Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Movies Media

Lord of the Rings News from New Zealand 181

Posted by michael from the just-a-few-more-days dept.
wonton_mein writes "The New Zealand Herald is doing some daily coverage of the LOTR - TTT. Can't wait for Dec. 18."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Lord of the Rings News from New Zealand More

Lord of the Rings News from New Zealand

Comments Filter:

  • Broad I Guess... (Score:5, Informative)

    by Grip3n ( 470031 ) on Sunday December 15, 2002 @02:42AM (#4890800) Homepage
    For the new LOTR:TTT Trailer seen on TV with MAJOR SPOILERS (ents, winged nazgul, ending of Battle of Helms Deep), head here (quicktime):

    Large Size [theonering.net]
    Medium Size [theonering.net]
    Small Size [theonering.net]

    • Frame by Frame Analysis (Score:5, Informative)

      by Grip3n ( 470031 ) on Sunday December 15, 2002 @02:45AM (#4890809) Homepage
      Oops, nearly forgot the frame by frame analysis link of the preview:

      Frame by Frame [theonering.net]

    • Re:Broad I Guess... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by LucidityZero ( 602202 ) <sometimesitsalex@@@gmail...com> on Sunday December 15, 2002 @02:45AM (#4890810) Homepage
      The REAL problem with the trailers was showing Gandalf in it! I have read the books many times myself, but most of my friends have not. All of them were asking, "Does Gandalf come back?" after the first movie ended. I lied and told them, "No." to make it more exciting for them, but instead they ruin my whole plan in the trailers!

      Was this not given any foresight?
    • So there. I SMELL NERDS. From revenge of the nerds or something.

    • Re:Broad I Guess... (Score:5, Informative)

      by Spy Hunter ( 317220 ) on Sunday December 15, 2002 @03:28AM (#4890927) Journal
      For a Linux player that can play these Sorensen files (finally), along with practically every other movie file format in existence, head here:

      MPlayer [mplayerhq.hu]

    • Re:Broad I Guess... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by trotski ( 592530 )
      Spoilers?!?

      If you haven't read the book, you shouldn't see the movie. So if some of this stuff is a spoiler to you YOU DESERVE IT I've said this a thousand times... watching this movie without reading the books will RUIN the experience. Don't miss out on some of the greatest literature of the 20th century, read the book(s) now before it's too late!

      • Chill out, man. While I do agree that the book should be read first, it should be noted that the movie isn't a perfect translation from the book. For FOTR, the whole love story was practically squat in the book, there was no Lurtz, Frodo wasn't the one that found the password, etc. I realize those aren't huge plot points but there are a lot of departures from the book.

        And apart from that, there's simply the whole visual aspect of things being spoiled. I don't recall seeing that huge, badassed 3D Balrog in the book, for example. Obvious, but I think that it's a pretty good point. I've been trying to minimize my exposure to this movie, PARTICULARLY with the Ents, just so I can behold their total coolness on the big screen. That'd still be just as much a spoiler as if I hadn't read the book.

        Your real point is still quite valid though. Any self-respecting human that hasn't read LOTR yet should buy a copy [amazon.com] immediately :)

        • Re:Not just plot spoilers, visual spoilers too! (Score:1, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward
          So true. Sadly I had never heard of LOTR until the first movie came out....please don't kill me. I've also had my head buried in technical manuals and programming books for the last 5+ years and forgot how good a novel can be. So after seeing the first movie, on DVD mind you (I missed on the big screen), I decided to read the books.

          I have since read The Hobbit and The Fellowship of the Ring. I loved them both. I struggled trying to decide whether to read The Two Towers before or after the movie. If I read it before then I will probably not like the movie as much, how could it match my own imagination?? If I see the movie first then my imagination will be tainted by someone else's vision. I decided to avoid the poison and read the book first. This way it will be my adventure that I experience and not Peter Jackson's. I have read the first have in the last two days and will try to finish it before the movie starts next week.

