "Beastmaster" and the like were fucking cool! SWORDS! BREASTS! MONSTERS! HOOTERS! I'm telling you man, that shit was better than the tentacle-reaming anime the kids are watching these days.
    • Hopefully this round will be better then "Conan" & "Heavy Metal" clones like "Beastmaster", "Red Sonja", etc. from the 70's and 80's

      My God, I HOPE your right! If LofR is the FIRST of a series of trend movies, and will follow the 80's trend movies, we know better are in the works!

      Say what you will, but I happened to enjoy some of those films. I thought "Rock and Rule" was way cooler than Heavy Metal (and Rock and Rule had Iggy Pop and Lou Reed, how can that be WORSE than Heavy Metal).

      Conan inspired The Beastmaster? Well, honestly, I thought they both sort of sucked. But, Conan the Barbarian was out in 1982, and Conan the Destroyer was out in 1984. The Beastmaster was released in 1982. How can you believe that they put out Conan the Barbarian, and immediately went "good idea" and put out "The Beastmaster" the same year, with better production, a deeper story, better polished, as a "copy cat" THAT CAME OUT A COUPLE MONTHS LATER? Sad 80's referances there...

      Sad part is, LotR isn't the trend setter. Harry Potter is the "Conan" of the 2000's. And LotR's is the "BeastMaster" of the 2000's. I'm sorry, I want to hope for better too, but I just don't think it will happen.

      • Guys - c'mon! Basic facts here...

        Conan was published before Lord of the Rings!!! Sheesh - this is like the third time I've had to jump into a Slashdot discussion because people don't know their golden age SF. Phoenix on the Sword, the first Conan story was written by Robert Howard in Wierd Tales in 1932. In the next several years, he wrote seventeen more. The Hobbit didn't appear in print until 1937, and the Lord of the Rings didn't appear until 1954, over twenty years after Conan first appeared in Hyboria.

        Note that this reply occurs here due to the following stuff, not directly as a response to this thread, but more as a response to the whole "Lord of the Rings inspired every other fantasy work" theme that pervades replies to this article.

        Rock and Rule was great. Debbie Harry, Lou Reed and Iggy Pop set to nifty Bakshiish over the top animation. Fire and Ice had Frazetta doing the character design, which was even better, and was authentic Bakshi. And of course Wizards, a Bakshi classic.

        --
        Evan

      • How can you believe that they put out Conan the Barbarian, and immediately went "good idea" and put out "The Beastmaster" the same year, with better production, a deeper story, better polished, as a "copy cat" THAT CAME OUT A COUPLE MONTHS LATER?

        Well, this "copy cat" thing happens frequently. "A Bugs Life" and "Ants" came out at the same time, "Deep Impact" and "Armageddon"... and we're their two "Volcano appears in the middle of a metropolian area" movies at the same time (I never saw either).

        A rumor leaks that "Studio A" is going to release a movie about $SUBJECT, so "Studio B" quickly produces a similar script also about $SUBJECT.

  • Download it... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Theom ( 567303 ) on Saturday January 11, 2003 @08:52PM (#5064552)
    Here [joannewarf...ineart.com]. I hate to look at movies within a web browser, is there actually a QuickTime plug-in for Mozilla?

  • Yeah... quite a bit has been inspired by Tolken... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by autopr0n ( 534291 ) on Saturday January 11, 2003 @09:19PM (#5064640) Homepage Journal
    And the vast majority of it sucks.
  • And why won't it play in my MPlayer rc1?

    Requested audio codec family [faad] (afm=faad) not available (enable it at compilation!)

    Wtf is that faad?
  • Since I can't see the trailer, I have to make it up.

    In this one, Dorfo and Samdumb go frolicking west across Amerrycah in their K-Y delivery van, lubing their way from adventure to adventure in their quest to destroy the Wrinngius Unus which was stolen from the Great Lord Mauron after a battle in which Mauron was defeated by a band of singing barbers. The movie climaxes when, at a Mauron's resort in Misted Mountains of Kallorahdoe, Samdumb gets his tongue stuck to a conveniently-placed ski-lift, and in order to unstick him, Dorfo engages in rough butt love to heat him up.

    The passionate Nhobbit Love opens up a HUGE CRACK in the earth, into which an alert but orgasmic Dorfo tosses the Wringius Unus, thereby destroying it and Mauron... ... thereby leaving the world unprotected from the resurrected band of singing barbers.

    Celine Dion writes the title song, My Hardon Will Go On.
  • I never got around to seeing the Two Towers, but I did see FOTR on DVD. Does anyone remember the LOTR cartoon? I think I'm permanently scarred for life after seeing it. :)
    • Does anyone remember the LOTR cartoon?

      I've been trying to forget it for years, only to be reminded of it every time an LotR story shows up on slashdot.

      Thanks a lot!!!

    • Where there's a whip...
      There's a way...

      You know, I think I learned that song from that cartoon even before I was old enough to know what LOTR was...
      • no, no - that was "The Hobbit" cartoon version... the FotR cartoon was made by different people, and didn't have random pointless singing by orcs.

        It still sucked, but was nowhere NEAR as bad as The Disneyfied Hobbit movie. It actually had some redeeming qualities, like the flashback to Smeagol strangling his brother Deagol and taking the Ring - I keep waiting for that flashback to show up in the Peter Jackson films. If it doesn't happen in Return of the King that would suck - I was totally expecting it in The Two Towers after he called himself a murderer, but they left the obvious hook unexplained instead.

        "Give us that ring, Deagol my love."
        "Why, Smeagol?"
        "Because it's my birthday, my love... and I wants it!"
    • While stuff like Boromir as a viking and Aragorn as a native american indian scout could scar you for life, in a lot of ways it was a lot more faithful to the books than the PJ works.

