From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V13 #84 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Friday, March 19 2004 Volume 13 : Number 084 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: for the lolly haters ["Eugene Hopstetter, Jr." ] Re: rrrrvvvrr-rrrvvvrrr-rrrrrvvrrr-vvmmp ["Eugene Hopstetter, Jr." ] reap [Eb ] Re: The Thes ["Fortissimo" ] Re: The Thes [Miles Goosens ] I FINALLY saw Return of the King... (40% mild spoilers, 110% geekiness) [] Re: I FINALLY saw Return of the King... (40% mild spoilers, 110% geekiness) ["Fortissimo" ] Myths and Legends of a Palantir Arriving to Late to Save a Drowning War Pig [The Great Quail ] Re: I FINALLY saw Return of the King... (40% mild spoilers, 110% geekiness) ["Jonathan Fetter" Subject: Re: for the lolly haters > From: "Fortissimo" > I JUST HATE FUCKING SUNSHINE AND GODDAMNED LOLLIPOPS!!! (4.1MB, SFW) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 16:30:11 -0600 From: "Eugene Hopstetter, Jr." Subject: Re: rrrrvvvrr-rrrvvvrrr-rrrrrvvrrr-vvmmp > From: "Fortissimo" > > Although that might just spur the dreaded Let's Talk In Too Much Detail > About Our Sex Lives thread that we suffered through, what, a year or so > back (or was that on another list?). Ahem. And who was the one, who proclaimed loudly, and without provocation recently, that "I like my oatmeal lumpy"? That's oversharing, if you ask me. I'm sure you also "once got busy in a Burger King bathroom," too. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 12:32:54 +1300 From: grutness@surf4nix.com Subject: way down south/overlooking films/another band name > > *my contribution to James's CARE** package: a disc of his own demos, > > transcontinentally digitized from cassette, so, see how that works? > > > > ** Why is that always written like an acronym when as far as I can tell > > it refers to absolutely nothing but a package that shows that you... > > care? > >I dunno...but the one that mystifies me is when people write it "FAX" in >all-caps. The word's short for "facsimile" - so "fax" is just fine, thank >you. > > me earlier: > >> the phrase 'blown away' comes to mind, actually, as does 'completely > >> gobsmacked'. To all of you who gave things to Marc to pass on to me, > >> a very very hearty thank you. I was thoroughly overwhelmed as Marc > >> brought out item after item - a squeaky crab, CDs, t-shirt, flag, scarf... > > > > and of course I forgot the prized signed copy of BSDR... I was bound > > to forget something. > >Um, DVD? Helloooooo? so many discs... I'd thought they were all audio... DVD...?! So much stuff... thank you all! >I always thought that FAX was FA International Airport. > > Yet *I* was hoping to spur a discussion about a provocative, overlooked > > film. > >But how can we discuss something we've overlooked? depends whetehr you mean overlooked or overlooked. One of those wonderful words like cleave and impregnable that means its own opposite. >Eb, a bit peeved because he forgot to tape "A Woman of Paris" on TCM >last night talking of TCM... is someone still collecting great ideas for band names? I caught ten minutes of a movie on TCM recently that had the perfect band name as a title: Hoodlum Priest. James - -- James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.- =-.-=-.-=-.- You talk to me as if from a distance .-=-.-=-.-=-. -=-. And I reply with impressions chosen from another time .-=- .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- (Brian Eno - "By this River") -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 12:33:06 +1300 From: grutness@surf4nix.com Subject: Re: on or in? > > well, we do live in houses built into hillsides with big round doors > > and... seriously though, do you live on Germany? Does Mike live on Great > > Britain? One of the easiest ways (other than accent) to tell whether > > someone is a NZer is if they talk about being "on the South Island" (or > > "on the North Island" for that matter). Worse still, if they say they're > > "on South Island"). > >Hmm, I think it's the article that makes it so weird. If it were "in South >Island" it would make sense to me (just a proper name, not to be parsed) >... of course there are other places that carry an article - "the United >States", "the Netherlands", but they are the exception. Whatever. > >BTW, German is undergoing a change right now. In addition to "die USA" and >"die Niederlande" (as in English) it used to be "der Iran", "der Irak", >"der Libanon" and so forth for quite a few countries. I don't know why, but >that's how it was. Recently the media have begun to drop the article. I >think it started with papers saving space in their headlines, but now it's >also used in spoken language. That bugs the hell out of me! a weird one is a Russian one. "Ukraine" literally means "the border country" or "the edge". So you might be in Russia, or in Estonia, or in Latvia, but you're "na Ukrainye" - on the border country. >Generally "on" would seem to relate to a physical place surrounded by >water, whereas "in" is the more psychological concept of a country (or >county or state). I have