          Reading what I have already read, I am more anxious to see the movie. I can't wait to read The Return of the King. If I read fast enough I may even finish before the 18th!!
          • It isn't to late to see _The Fellowship of the Ring_ on a big screen. It will be in the cinemas until the _The Return of the King_ goes up.

            As the movie is expicitly aimed to people who have read the book, I think you can be assured that your experience of the film will be enhanced by having read the book beforehand.

            I'm reading through _The Two Towers_ right now, in time for the premiere, but for me it's about the twelwth time.

          • For best results: Books, then movies. (Score:4, Insightful)

            by Admiral Burrito ( 11807 ) on Sunday December 15, 2002 @06:50AM (#4891243)
            If I read it before then I will probably not like the movie as much, how could it match my own imagination??

            I wouldn't worry too much about that. I've read the books several times before watching the movie, and I would say that Peter Jackson et al did very well in bringing the book to life. Sure the movie has lots of things missing, and the occasional thing done not very well, but all in all a good job that even surpassed my imagination in some places.

            I think the book touched me emotionally far more than the movie ever could. Tolkien's writing gives a supernatural splendor to the the most common things, contrasted against the looming darkness. The movie made me gawk at the amazing visuals. :) Book, then movie, and neither will take away from the other.

            After reading the trilogy and watching all three movies (after they're released of course), go and read the Silmarillion. Read it more than once - the style of writing is very matter-of-fact, which makes for hard reading, but the second time is easier. It is truely epic, and if you manage to follow it you'll look at the story in the Lord of the Rings with a new perspective.

            • Silmarillion (Score:2, Informative)

              by Angram ( 517383 )
              I consider the Silmarillion the best of the lot. Instead of just one story spanning three books (albeit a great one), you have dozens that feel just as detailed in a single volume. Tolkien combines most of the major mythologies to bring this one to us, and he does an amazing job. Don't stop with the Silmarillion, though, go on the Unfinished Tales and the rest. There are another dozen or so books published from his journals, and they contain a lot of unpublished parts to each, and earlier versions (Strider was a hobbit named Trotter). After reading the Silmarillion et al. you gain a whole new understanding of the events of the Third Age (Hobbit, LotR). LotR becomes a whole lot more impressive once you know the events that lead up to it.
            • Reading LotR again after reading the Silmarillion is a very different experience. You suddenly spot lots of references and everything fits into a bigger scheme.

              Highly recommended.

      • Re:Broad I Guess... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by wheany ( 460585 ) <wheany+sd@iki.fi> on Sunday December 15, 2002 @07:29AM (#4891305) Homepage Journal
        watching this movie without reading the books will RUIN the experience.

        No, it seems reading the books will ruin the movie experience. The most vocal whiners have been people who have read the books. I was going to read the books after seeing the first movie, but then I read all the whining and nit-picking from people that had read the books and thought I don't want to become like that.
        • Assuming it is true that "the most vocal whiners have been people who have read the books," it's silly to assume that reading the books will turn you into a vocal whiner (or will turn you into anything)... unless you're a whiny, nitpicking asshole by nature, in which case I'd agree with you. Stay away from the long, complicated words and stick with the nice pretty images instead. :)
      • I do not know about that. I prefer to read the book after having seen the movie so I do not ruin the movie and the book.
        Though I've had this fail for 2 movies/books. The movie "Silence of the Lambs" was better than the book. Ninth gate was a stripped down version of "The Club Dumas" by Arturo Perez-Reverte. If you saw the movie first, the book was a disappointment. If you read the book first, the movie was a major disappointment.
      • From your sig...you've been published on Slashdot? Congrats...wait for the royalty cheques to roll in. I submitted a good one on how wearing glasses trounces your chances with the ladies but it got rejected, ironically. Maybe there are some hot babe editors...
      • I disagree. My sister, an English Lit. snob, had never read the books because she thought they were just pulpy fantasy books for geeks. I took her to see Fellowship. She immediately asked to borrow the first book, and now she's geeking out over the trilogy in a way that puts me to shame. Example: She wants to get in touch with her "inner elf" by learning Elvish.