      Funny thing is, you mention this on a tolkien newsgroup and they go nuts. They will go on about how it left out the old forest and Tom Bombadil - hey...so did PJ.

      So they go on with the next best thing they can find, which is usually a dig about the animation styles. Or they will bitch about the Nazgul crying/screaming after they missed Frodo in Bree (oh wait..the PJ movie did the same thing.)

      I still like it - though it is kinda hard to watch sometimes. Not as bad as the Return of the King movie.

  • Two Towers now showing at Slashdot... (Score:4, Funny)

    by SkoZombie ( 562582 ) <skozombie@nospAM.kruel.org> on Saturday January 11, 2003 @09:36PM (#5064687) Homepage
    Starring:
    • Cowboy Neal, as Gandalf as Not-so-gray
    • ./ readers, as the orcish hordes
    • micheal, as Saruman (He is directing the orchish hordes, remember?)
    • http://www.ancanar.com/, as the wall of helm's deep
    • Apache Server, as aragon and gimli (trying to hold back the orcish hordes)
    • Slashdot Effect, as the pyro effects that destroy the walls of helms deep.

  • Umm.... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by LordYUK ( 552359 ) <jeffwright821@noSPAm.gmail.com> on Saturday January 11, 2003 @09:49PM (#5064728)
    The search begins?? for what, better actors and a plot? Sheesh, this is one of these storys that got rejected from Xena isnt it? seriously, it looks horrible, but it has elves and swords, so what the hell, I'll go see it...

  • /.'d (Score:1)

    by Echnin ( 607099 )
    Oh, come on; "indie film" and "teaser trailer" are not two terms that should appear together on the Slashdot mainpage. Can anyone say "slashdotted"? Early fantasy books (ie inspired by Tolkien) actually labeled themselves as "Tolkienesque" works.

  • Legal Issues? (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I'm not an expert, but I vaguely remember reading that when Tolkien sold the film rights to LotR, he specifically prohibited any 'based on'-type works (thus thankfully preventing a Middle-Earth sitcom). Even if this is not the case, aren't there legal issues involved in using, at the very least, Tolkien's geography? It was always my understanding that one needed some sort of contractual right in order to do, say, a Dune prequel or Star Wars novel.

    Irrespective of the legal issues, I don't think that a film like this does Tolkien much service or is particularly respectful of his wishes. Unlike, say, the Star Wars universe, Middle-Earth was very much the product of one man, and it was for him a very personal way of expressing some of his most deeply-felt beliefs. Considering that the vast majority of the Tolkien canon remains yet unfilmed (I would kill for a Beren and Luthien movie), the only real reason I can fathom for making a movie like this is to exploit the depth of Tolkien's universe without having to include its messages.

    That being said, I may see this movie, and, if it is true to Tolkien's beliefs and tone, I may see it fit to like it. That, however, is unlikely; while I liked Jackson's FotR quite alot, I felt his TTT was unfaithful not only to the plot of Tolkien's work (which I can forgive), but to the messages as well. I don't want to sound like a snobby purist when I say that; it's just that all the talking (particularly by Faramir, Gandalf, and Treebeard) was the interesting part of TTT for me, not the fighting. I understand that many may feel differently.

    Rob
    • Whatever, those are retarded laws that stifle free speech and creativity.

      And speaking of stifling free speech, there's a whole bunch of Final Fantasy Fan Fiction that I keep submitting for a story, but it keeps being rejected. :P
    • Hey, if you don't want to sound like a snobby purist, you might want to try avoiding phrases like

      "That being said, I may see this movie, and, if it is true to Tolkien's beliefs and tone, I may see it fit to like it."

      Which make you sound like a ... well, the phrase I was going to use was much less polite than snobby purist, lets say.

      I just love how many people are willing to condemn the works of others sight unseen. I was hoping at least one comment here would have come from someone who'd watched the trailer and given it some thought. Apparently not. Guess I'll have to go see before I pass judgement.
    • I'm not an expert, but I vaguely remember reading that when Tolkien sold the film rights to LotR, he specifically prohibited any 'based on'-type works (thus thankfully preventing a Middle-Earth sitcom).

      Damn. There goes my idea for a Justice Friends [bcdb.com]-type show about Gimli and Legolas settling down into an apartment in Bree...

  • I put it up on my .mac site [mac.com] Enjoy. I'm not so sure it's going to be a hit or a cult classic but, maybe worth an hour and a half or so. I've wasted plenty of my time watching other trash.
  • I know "Indie" is a realy nice and trendy term, but is it really that hard to spell out the entire word "independent"?

    Oh wait, this is Slashdot, nevermind. That's like asking the editors to check for dupes! :)

  • Looks a lot more like they were taken with the movie adaptation of LOTR than the source material itself. A lot of things are "Tolkien inspired," but I think its more fair to call this LOTR movie inspired. The bits of CGI, the trailer, etc all scream, "We really liked Fellowship, lets make our own" instead of ,"Lets make a good Tolkien flick."

    Afterall, if it didn't try to emulate the "look and feel" of LOTR it would just be another fantasy movie and probably never be posted on slashdot.
    • Hey there, this is Curugon from Ancanar.com. I just wanted to point out the Ancanar was in production since early 1999, and was shot at the end of 2000 (a year before FOTR came out). So it would've been hard to be inspired by something we hadn't seen yet! I'd be happy to answer questions 1-on-1, my AIM is Curugon if you wish to drop me a line. Cheers, Curugon
  • "Why must mortal man be forbidden such?"
    "...whilst you are granted life eternal!!"

    And why do independent films always have ugly actors with weenie voices>

Slashdot Top Deals

Love may laugh at locksmiths, but he has a profound respect for money bags. -- Sidney Paternoster, "The Folly of the Wise"

Close