no idea of the political divisions of NZ - are >South and North Island two "provinces"? infodump follows: >Or does it divide by super 12 team? heh. Not so far from the truth these days... Originally NZ was divided into three provinces, two for the NI and one for the SI. Traditionally we still think of the 13 or so provinces that had their own parliaments in the 1880s or thereabouts (the SI has Southland, Otago, Canterbury, Westland, Marlborough, and Nelson; the NI has Wellington, Taranaki, Hawkes Bay, Gisborne, Waikato, Auckland, and Northland). But they're provinces in name only these days, with no parliaments of their own. I think the "on/in" argument depends largely on size. NZ's two main islands are large enough to have continental climate inland, and to have places that are several hours drive from a coast at open road speed - a day or more from the coast by horse (which would have been in use at the time when the "on/in" linguistic development occurred). If you live on an island large enough for that, you stop thinking of it as a lump of rock surrounded by water, and regard it in the same way as people regard a continent - you don't talk of people living on Africa, or even (thinking of large islands) of people living on Borneo, despite the fact that this is not a political unit but an island. James - -- James Dignan, Dunedin, New Zealand -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.-=-.- =-.-=-.-=-.- You talk to me as if from a distance .-=-.-=-.-=-. -=-. And I reply with impressions chosen from another time .-=- .-=-.-=-.-=-.-=- (Brian Eno - "By this River") -.-=-.-=-.-=-.-= ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 16:02:15 -0800 From: "Rex.Broome" Subject: RE: fegmaniax-digest V13 #83 Sebastian: >>... of course there are other places that carry an article - "the United >>States", "the Netherlands", but they are the exception. Whatever. The one that gets me is The Hague. The US and the Netherlands are variations on "The Kingdom/Land/Confederacy of Whatever", but what did The Hague do to earn its article? I mean, The City of the Hague, sure. But you never get to go to The Chicago, or even The Amsterdam, keeping it in the neighborhood... Tom: >>I thought Greta was a Quail invention... Me too. At least one of them is still around to confirm or deny. Not that either would tip their hats... nor would we want them to... - -Rex ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 18:57:28 -0800 From: Elizabeth Brion Subject: Re: Fegs qua fegs (just sounds cool) On Wednesday, March 17, 2004, at 02:45 PM, Sebastian Hagedorn wrote: > -- "Rex.Broome" is rumored to have > mumbled on Mittwoch, 17. Mdrz 2004 10:25 Uhr -0800 regarding Fegs qua > fegs (just sounds cool): > >> Nat: >>>> A bittersweet moment... James has lost his title of The Feg That No >>>> Other Feg Has Met. Who now can replace him?? >> >> Fric? Greta Swann? Any number of other feg-fic personas, falling >> under >> the umbras "The Fegs Who Invented Themselves"? As far as I can remember, I've never met a Feg or if I have, I wasn't thinking of them in that context at the time. I don't even have a good excuse like living in New Zealand or being a fictional persona (I've probably been in the same room with many of you once or twice). Although now I really want a fake persona, even though I hardly have time to keep up as myself. Steve forwarded: > I now have the second in a series of 6 shows available for download on > my Embrionic list web page: > > http://www.gregingber.com/embrionic.html Thanks for this, Steve... although I'm not sure how well they hold up as isolated listening experiences, I have very fond memories of both of these shows. For the record, the show listed as 1999, date unknown, does have a Robyn monologue in it. Or part of one, at any rate - I seem to remember it going on quite a bit longer than that in person, but the recording gets pretty chopped up toward the end there. Elizabeth ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 22:59:23 -0600 From: "Fortissimo" Subject: The Thes On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 16:02:15 -0800, "Rex.Broome" said: > The one that gets me is The Hague. The US and the Netherlands are > variations on "The Kingdom/Land/Confederacy of Whatever", but what did > The Hague do to earn its article? It's an honorific: there were several Hagues, and they had a tournament to determine which one would get rights to call itself "The Hague." Same thing with The Bronx - although there are allegations of under-the-table payoffs to certain tough guys who didn't want it bruited about that they were from The Queens. - ------------------------------- ...Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ :: Miracles are like meatballs, because nobody can exactly agree :: what they are made of, where they come from, or how often :: they should appear. :: --Lemony Snicket ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 21:12:15 -0800 From: Eb Subject: reap J.J. Jackson, Original MTV 'VJ,' Dies By ALEX VEIGA, Associated Press Writer LOS ANGELES - John 'J.J.' Jackson, who in the 1980s helped usher in the music video era as one of the first MTV on-air personalities, has died. He was 62. Jackson, a longtime radio station disc jockey, died of an apparent heart attack Wednesday while driving home from dinner in Los Angeles, friends and radio industry colleagues said Thursday. "I talked to him like two days ago. J.J. was in a great place," said Mark Goodman, a longtime friend who also worked with Jackson as a 'VJ' when MTV launched in 1981. "It's incredible, so incredibly sad it happened like this." In a statement, MTV said Jackson's love of music and good humor helped set the tone for the cable music network in its formative years. "He was a big part of the channel's success and we are sure he is in the music section of heaven, with lots of his friends and heroes," the statement said. "He will be greatly missed." Jackson's career in broadcasting began in radio. He first gained prominence while working at WBCN in Boston in the late 1960s, then moved in 1971 to Los Angeles where he took on the afternoon radio slot at KLOS. In the late '70s, he worked as a music reporter for KABC-TV, then it was off to New York and MTV, where his musical knowledge, hewn over years in radio, helped ease his transition to a new format for music, Goodman said. "It was a great experience for him. He came in already knowing and being successful," Goodman said. "We were all thrust into the spotlight and he was able to take the things that happened at MTV with stride." After five years at MTV, Jackson returned to radio in Los Angeles, including a stint hosting a nationally syndicated show on the Westwood One Radio Network. Most recently, he was hosting an afternoon slot at Los Angeles' KTWV. "All of us at The Wave (KTWV) are saddened by the news about J.J.," said Samantha Wiedmann, assistant program director for KTWV. "He was a warm, kind person whose track record in the industry speaks for itself." Goodman said Jackson had been divorced for some time. He had a daughter and two grandchildren in the Bahamas, Goodman said. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 23:21:15 -0600 From: "Fortissimo" Subject: Re: The Thes > On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 16:02:15 -0800, "Rex.Broome" > said: > > > The one that gets me is The Hague. The US and the Netherlands are > > variations on "The Kingdom/Land/Confederacy of Whatever", Wasn't "The Confederacy of Whatever" one of those second-tier grunge bands? - ------------------------------- ...Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ :: crumple zones:: :: harmful or fatal if swallowed :: :: small-craft warning :: ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 00:20:35 -0600 (GMT-06:00) From: Miles Goosens Subject: Re: The Thes Jeff: >Wasn't "The Confederacy of Whatever" one of those second-tier grunge >bands? More recent than that - the Tupelo, MS, sextet, one of the emerging "new Southern rock" bands (i.e., Drive-By Truckers, Kings of Leon, Legendary Shack Shakers), had been playing around southern college towns as "Neck Gristle" since 1997, adding a sonic layer of bacon fat and grits to the sounds of the post-grunge milieu. However, the principal songwrters of Neck Gristle, guitarist/vocalists Chester "Bunghole" MacIntyre and Julius C. "Kudzu" Taliafero, became incened upon hearing Liam Lynch's "United States of Whatever." Rejecting Lynch's worldview as exclusionary of slackers below the Mason-Dixon line, Bunghole and Kudzu polished off two bottles of Maker's Mark one fell evening after the Mississippi-Mississippi State game, and over the course of that 25 minutes of furious drinking wrote the answer song whose title would become their new moniker. Look for the Confederacy of Whatever at a Clear Channel Shed near you this summer, where they will be appearing as the opening act of the Guns And Ammo "Triple Dixie" Tour, sharing the bill with Hank Williams Jr. and Lynyrd Skynyrd. later, Miles ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 00:28:33 -0800 From: "Natalie Jane" Subject: I FINALLY saw Return of the King... (40% mild spoilers, 110% geekiness) A brief review before I rest and dream of hobbits... Return of the King is, without a doubt, one of the coolest movies I have ever seen. Not the BEST, by a long shot (I'd have to give that title to Fargo or The Royal Tenenbaums), but... the elephants, man, the ELEPHANTS!! As a massive, massive Tolkien geek (I've even read The Silmarillion, and enjoyed it!), I had a lot of quibbles with the way they adapted the story - they overloaded the film with too many bits that should've gone in the previous two movies, such as the Shelob episode and the stuff about Aragorn's sword, which was supposed to go way back at the very beginning. I've run out of rat's asses, so I didn't have one to spare about the whole Aragorn/Arwen love story. The alterations to Frodo and Sam's story makes Sam almost impossibly and ridiculously heroic... to the point of being a sucker for punishment. Also, what the fuck happened to Saruman? He just dropped out of the story... in the book he comes back and is all evil and shit... But