        Seriously, she used to make fun of people like this. And it was the movie that paved the way.

      • If you haven't read the book, you shouldn't see the movie. So if some of this stuff is a spoiler to you YOU DESERVE IT I've said this a thousand times... watching this movie without reading the books will RUIN the experience. Don't miss out on some of the greatest literature of the 20th century, read the book(s) now before it's too late!

        The Lord of the Rings was, at its time, groundbreaking and innovative. But it was still badly written and poorly designed.

        The climax of the entire story happens less than halfway through the final book, and is done via the predestined actions of a minor character. Most of the really good parts happen off camera-; rather than actually capturing them in prose, Tolkien decided to simply suggest them--thus making each person imagine them by themself.

        Yes, it was groundbreaking. Yes, I wouldn't have either my favorite genre or my favorite game without it. But it was hardly among "the greatest literature of the 20th century." Most important maybe, but not "greatest."

        "There was a lot missing in the movie from the book."

        "What?"

        "All the parts that sucked, for one..."

    • and honestly, a really lame trailer at that. The trailer for the Fellowship was waaaay better.
  • I already have my Tickets to LoTR TTT midnight show, got a group of geeks I'm going there with, now I just need to decide if I want to be an ubergeek and dress up as a character from it.

  • Gollum Song Video (Score:5, Informative)

    by Grip3n ( 470031 ) on Sunday December 15, 2002 @02:51AM (#4890822) Homepage
    For those of you who are interested, here is a link to the Gollum Song Video. This song will be played at the end of The Two Towers during the credits. Its really creepy, starring Emiliana Torrini [emiliana.net] for the voice. It's extremely well done and makes you feel a deep sense of pity for the tortured soul that is Gollum. (There are no spoilers in this video, just recycled images from already released previews).

    Large (11.8mb) [theonering.net]
    Med (2.2mb) [theonering.net]
    Small (970k) [theonering.net]

    (Note: these are in Quicktime)

    • Re:Gollum Song Video (Score:2, Insightful)

      by geekoid ( 135745 )
      "here are no spoilers in this video, just recycled images from already released previews"
      which have enough spoiler in them them selves.

      I know people who have not read the books, so putting that charater in the trailer was poor judgment.

      Yes most people have read the books, but thay already know, its the few who havent seen it that the trailer should be geared to.
      • Most adult film goers don't care that much about spoilers. I assume that people go to films for reasons other than to see punch lines and surprises. If otherwise, they'd best not discuss films or books or any narratives with me at all. The only exception to that is the true plot twist, a la Crying Game. As Andrew O'Hehir says:

        Actually, my view is that the spoiler obsession, born of the Internet's fan-geek culture, is the enemy of real criticism, real discussion and maybe even real thought, but that's a subject for another time.
        • Most adult film goes don't care about spoilers because there is nothing to spoil. Hollywood garbage doesn't have much in terms of plot. When a decent movie does come out, the people that want to see it as an intellectual or artistic journey don't want it spoiled (think Brazil).

          Plot twists aren't relevant, most great works are meant to be a single uninterrupted unit, without prior knowledge. Every decent movie or book has a plot twist (how many of you expected X to happen to Y at point A in anything you've ever read or seen?) There's always something you don't expect. We're not psychics here.

          One of my great regrets as a child was reading the Encyclopedia of Middle Earth before LotR. I knew the end before I got to the beginning. There is nothing more anticlimactic than reading or watching what you'd known was going to happen.
          • Most great works have nothing to do with avoiding prior knowledge. News flash: in Hamlet, he kills his uncle and his Mom, and dies. MacBeth dies. Oedipus sleeps with his mum and kills his Pa, goes crazy and kills himself.

            If you think in any way that I've ruined those stories for you, you're mad. If you think that most people who went to see the original plays didn't know those stories ahead of time, you're also mad.

