Saturday, February 02, 2002
Hall Of Fire Chats For February 2nd & 3rd
- Strider @ 15:52 PST
For some, the Lord of the Rings is a novel about adventure, for others it's a novel about the way people change and develop in character when faced with adversity and for others its simply a book about the struggle between good and evil. And for some it is about the romance between Aragorn and Arwen, a mortal and immortal who shared love in both life and death. This weekend, the Hall of Fire is discussing the extended role of the romance between Aragorn and Arwen in Peter Jackson's Fellowship of the Ring. The romance between Aragorn and Arwen, the adversity and sacrifices faced by both lovers only comes to fruition in the Appendices of the Lord of the Rings, and is not as prominent in the tale of the War of the Ring itself. However, the beauty and sadness of the tale has often had Tolkien fans wishing it was more prominently interwoven into the War of the Ring. As Peter Jackson does not have the luxury of movie-goers reading the Appendices beforehand, he has done exactly that: made their romance more prominent than in the book on the silver screen. Yet in doing so, PJ has had to tinker with the story in places to put the romance up their on the silver screen: if the romance is to be expanded, then the role of Arwen must be similarly expanded also. Also, he has had to use the information found in the Appendices and adapt them to the tale, sometimes having things take place in a different time frame to which they were originally written. In doing so, he has received praise from Tolkien fans with a big heart and hardcore fans who cry outrage for Arwen's expansion. So what do you think? Are you happy with what PJ has done in Fellowship of the Ring to portray the love of a mortal and immortal? Or could he have done it differently? Did the story merit inclusion into the film itself, and was the price of tinkering with Arwen's character so greatly worth it? We want you to ask and answer these questions this weekend as we talk about the great love story of J.R.R Tolkien's epic. Upcoming Discussions: Place: Saturday Chat: 5:30 pm ET (17:30) [also 11:30 pm (23:30) CET and 7:30 am Sunday (07:30) AET] Sunday Chat: 7:00 pm (19:00) CET [also 1:00 pm (13:00) ET and 4:00 am (04:00) Monday morning AET] ET = Eastern Time, USA’s East Coast Questions? Topics? Send ‘em here.
Feb 09 & 10: Elijah Wood as Frodo Baggins
Feb 16 & 17: The Misconcepted 'Errors' in FotR
Feb 23 & 24: The Needed and Wanted on the FotR DVD
#thehalloffire on theonering.net server; come to theonering.net’s chat room Barliman's and then type /join #thehalloffire .
CET = Central European Time, Central Europe
Saturday, January 26, 2002
Hall of Fire Chats for January 26th & 27th
- Strider @ 17:28 PST
For the majority of Lord of the Rings fans, December 19th was the payoff for a wait that spanned almost three years. However in the back of most people's there was an underlying doubt, not over the quality of the film itself but how the average movie-going, non-Tolkien fan would take to the Fellowship of the Ring, a motion picture that tried to cram 1,500 pages of information into three hours. Judging by the success of the film both critically and in the box office, it seems that somehow, by some sort of magic, Peter Jackson managed to pull it off. Or did he? This weekend, the Hall of Fire crew are discussing the Friendliness Of FotR To Non-Fans. For Peter Jackson, one of the biggest challanges was to on the one hand satisfy the hardcore fans on one hand while not alienating casual movie fans on the other. How could he achieve this? Well, it started with cutting down the subject-matter by making some changes to the storyline, most infamous of which was the axing of Tom Bombadil completely from the movie. Also many scenes were edited out to keep the film down to three hours, most noticeable of which was the sequence within Lothlórien. In doing this, PJ walked the fine line between criticism and praise in an attempt to give the film a balance. And the question is, did he achive that balance? Despite these changes, did Peter succeed in making the Fellowship of the Ring more comprehensible to the common man? Or were his attempts badly judged, diminishing the power of the story itself? Is it possible to bring such a book like Lord of the Rings to the silver screen without some of its contents going over non-fans heads? And if so, how would you have gone about the job differently? All these questions and more will be asked this weeked as we focus on the directorial process involved in bringing the Lord of the Rings to life. Place: Saturday Chat: 5:30 pm ET (17:30) [also 11:30 pm (23:30) CET and 7:30 am Sunday (07:30) AET] Sunday Chat: 7:00 pm (19:00) CET [also 1:00 pm (13:00) ET and 4:00 am (04:00) Monday morning AET] ET = Eastern Time, USA’s East Coast Questions? Topics? Send ‘em here.
#thehalloffire on theonering.net server; come to theonering.net’s chat room Barliman's and then type /join #thehalloffire .