there was so much awesome detail - particularly the welts around Frodo's neck from carrying the Ring - and the battles, and the special effects, and the ELEPHANTS -!!!! And lots of cute hobbit action! I'm blown away. On a side note, I was vaguely bummed by the previews, as I often am... unfortunately the success of LOTR seems to have provided yet further excuse for a slew of bombastic special-effects-driven movies which excited my inner geek initially but then all started to run together into one giant CGI/explosion-laden blur. ROTK is the last movie of this type I need to see for a while, I think... next up will probably be Lost in Translation (another movie I've been putting off seeing) or Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind... and I still need to rent School of Rock so I can watch the Jim O'Rourke interview in the extra footage! Whoo! Speaking of Jimbo - Gene, put down the copy of Insignificance and back away slowly. Jim O'Rourke will destroy your bank account and possibly your sanity. He has turned me into the trembling wreck you see today... haunting the Forced Exposure catalogue with drool trickling down my chin... obsessively listening to the dentist drill noises in Gastr del Sol's "Our Exquisite Replica of 'Eternity'"... it's a dark road, Gene. Don't go there. n. _________________________________________________________________ MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page  FREE download! http://clk.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200413ave/direct/01/ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 07:22:12 -0600 From: "Fortissimo" Subject: Re: I FINALLY saw Return of the King... (40% mild spoilers, 110% geekiness) On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 00:28:33 -0800, "Natalie Jane" said: > sucker for punishment. Also, what the fuck happened to Saruman? Do you mean Frank Zappa dressed up as Rick Wakeman? - ------------------------------- ...Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ :: Some days, you just can't get rid of a bomb :: --Batman ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 09:08:24 -0600 From: steve Subject: Re: I FINALLY saw Return of the King... (40% mild spoilers, 110% geekiness) On Mar 19, 2004, at 2:28 AM, Natalie Jane wrote: > Also, what the fuck happened to Saruman? He just dropped out of the > story... in the book he comes back and is all evil and shit... Saruman lost out to running time. He'll be back in the special edition DVD set. > On a side note, I was vaguely bummed by the previews, as I often am... > unfortunately the success of LOTR seems to have provided yet further > excuse for a slew of bombastic special-effects-driven movies which > excited my inner geek initially but then all started to run together > into one giant CGI/explosion-laden blur. It's summer movie time again, with Scooby-Doo 2 edging out Hellboy. The Chronicles of Riddick is the one I'm interested in. How can you not like a film with design that looks like Warhammer 40K meets Lynch's Dune. - - Steve - ---------- This big deal about Bush landing on an aircraft carrier? Talk about a 6-year-old kid with a Tonka toy -- we got it here. - Neil Young ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 09:10:32 -0600 From: Marcy Tanter Subject: Elliot Smith--suicide or not? http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/fridayreview/story/0,12102,1172275,00.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 10:21:36 -0500 From: The Great Quail Subject: Myths and Legends of a Palantir Arriving to Late to Save a Drowning War Pig >> sucker for punishment. Also, what the fuck happened to Saruman? > > Do you mean Frank Zappa dressed up as Rick Wakeman? Jeff! Oh my God! That's almost exactly what I thought, too -- Frank Zappa dressed up as Rick Wakeman and playing in early Black Sabbath! In no way is this a criticism. The cut scenes with Saruman will be added back in for the extended version. - --Quail ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 08:35:01 -0700 From: "Cadtharsis" Subject: Re: fegmaniax-digest V13 #83 Sebastian hat gesagt daB: > BTW, German is undergoing a change right now. > In addition to "die USA" ..... media have begun to drop the article. > That bugs the hell out of me! > > Cheers, Sebastian > - -- > Sebastian Hagedorn PGP key ID: 0x4D105B45 > http://www.spinfo.uni-koeln.de/~hgd/ I wholeheartedly empathize; however I think the Germans commonly having "die USA" in print would be taken as a sign of blatant hostility by our current administration. - - Bill ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 11:07:29 -0500 (EST) From: "Jonathan Fetter" Subject: Re: I FINALLY saw Return of the King... (40% mild spoilers, 110% geekiness) > As a massive, massive Tolkien geek (I've even read The Silmarillion, and > enjoyed it!), I had a lot of quibbles with the way they adapted the story - > they overloaded the film with too many bits that should've gone in the > previous two movies, such as the Shelob episode and the stuff about > Aragorn's sword, which was supposed to go way back at the very