            In a journey, you largely know where you are going and the route you will take. It's a matter of enjoying, not "knowing," the route that matters.

            • In a journey, you largely know where you are going and the route you will take. It's a matter of enjoying, not "knowing," the route that matters.
              You may know a general idea behind the story (crime thriller: cop solves mystery; romantic comedy: at-odds couple finally falls in love; etc.), but the surprises along the way can turn a well-known idea into a wonderful story (LA Confidential; When Harry Met Sally). I personally prefer to know as little as possible about a story before I experience it (be it a movie, book, whatever). Just because you don't care about whether you know the entire story doesn't mean that other people don't or shouldn't care. I didn't know dick about Hamlet the first time I saw it, and I'm glad -- if I'd known they were all going to die in the end, it would have taken all the shock out of it. Do I think everyone should feel this way? Of course not; that's your thing. :)

              Anyway, the entire point of this thread was that he was making readers aware what level of spoiler info there was in the linked material. If you don't care about spoilers, then you don't have to heed the warning, but don't go insulting those who like surprises in their entertainment.

    • (Note: these are in Quicktime)

      Have no fear, MPlayer [mplayerhq.hu] plays them without problem.

  • Umm.. (Score:2, Funny)

    by alwsn ( 593349 )
    In other news: newspapers (even in their electronic form) occasionally cover information about recent events or happenings

  • Some links (Score:5, Informative)

    by tgrotvedt ( 542393 ) on Sunday December 15, 2002 @02:54AM (#4890829) Journal
    This wasn't too detailed so...

    Here are some places around the web for more TTT info/media:

    http://www.darthscreencapture.com/LOTR/ttt.html [darthscreencapture.com]: Trailers and previews.

    The Lord of the Rings : The Two Towers Official Movie Site [lordoftherings.net]: The name says it all.\

    TheOneRing.net(TM)| Lord of the Rings Movie News and Rumors [theonering.net]: Very useful news site.

    TolkienMovies.com - Lord of the Rings Movie News, Rumors, Photos [tolkien-movies.com]: Alot of available stuff, but nicely colated.

    Hope that helps...

    • Don't forget the "hate speech" link (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jerde ( 23294 ) on Sunday December 15, 2002 @03:26AM (#4890920) Journal
      So, um... get this:

      Naming this movie "The Two Towers" is hate speech, according to the folks at www.twotowersprotest.org [twotowersprotest.org].

      Why?

      You insensitive clod, it's because "The Two Towers" somehow reminds us of the World Trade Center towers. (Never mind that the towers never went by that name. They were the "Twin Towers" in some circles. I never heard "Two Towers")

      I can't find any references to protests about the title of "K19: Widowmaker" -- talk about an insensitive title!

      Sigh.

      I'm wandering even farther off topic, please excuse me:

      My grandfather just passed away, and he was cremated. Garrison Keillor, in his "News from Lake Wobegon" tonight on the Prairie Home Companion radio show, told an extended joke about a grandma who would take "grandpa" (an urn) down off the shelf around christmas time, so he could spend time with the family. Think about it -- this can be quite funny, all the odd situations that go on with an urn in the picture.

      Obviously, I had rather mixed feelings hearing this, given my family's recent loss.

      But should I be mad at Keillor for telling this joke? Is it in poor taste?

      I'm willing to say of course not! Humor, art, literature, movies talk about stuff that happens in life.

      You could try to restrict the content of art forms so as not to offend anybody... but you'd never succeed.

      This two towers thing is JUST A COINCIDENCE, and not to obvious a one at that. It never even ocurred to me until I'd read about this protest.

      Stop to consider that sometimes protests like this just make the whole situation worse.

      Off the soapbox... sorry for the rant...