CET = Central European Time, Central Europe
AET = Australian Eastern Time, Australia’s East Coast
Saturday, January 12, 2002
Hall of Fire Chats for January 12th & 13th
- Strider @ 14:24 PST
We all knew as soon as production started for Fellowship of the Ring that Peter Jackson would take some liberties with certain characters to help Tolkien's story become more like a cinematic piece; the expansion of Arwen's role, the removal of Tom Bombadil, the reduction of Glorfindel's role, and so on. This weekend, the Hall of Fire staff are discussing one such character who experienced some extra character development: The expansion of Saruman the White Though Sauron is shown to be the ultimate evil in Middle-Earth during the prologue at the beginning of the movie, at times it feels like Saruman, and not Sauron is the most tangeable evil during Fellowship of the Ring. Though Tolkien's Saruman seemed to be an unwitting pawn under Sauron's control, Peter Jackson's portryal of the Istari is more powerful, less a tool of a greater evil but more a rival to that evil itself. This seems more to do with Jackson's expansion of the Saruman character than the acting of Christopher Lee; from the beginning we witness how Saruman turns Isengard and the earth around it into deep pits, dungeons and forges where the instruments of war are forged and tempered. Peter Jackson does well to hint towards the events of the Two Towers when Saruman coldly tells his orcs to 'tear them [trees] down, all of them', yet his re-writing of the creation of the Uruk-Hai in pods and the introduction of the Lurtz character seems to have angered some purist Tolkien fans. The same can be said for the change to the Fellowship's ascent of Caradhras: the fierce conditions that force them to leave the mountain is no longer due to nature and instead is a creation of Saruman. Though it portrays Saruman as a more fiercer and powerful opponent not to be trifled with, some have seen it as an unnescassary change to Tolkien's magical tale. Whatever you believe, we want to hear your thoughts on the subject this weekend! We want to hear your thoughts on Saruman's character, the unfolding of events in the film and how you think things will play out in the Two Towers. From orc pods to blizzards and snow storms to the portrayal of Saruman by Christopher Lee himself, you get your say at one of our discussions which have a brand new time this week. Upcoming Discussions: Place: Saturday Chat: 5:30 pm ET (17:30) [also 11:30 pm (23:30) CET and 7:30 am Sunday (07:30) AET] Sunday Chat: 5:00 pm (17:00) AET [also 07:00 am (08:00) CET and 2:00 am (02:00) ET] Sunday Chat: 7:00 pm (19:00) CET [also 1:00 pm (13:00) ET and 4:00 am (04:00) Monday morning AET] ET = Eastern Time, USA’s East Coast Questions? Topics? Send ‘em here. Tuesday, January 08, 2002 Barlibash 2002... SEATTLE!! Well, folks, the votes are in and tallied. Come July 24th-28th, Ringers shall descend upon Seattle, Washington like some sort of geeky plague! Actually, we probably won't seem terribly geeky, with Microsoft headquarters but fifteen miles from downtown Seattle, but that's beside the point! What, some of you may be asking, IS Barliman's Bash? Well, it's fairly simple. Barliman's Bash is an opportunity to meet up with your fellow Ringers, to get together and talk, goof off, and perhaps see if we can't get a bar to close because they've run out of beer. We had our second annual run last August, and we all had a blast. There was food, fellowship, ale, and a lot of laughter and glowsticks; many of us were asking about the next Bash before we'd even left the first. Trust me, you'll love it! To recap: Barliman's Bash 2002, July 24th-28th in Seattle, Washington. I've not got a hotel selected yet, but hope to by the end of the week. If you have any questions, or if you're interested and would like to be kept up-to-date via email, please send a note to Curunir and let me know. More info will follow very soon! - Curunir Sunday, December 30, 2001 BarliBash 2002 is Coming Soon! Curunir sends this in for all interested folks to read and make their choices known: Greetings, Ringers! After some classes and a bit of a vacation from planning for me, it's time to get the ball rolling for Barliman's Bash 2002. As you might have noticed if you were around last August, we had a fantastic time in Chicago, and can't wait for a repeat performance. We're in the early stages of planning at the moment, and are working to figure out a location that will work for the largest number of people. We're looking at locations on both the Atlantic and Pacific coasts for the next go 'round, and this is where I need your help. In order to figure out which coast will suit the largest number of probable attendees, I need anybody that's both interested and reasonably likely to attend to email Curunir and tell me which coast of the United States you'd prefer to enjoy yourself on. The East coast options are Boston, Massachussetts and Washington, DC. The West coast options are San Francisco, California and Seattle, Washington. You can specify which of those cities you prefer as well - the more information I have, the better. Any other suggestions for cities will be welcome, however the choice will be made based on the majority of votes. The time frame is likely to once again be late July - early August, to accomodate our many students and teachers, in case the weather plays a part in your decision. Thanks for your help, and here's to seeing you this summer! - Curunir Friday, December 28, 2001 Hall of Fire Chats for December 29th & 30th Ten days on, and the world has already seen and accepted Peter Jackson's Fellowship of the Ring and looks hungrily towards this time next year for the Two Towers. As quickly