beginning. > I've run out of rat's asses, so I didn't have one to spare about the whole > Aragorn/Arwen love story. The alterations to Frodo and Sam's story makes > Sam almost impossibly and ridiculously heroic... to the point of being a > sucker for punishment. Also, what the fuck happened to Saruman? He just > dropped out of the story... in the book he comes back and is all evil and > shit... I think Aragron should have apologized to Rohan for arriving late to Minas Tirith with an invincible army of the undead that swept all before them thus making all of the preceding battle, apart from the killing of the Lord of the Nozdrul, pointless. I hope the extended DVD will round out some of the rough story edges. > But there was so much awesome detail - particularly the welts around Frodo's > neck from carrying the Ring - and the battles, and the special effects, and > the ELEPHANTS -!!!! And lots of cute hobbit action! I'm blown away. But as a geek, one misses small details that didn't get included. In ROTK, I always liked that a rooster crowed to signal the return of daylight right before Rohan starts blowing their horns on the Pelennor Fields. Or that Legolas could "convince" his horse to enter the paths of the dead. (I suppose Aragon, L and G rode undead horses the many leagues to capture the Corsair ships, or ran really fast). I don't miss the sons of Elrond or Prince Imrahil, however. >one giant > CGI/explosion-laden blur. "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow." I guess its going to be a comedy, cause several people were laughing at the preview. Jon ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 11:07:30 -0500 (EST) From: "Jonathan Fetter" Subject: Re: I FINALLY saw Return of the King... (40% mild spoilers, 110% geekiness) > As a massive, massive Tolkien geek (I've even read The Silmarillion, and > enjoyed it!), I had a lot of quibbles with the way they adapted the story - > they overloaded the film with too many bits that should've gone in the > previous two movies, such as the Shelob episode and the stuff about > Aragorn's sword, which was supposed to go way back at the very beginning. > I've run out of rat's asses, so I didn't have one to spare about the whole > Aragorn/Arwen love story. The alterations to Frodo and Sam's story makes > Sam almost impossibly and ridiculously heroic... to the point of being a > sucker for punishment. Also, what the fuck happened to Saruman? He just > dropped out of the story... in the book he comes back and is all evil and > shit... I think Aragron should have apologized to Rohan for arriving late to Minas Tirith with an invincible army of the undead that swept all before them thus making all of the preceding battle, apart from the killing of the Lord of the Nozdrul, pointless. I hope the extended DVD will round out some of the rough story edges. > But there was so much awesome detail - particularly the welts around Frodo's > neck from carrying the Ring - and the battles, and the special effects, and > the ELEPHANTS -!!!! And lots of cute hobbit action! I'm blown away. But as a geek, one misses small details that didn't get included. In ROTK, I always liked that a rooster crowed to signal the return of daylight right before Rohan starts blowing their horns on the Pelennor Fields. Or that Legolas could "convince" his horse to enter the paths of the dead. (I suppose Aragon, L and G rode undead horses the many leagues to capture the Corsair ships, or ran really fast). I don't miss the sons of Elrond or Prince Imrahil, however. >one giant > CGI/explosion-laden blur. "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow." I guess its going to be a comedy, cause several people were laughing at the preview. Jon ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 11:07:33 -0500 (EST) From: "Jonathan Fetter" Subject: Re: I FINALLY saw Return of the King... (40% mild spoilers, 110% geekiness) > As a massive, massive Tolkien geek (I've even read The Silmarillion, and > enjoyed it!), I had a lot of quibbles with the way they adapted the story - > they overloaded the film with too many bits that should've gone in the > previous two movies, such as the Shelob episode and the stuff about > Aragorn's sword, which was supposed to go way back at the very beginning. > I've run out of rat's asses, so I didn't have one to spare about the whole > Aragorn/Arwen love story. The alterations to Frodo and Sam's story makes > Sam almost impossibly and ridiculously heroic... to the point of being a > sucker for punishment. Also, what the fuck happened to Saruman? He just > dropped out of the story... in the book he comes back and is all evil and > shit... I think Aragron should have apologized to Rohan for arriving late to Minas Tirith with an invincible army of the undead that swept all before them thus making all of the preceding battle, apart from the killing of the Lord of the Nozdrul, pointless. I hope the extended DVD will round out some of the rough story edges. > But there was so much awesome detail - particularly the welts around Frodo's > neck from carrying the Ring - and the battles, and