      (Go out and enjoy the movie!!! I got my tickets already. :)

      - Peter
      • LOL, that link is so stupid! They pretend that they're trying to be "sensitive" by eliminating the Two Towers title, while plastering the "Two Towers" phrase all over the website. Not to mention that thier logo shows a trade center in flames... yeah, that's being sensitive alright.
      • from the FAQ:

        We believe that Peter Jackson and New Line Cinema's actions are in fact hate speech. The movie is intentionally being named The Two Towers in order to capitalize on the tragedy of September 11. Clearly, you cannot deny the fact that this falls under hate speech. We believe that if they will not willingly change the name, the government should step in to stop the movie's production or to force a name change.

        Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the second book named 'The Two Towers' - Therefore, the movie is intentionally being named 'The Two Towers' because that was the name of the book its based on. That has nothing to do with capitalising on the tragedy. Are they going to try and get the name of the book changed as well?
      • I sent sent them an email to twotowersprotest [mailto]

        asking if they also wanted the publisher to retroactively collect all the books that had the title in it including the ones published before 2001....
      • dude...every time I read those /. posts about how rong it is to have called the movie (or even the book) The Two Towers it just makes me afraid they are _really_ gonna do it again (oops) when the movie comes out...
      • God, how can you all be so insanely dense. It's obviously not hate speach, it's prophecy. An evil presence coming from the south east??? How can you not see.


        Sauron is Bin Laden, Gandalf is Dick Cheney (remember how he disapeared for a bit... just like the balrog thing), Aragorn is Colin Powell, Frodo is George Bush, Helms Deep is Iraq.


        It's all so obvious. Though I'm not sure how we're going to get the giant eagles to help us in the final battle against Bin Laden's forces.

  • International Release Dates (Score:5, Informative)

    by Grip3n ( 470031 ) on Sunday December 15, 2002 @02:54AM (#4890830) Homepage
    Slashdot receives a wide range of visitors from every country. Therefore, here's an international list of release dates in each country TTT will be showing (believe it or not, TTT just doesn't come out on Dec. 18):

    Release Dates [theonering.net]
    • So can someone tell me, why is Japan always the last place on earth to get these movies (by over a month in the case of LOTR TTT; better than 6 months I suppose...)?

      Sucks.
  • caught a press preview this week:

    1) much more action than the first one
    2) less dramatic/emotinal slowdown.
    3) Golum is the best done CGI character to date.

    can't wait to see it again
    • In other words - less Tolkien, more dumbed down Hollywood.

      Don't get me wrong, I liked the first movie, but it becomes such a better told story with the extended edition, when all the "dramatic/emotional slowdowns" that have been cut from the release version are added back.

      After your post, I dread going to the theater on the 18th to see a pure action flick, a James Bond movie with swords and elves. And that would suck, since Lord of the Rings can be so much more than that.

      • The problem with your analysis is that even in the original book form The Two Towers had more action and less development than Fellowship Of The Ring, so it's premature to blame this on "less Tolkien, more dumbed down Hollywood" especially when you haven't seen it yet. If this movie had an equal amount of slow melodrama as the first did, then THAT would be a departure from what Tolkien wrote.
        • Actually... I was reading in Time (?) at the barber's that Jackson thinks, while it's still the stame story, that this upcoming movie is the least faithful of the three. He thinks, however, that it makes it a better movie than it would otherwise be.
          • of course its the least faithful, the opening scene was cut out and added to a different movie ;)

            But in all honesty, people wouldnt like a strict following of the book format of this one, where the book tells what happens to one group, then the other halfway into the book. I dont think that would translate too well in a film where people will wonder, 'what happened to so and so?' and would not want to wait until an hour into the movie to see some of the charaters for the 1st time

  • For those of you who can't wait to see it on the 18th just may be in luck! There is a special screener happening the day before in San Francisco (at the Metreon) for $50. I guess it's some form of charity thing, I'm not sure; once I read that you get to see the movie Tuesday night I just kind of zoned out!
    Here is the link: Special Preview Screening / Benefit for Amnesty International [kgoam810.com]

  • More News (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Well, we have even more news coverage from Google News [google.com].