as fans left the cinemas and hit the Net to reveal their thoughts, cries of 'Director's Cut DVD' and '364 days to go' erupted as the Fellowship of the Ring drove Tolkien fan's desire to see the complete Trilogy to new heights. Such is the important of an event like the release of Fellowship of the Ring in the Tolkien fan world (it is one of the things we have been building the last three years of our news site around!), the Hall of Fire staff once again opens its door to a discussion on the Fellowship of the Ring. Not only is it a chance for people who missed it the first time around to share their views, but we can also cover a lot of new ground that we missed the first time around. For instance, we've talked plenty about what went into the film, but have we talked enough about what didn't make the film? A sing along in the Green Dragon Inn, the journey from Bree to Weathertop through the Midget Marshes, the chasing of the Fellowship from Moria to Lothlórien...there's a lot of stuff there that may not see the light of day because of the time constraints. And what about your hopes for the future. After seeing Fellowship of the Ring, are you now optimistic or pessemistic for the Two Towers and the Return of the King? Does the film make you want to rush out to the stores and buy up their stock of Toy Biz figures, buy up Howard Shore's soundtrack? Or for the next few months will you bury your head in the sand and revert back to the literature itself, cursing Peter Jackson's very wingy balrog and his ghostly Galadriel. Whatever it is, if it's got to do with Fellowship of the Ring then we want to discuss it this weekend while we still have a chance. Because in just a few days time, 2001 will be gone and in comes 2002 and with it Peter Jackson's The Two Towers! Place: Saturday Chat: 7:00 pm ET (19:00) [also 12:00 am Sunday (01:00) CET and 10:00 am Sunday (10:00) AET] Sunday Chat: 5:00 pm (17:00) AET [also 07:00 am (08:00) CET and 2:00 am (02:00) ET] Sunday Chat: 7:00 pm (19:00) CET [also 1:00 pm (13:00) ET and 4:00 am (04:00) Monday morning AET] ET = Eastern Time, USA’s East Coast Questions? Topics? Send ‘em here. Friday, December 21, 2001 Hall of Fire Chats for December 22nd & 23rd After three years of waiting, 18 months of shooting, months of post production and several long agonising Decmeber days, the Fellowship of the Ring has finally arrived, and for the majority of those that have witnessed it, it is for them the finest movie they have ever seen. For every five hundred reviews there appears to be one bad one, which in itself speaks volumes about what Peter Jackson has created. This weekend the Hall of Fire finally gets the long-awaited chance to discuss The Fellowship Of The Ring: The Motion Picture. From the beginning to end, the Fellowship of the Ring is a cinematic experience unlike all else, a film that revels in it's own individuality and unique style. The characters we have grown to love from the books seems more real than ever before, and actors like Sir Ian McKellen, Christopher Lee and Viggo Mortensen seem to give the characters a new depth, a new life. Everyone's favourite scenes from the books are there, and the representation of Middle-Earth is simply breathtaking in places, a fantastic advertising for New Zealand itself. However, the film is not perfect. This has been said by many people who have watched, and there are some occasions when a fan of the books may be forced to bite their tongue and grin and bear as they watch Peter Jackson deviate from the books somewhat. Also, the way in which the story jumps from point A and point B and the route it takes to get there has also been to the disappointment of some fans: the cutting down of the film to three hours seems to be one of the main reasons for this. The changes to the portrayal of some other characters has also raised some eyebrows amongst Tolkien fans. There is no doubt that in the most part, the Fellowship of the Ring is a great success for Peter Jackson and all else involved. But what do you think of it? Do you like it/love it/loath it? Did you feel the film strayed too much from the books, and if so was that a good thing or a bad thing? Did every character the get the time they deserved? Was the editing too quick? Did Howard Shore's soundtrack add to the atmosphere of the film, or take away from it? All these questions and more will be answered this weekend as we discuss Peter Jackson's The Fellowship of the Ring! Upcoming Discussions: Place: Saturday Chat: 7:00 pm ET (19:00) [also 12:00 am Sunday (01:00) CET and 10:00 am Sunday (10:00) AET] Sunday Chat: 5:00 pm (17:00) AET [also 07:00 am (08:00) CET and 2:00 am (02:00) ET] Sunday Chat: 7:00 pm (19:00) CET [also 1:00 pm (13:00) ET and 4:00 am (04:00) Monday morning AET] ET = Eastern Time, USA’s East Coast Questions? Topics? Send ‘em here.
Dec 19 & 20: Fellowship of the Ring Complain Session
Dec 26 & 27: The Friendliness Of FotR To Non-Fans
#thehalloffire on theonering.net server; come to theonering.net’s chat room Barliman's and then type /join #thehalloffire .
CET = Central European Time, Central Europe
AET = Australian Eastern Time, Australia’s East Coast
- Jincey @ 20:15 PST
- Jincey @ 23:20 PST
- Strider @ 19:43 PST
#thehalloffire on theonering.net server; come to theonering.net’s chat room Barliman's and then type /join #thehalloffire .
CET = Central European Time, Central Europe
AET = Australian Eastern Time, Australia’s East Coast
- Strider @ 18:39 PST
Dec 29 & 30: Fellowship of the Ring Movie Discussion 2
#thehalloffire on theonering.net server; come to theonering.net’s chat room Barliman's and then type /join #thehalloffire .
CET = Central European Time, Central Europe
AET = Australian Eastern Time, Australia’s East Coast