the special effects, and > the ELEPHANTS -!!!! And lots of cute hobbit action! I'm blown away. But as a geek, one misses small details that didn't get included. In ROTK, I always liked that a rooster crowed to signal the return of daylight right before Rohan starts blowing their horns on the Pelennor Fields. Or that Legolas could "convince" his horse to enter the paths of the dead. (I suppose Aragon, L and G rode undead horses the many leagues to capture the Corsair ships, or ran really fast). I don't miss the sons of Elrond or Prince Imrahil, however. >one giant > CGI/explosion-laden blur. "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow." I guess its going to be a comedy, cause several people were laughing at the preview. Jon ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 11:07:32 -0500 (EST) From: "Jonathan Fetter" Subject: Re: I FINALLY saw Return of the King... (40% mild spoilers, 110% geekiness) > As a massive, massive Tolkien geek (I've even read The Silmarillion, and > enjoyed it!), I had a lot of quibbles with the way they adapted the story - > they overloaded the film with too many bits that should've gone in the > previous two movies, such as the Shelob episode and the stuff about > Aragorn's sword, which was supposed to go way back at the very beginning. > I've run out of rat's asses, so I didn't have one to spare about the whole > Aragorn/Arwen love story. The alterations to Frodo and Sam's story makes > Sam almost impossibly and ridiculously heroic... to the point of being a > sucker for punishment. Also, what the fuck happened to Saruman? He just > dropped out of the story... in the book he comes back and is all evil and > shit... I think Aragron should have apologized to Rohan for arriving late to Minas Tirith with an invincible army of the undead that swept all before them thus making all of the preceding battle, apart from the killing of the Lord of the Nozdrul, pointless. I hope the extended DVD will round out some of the rough story edges. > But there was so much awesome detail - particularly the welts around Frodo's > neck from carrying the Ring - and the battles, and the special effects, and > the ELEPHANTS -!!!! And lots of cute hobbit action! I'm blown away. But as a geek, one misses small details that didn't get included. In ROTK, I always liked that a rooster crowed to signal the return of daylight right before Rohan starts blowing their horns on the Pelennor Fields. Or that Legolas could "convince" his horse to enter the paths of the dead. (I suppose Aragon, L and G rode undead horses the many leagues to capture the Corsair ships, or ran really fast). I don't miss the sons of Elrond or Prince Imrahil, however. >one giant > CGI/explosion-laden blur. "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow." I guess its going to be a comedy, cause several people were laughing at the preview. Jon ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 11:07:28 -0500 (EST) From: "Jonathan Fetter" Subject: Re: I FINALLY saw Return of the King... (40% mild spoilers, 110% geekiness) > As a massive, massive Tolkien geek (I've even read The Silmarillion, and > enjoyed it!), I had a lot of quibbles with the way they adapted the story - > they overloaded the film with too many bits that should've gone in the > previous two movies, such as the Shelob episode and the stuff about > Aragorn's sword, which was supposed to go way back at the very beginning. > I've run out of rat's asses, so I didn't have one to spare about the whole > Aragorn/Arwen love story. The alterations to Frodo and Sam's story makes > Sam almost impossibly and ridiculously heroic... to the point of being a > sucker for punishment. Also, what the fuck happened to Saruman? He just > dropped out of the story... in the book he comes back and is all evil and > shit... I think Aragron should have apologized to Rohan for arriving late to Minas Tirith with an invincible army of the undead that swept all before them thus making all of the preceding battle, apart from the killing of the Lord of the Nozdrul, pointless. I hope the extended DVD will round out some of the rough story edges. > But there was so much awesome detail - particularly the welts around Frodo's > neck from carrying the Ring - and the battles, and the special effects, and > the ELEPHANTS -!!!! And lots of cute hobbit action! I'm blown away. But as a geek, one misses small details that didn't get included. In ROTK, I always liked that a rooster crowed to signal the return of daylight right before Rohan starts blowing their horns on the Pelennor Fields. Or that Legolas could "convince" his horse to enter the paths of the dead. (I suppose Aragon, L and G rode undead horses the many leagues to capture the Corsair ships, or ran really fast). I don't miss the sons of Elrond or Prince Imrahil, however. >one giant > CGI/explosion-laden blur. "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow." I guess its going to be a comedy, cause several people were laughing at the preview. Jon ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V13 #84 *******************************