    Some highlights:

    • Re:More News (Score:5, Interesting)

      by nhaines ( 622289 ) <nhaines.ubuntu@com> on Sunday December 15, 2002 @03:12AM (#4890889) Homepage

      Yeah, let's see. Tolkien wrote The Lord of the Rings starting in 1940. I guess it reflects British immigration worries in 1950.

      Tolkien's main characters are white. Why? It's a British epic story, set in Britain 7,000 some odd years ago. The "bad guys" are not actually humans, but orcs. That hardly constitutes racism.

      Tolkien was contacted in 1938 by a German publisher interested in translating and printing a German edition of The Hobbit. Tolkien wrote a letter to his publisher expressing outrage at the idea that Jewish heritage might be a prerequisite for a German edition and didn't want to give proof he wasn't Jewish (although he did happen to have proof).

      Since it was really his publisher who had to decide the issue, Tolkien wrote two letters, one politer and the other refusing to give proof of lack of Jewish heritage. Since the politer one still exists, it seems the more angry one got sent to the German publisher. Good for Unwin-Allen. These are letters 28 and 29.

      Personally I should be inclined to refuse to give any Bestätigung [confirmation] (although it happens that I can), and let a German translation go hang. In any case I should object strongly to any such declaration appearing in print. I do not regard the (probably) absence of all Jewish blood as necessarily honourable; and I have many Jewish friends, and should regret giving any colour to the notion that I subscribed to the wholly pernicious and unscientific race-doctrine.

      • Yeah, let's see. Tolkien wrote The Lord of the Rings starting in 1940. I guess it reflects British immigration worries in 1950.

        I can't tell if you're being sarcastic here or not (apologies if you were), but ...

        Tolkien would likely take great offense at this characterization, were he alive and able to hear (read) it. He truly disliked, one could perhaps even say DESPISED, allegory, and emphatically stated time and time again that his mythos was in no way allegorical about any of the political, social, or economic conditions of the time. It was intended as a MYTHOS drawing upon the rich historical and cultural heritage of Britain, and unlike so many novels of the era, had ABSOLUTELY NO MESSAGE with respect to current potitics, economics, or social commentary WHATSOEVER.

        Other than that, I think you post is dead on (and find the tidbit you bring up about German translation very interesting).
        • Yeah, let's see. Tolkien wrote The Lord of the Rings starting in 1940. I guess it reflects British immigration worries in 1950.

          I can't tell if you're being sarcastic here or not (apologies if you were)

          Seeing as time-travel hadn't been perfected in the 1940s, I'm fairly confident that he was being sarcastic.

      • Tolkien's main characters are white. Why? It's a British epic story, set in Britain 7,000 some odd years ago. The "bad guys" are not actually humans, but orcs. That hardly constitutes racism.

        Aside from the lack of resemblance between Britain and Middle Earth geographically, surely, it's racism on a grand scale, against -- for example -- orcs and people of dark complexion.

        The Southrons, who I think not coincidentally are described as swarthy, are human allies of Sauron. Likewise the darker wood elves are less noble than the fair grey/high elves. Gandalf ascends from being "grey" to being "white".

        So from Tolkien we get the following messages:

        a) Purity of blood = purity of spirit. Thus the more Numenorean blood (or better yet High Elvish) in you, the better a person you are.

        b) Race = personality. If you're an elf you're good. There are no evil elves. If you're an orc you're bad. There are no good orcs.

        c) Dark skinned southerners are evil. (OK, that reflects British immigration policies...)

        d) When thousands of orcs are slaughtered by the Riders of Rohan it's heroism. When orcs engage in similar behavior against humans its evil.

        Now I don't think there's any real evidence Tolkien was anything more than casually anti-semitic (as were most Anglicans). There's a good deal of evidence that he lived in a world of white male Christian Oxford dons and this is strongly reflected in his novels. (Reread the "Return of the King" from a homoerotic perspective as a drinking game.)

        Still, Tolkien was raised in South Africa and fought in WWI. A complete non-grasp of sex, race and politics is not entirely forgiveable in a highly educated scholar. E.g. it can scarcely have failed to negatively impact his professional work as a philologist -- what can be more political than language?
  • I'm going to this movie opening night and I'm very excited I saw an ent in a preview the other day and I'm excited, though anytime I see lord of the rings now I keep thinking about the MTV video awards version with jack black

    "Elron:do you have the ring. Jack Black:yes, I have the ring, see thing is last night me and my buddies had a little too much meed, and ug we ended up at the piercing parlor, and uh long story short ~drops pants~ Boromir:it is a gift. jack black:your damn right it's a gift, it's called a prince albert, and it's MY PRECIOUS"

  • I mean look at all those guys with point ears!

  • Would explain a thing or two. (Score:4, Funny)

    by WasterDave ( 20047 ) <davep@noSPAm.zedkep.com> on Sunday December 15, 2002 @03:11AM (#4890884)
    So that's where all our international bandwidth has gone, /. strikes again.

    Dave

  • Super-Hero Prime Minister (Score:4, Interesting)

    by coloth ( 630330 ) on Sunday December 15, 2002 @03:15AM (#4890895)
    The prime minister of New Zealand, Helen Clark, is showing off her country, as featured in the LOTR movies, by jetboating, ice-picking, rappelling into sinkholes, and overall doing some incredible things for a head of state.

    Makes George Bush look sedentary!

    (article) [stuff.co.nz]

  • Triumph the Wonder Dog and Star Warsq (Score:4, Funny)

    by mwmurphy ( 631277 ) on Sunday December 15, 2002 @03:16AM (#4890897) Homepage
    Man, you guys need wedgies. I will be a kickass movie but you will get what's coming to you if I see you in costumes outside the theater.

  • Sleep and Map of Middle Earth/NZ (Score:3, Informative)

    by AndroidCat ( 229562 ) on Sunday December 15, 2002 @03:32AM (#4890937) Homepage
    When I went to the map of locations [nzherald.co.nz] I looked for the dot marked "Author's house". You'd have to be a Samurai Cat fan to understand. Or.. Let's see, good art, no maps [geocities.com], hurm no luck. Ah well, good down to the local shop and buy one. (Don't just flip through it to see the maps or you will be Banned For Life!)

    Oh yeah, the sleep part - knew I was forgetting something.

  • Another link (Score:5, Funny)

    by bahwi ( 43111 ) on Sunday December 15, 2002 @03:34AM (#4890941)
    Everyone else is posting links and karma whoring(one, the other, or even both) so I'll join them!

    Slashdot.org [slashdot.org] has links to an article, plus comments with links to other sites giving even more information on LOTR:TTT.

    Slashdot comes in one size and is _not_ quicktime! Sorry!

  • It's out... On Kazaa! (Score:3, Funny)

    by Alien Venom ( 634222 ) on Sunday December 15, 2002 @03:52AM (#4890964) Homepage
    It's already out on KaZaA, I saw it! It was a 200k executable file -- file compresion has gone so far these days! :P

  • the LOTR phat beats (Score:4, Funny)

    by thing_in_itself ( 627549 ) on Sunday December 15, 2002 @04:13AM (#4890994)
    Lords of the Rhymes [fistfulayen.com]:

    I'm Gimli and I'm a fuckin' dwarf
    Killin' motherfuckers from the south to the north
    That's not Mirkwood I'm chopping with my battle axe
    And I'm on an orc stampede like Shadowfax

    I think things like this need to be encouraged as much as possible. They have an MP3 download. And they also sample the immortal Ballad of Bilbo Baggins [game-revolution.com] by Leonard Nimoy.

  • There's daily coverage on stuff.co.nz as well (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Karora ( 214807 ) on Sunday December 15, 2002 @04:32AM (#4891026) Homepage
    Stuff [slashdot.org] also has daily coverage [stuff.co.nz]. This is the site for the major Wellington newspaper, The Dominion Post [stuff.co.nz], (among others) and Wellington's really where the major LOTR action has been in New Zealand, especially since it's where Peter Jackson lives.

    Check out this cool map [stuff.co.nz] :-)

  • How come Grauman's Chinese Theatre is not showing? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by antdude ( 79039 ) on Sunday December 15, 2002 @05:01AM (#4891063) Homepage Journal
    Does anyone know why the famous Grauman's Chinese Theatre [digitalcity.com] (aka Mann's Chinese), in Hollywood, CA, is not showing LOTR movie? Same thing happened with the last movie. Yet, it is currently showing Star Trek: Nemesis. The theatre did show last two Star Wars movies. This theater is a perfect place for LOTR movies and big revenues. This calendar of events [moviefone.com] does not show this movie listed. :(

    • Most likely it's just a business matter between the companies involved. Mann Theatres owns the Chinese, and the Mann Village theater in Westwood (just off-campus from UCLA), and TTT will be showing there. Maybe they figured that Nemesis would be a big enough draw to justify having it at the Chinese this week, since their other big-ticket theater (the Village) would have TTT. (They were wrong; Nemesis did poorly this weekend, but if you could predict that in advance, you'd be smarter than every other person who ever worked in the entertainment industry...)

      So it did poorly; why not dump it for TTT? Alas, the contracts between theaters and studios usually require that first-run movies show for two to four weeks minimum, and that commitment is usually made several weeks, if not months, in advance. Nemesis opened on Friday; there's no way it could be bumped for TTT by the following Wednesday, no matter how poorly it did.

      Granted, it would be a great experience to see it there, but I personally prefer the Village. (The sound is louder, for one thing. :))

  • I have been a great fan of LOTR since the first American release of the books in the 60's; my wife actually has the first edition - she had it imported from England when she was a teenager after reading WH Auden's original review.

    We had both thought that doing justice to this on film was impossible and were viewing the Peter Jackson effort as likely to be a great flop.

    How glad we are that we were wrong. These films are magnificent and capture the greatest story of the 20th century. We have watched FOTR several times now, and are amazed how well it has held up.

    I cannot wait until we can put all 3 films on a dvd changer and let them run consecutively.

  • My girlfriend worked at the LOTR exhibit in Toronto.
    I'll be seeing the movie on Monday.

    Bwahahahahaha!
    I'll probably post to stories on Tuesday to ruin the movie for you all.
  • I've already seen The Two Towers as part of a special screening for Electronic Arts employees. I submitted the following review to /., but it was rejected:

    Two words: Fucking awesome.

    • I've also saw it at the avant-première in Paris last tuesday and two words :
      too long !

      And can anyone tell me why they didn't choose to put a resumé of the first movie, I mean I've seen the first one but the movie opens directly with the last shot of the first movie (hobits walking in the snow..) and it's was diffiult to "get in" (don't know the english expression) the movie without a quick intro on what was going on just before.

      Otherwise the party was really great... just in front of the eiffel tower, nice dj's, nice girls (liv I love you) and free champagne and fois gras till 6 in the morning !

  • Brazilian Line Parties (Score:3, Informative)

    by Nasheer ( 179086 ) on Sunday December 15, 2002 @02:34PM (#4892933) Journal
    And if there are any Brazilian Tolkien fans who read ./, don't forget to have a look at the scheduled Line Parties for Brazil [theonering.net].

    And going farther, if there is any Tolkien Fan who reads /. AND lives in Recife, I'll see you at the Multiplex Tacaruna [theonering.net] Line Party. For the ones who live in the South Zone, there is one party at the Multiplex Recife [theonering.net].

    I'll be there dressed as a Dark Night (No, this is not a joke. I did the same Jan, 1st, in the release of Fellowship Of the Ring.)

  • Sauron watches YOU !

Slashdot Top Deals

"How to make a million dollars: First, get a million dollars." -- Steve Martin

Close