JoeLassister Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 John Rhys-Davis lent his voice to Treebeard. What they did was they made him change the way he talks. Usually you talk as you exhale - Rhys-Davis was told to talk as he inhaled. That's the trick. I was never a huge fan of Tom Bombadill. The way he acted was too annoying. The little detour doesn't really change anything in the overall story, so I can see why you'd cut it from a movie. Ralph Bakshi (sp?) did the same thing in his animated LOTR movie way back. I also have a radio play version, same thing there. Bombadill got the axe. That said, I have always wondered what he'd look like. would have been fun to see him in the first meeting of the fellowship, maybe just a litle flashback or something. Remember in the book, they say Bombadill would be the only one who could handle the ring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsniper Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 John Rhys-Davis lent his voice to Treebeard. What they did was they made him change the way he talks. Usually you talk as you exhale - Rhys-Davis was told to talk as he inhaled. That's the trick. Thats it? Wow, it really sounds like theres some kind of digital enhancement over his voice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Kosmos Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 Thats it? Wow, it really sounds like theres some kind of digital enhancement over his voice. Well, maybe a little. But the main gimmick is the trick I posted. At least according to the bonus material on the extended DVD version of The Two Towers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Kosmos Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 would have been fun to see him in the first meeting of the fellowship, maybe just a litle flashback or something. Remember in the book, they say Bombadill would be the only one who could handle the ring. Oh yes, I remember that. But they also said that he is too absent-minded to be trusted with the task of safe-guarding the Ring. While the Ring seems to have no power over him, he also has no interest in the Ring. Since it is of no importance to him, he'd only forget about it. The Council also says that hiding the Ring is no permanent solution, only a temporary one. THat's basically why the Fellowship sets out for Mordor in the first place - they need to rid Middle Earth of the threat of Sauron once and for all. In order to do that they have to destroy the Ring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 Oh yes, I remember that. But they also said that he is too absent-minded to be trusted with the task of safe-guarding the Ring. While the Ring seems to have no power over him, he also has no interest in the Ring. Since it is of no importance to him, he'd only forget about it. The Council also says that hiding the Ring is no permanent solution, only a temporary one. THat's basically why the Fellowship sets out for Mordor in the first place - they need to rid Middle Earth of the threat of Sauron once and for all. In order to do that they have to destroy the Ring. true. remains that mention of him by the council and a litle 7 sec of Bombaldill (Steve Buschemi or someone crazy like that) would have been awesome Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Kosmos Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 (edited) The problem is that if you cut out the parts with the Old Forest and Bombaill's cabin and the barrow-downs, none of those who have not read the books would get anything out of a flashback like that. It'd be just another name of a character that doesn't play even a small part in the movie as a whole. Steve Buscemi, eh? I always thought of Tom Bombadill as a Robin Williams type of character. Edited June 22, 2007 by Doktor Kosmos Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 Oh yes, I remember that. But they also said that he is too absent-minded to be trusted with the task of safe-guarding the Ring. While the Ring seems to have no power over him, he also has no interest in the Ring. Since it is of no importance to him, he'd only forget about it. The Council also says that hiding the Ring is no permanent solution, only a temporary one. That's basically why the Fellowship sets out for Mordor in the first place - they need to rid Middle Earth of the threat of Sauron once and for all. In order to do that they have to destroy the Ring. Haha, my favourite chapter in the series, The Council of Elrond. So many great quotes in it! I'm still interested in Bombadil though as he seems to be the most powerful being (clearly not a man) in Middle-Earth yet doesn't have a care in the world and just stays in his tiny forest picking flowers for his wife. I've never read The Adventures of Tom Bombadil but I'm sure it tells you about how "he was first and he will be last." One controversy in the trilogy is that both Bombadil and Treebeard are called as the "first" who ever lived. Both claim to have been on Middle-Earth long before anything else. I don't believe Tolkien ever set that straight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Kosmos Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 Yes, I have thought about that too. I don't think it is an all too important question though. Judging by what I've read in Silmarillion, neither Bombadill nor Treebeard are the first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 Yes, I have thought about that too. I don't think it is an all too important question though. Judging by what I've read in Silmarillion, neither Bombadill nor Treebeard are the first. I read The Silmarillion too but I don't remember much but I think they mention Bombadil as being one of the first men, before even Gandalf and the others (I can't remember what they're called) were sent to Middle-Earth. I watched 2001: A Space Odyssey this morning. I'm sure it's a great movie but my attention span is WAY too short. I've never been so bored watching a movie before, I actually got a big boost of energy and excitement when it finally ended. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 The problem is that if you cut out the parts with the Old Forest and Bombaill's cabin and the barrow-downs, none of those who have not read the books would get anything out of a flashback like that. It'd be just another name of a character that doesn't play even a small part in the movie as a whole. Steve Buscemi, eh? I always thought of Tom Bombadill as a Robin Williams type of character. True Williams is as crazy as Buscemi for this role. I call Robin Williams a "real one" along with Roberto Benigni, Johny Depp, Juliette Lewis, Meryl Streep, Jack Nicholson, etc. Those who can play any character and make it real !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark_faerie87 Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 I watched Robin Hood: Men in Tights for the first time. Oh god, that was freakin' hilarious! "Robin is gonna be dead. D-E-D. Dead." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Kosmos Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 I read The Silmarillion too but I don't remember much but I think they mention Bombadil as being one of the first men, before even Gandalf and the others (I can't remember what they're called) were sent to Middle-Earth. I don't recall there being any mention of Bombadill at all. And Gandalf didn't appear until the end of the Second Age or the beginning of the Third Age. If memory serves me right that is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 I watched Robin Hood: Men in Tights for the first time. Oh god, that was freakin' hilarious! "Robin is gonna be dead. D-E-D. Dead." You should watch more Mel Brook smovies. They're all hilarious. My favourite is Young Frankenstein, followed by Space Balls. Blazing Saddles is a good one too. I don't recall there being any mention of Bombadill at all. And Gandalf didn't appear until the end of the Second Age or the beginning of the Third Age. If memory serves me right that is. Could be - I read it two years ago so I don't remember all that much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Kosmos Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Mel Brooks is great. I even liked Life stinks. His Dracula movie was pretty bad though. But I would definitely recommend all the rest. Spaceballs, Blazing Saddles, Young Frankenstein - great movies! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Yeah I own Life Stinks and I like it but it doesn't compare to those 3 or Robin Hood: Men in Tights. I can't remember if I've ever seen History of the World but I know I haven't seen Dracula - I want to find it. Oh I liked the Producers by him (I preferred the remake to the original). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsniper Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 I can never seem to get into Young Frankenstein, it was on AMC yesterday and I tried watching it yet again. It just bores me, kinda like BTH and 2001. Space Balls however is very high on my all-time list. I LOVE that movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Uggh don't get me started on 2001. I dunno if you've ever watched it but jokes aside, no exaggeration whatsoever, the part of the movie that caught my attention the most was the first 20 minutes where's it a bunch of monkeys living in the wilderness (eating, fighting, yelling)... After that it turned into scene after scene of cameras showing what space looks like with NO sound. Sometimes they put classical music in the background which just got me more and more tired. I think there were 5-10 conversations in the entire movie and half of them were with the computer. I don't even know what the plot is. Yet a lot of people consider this the greatest movie of all time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsniper Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Yeah, theres a reason I've never bothered to watch it. Although I don't really like Space movies in general. Space Balls is probably the only exception for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 I watched Robin Hood: Men in Tights for the first time. Oh god, that was freakin' hilarious! "Robin is gonna be dead. D-E-D. Dead." this movie is defenitly in my top 5 Prince Jean (maybe John in english) is so melodramatic hilarious. I don't recall there being any mention of Bombadill at all. And Gandalf didn't appear until the end of the Second Age or the beginning of the Third Age. If memory serves me right that is. same here but i read the book 2 years ago or so... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark_faerie87 Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 You should watch more Mel Brook smovies. They're all hilarious. My favourite is Young Frankenstein, followed by Space Balls. Blazing Saddles is a good one too. Yeah, I've seen a bunch of his. I think Space Balls is probably my favourite. And I agree with Jets about space movies in general sucking ass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Kosmos Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 I think a lot of space movies (2001 included) do not age well. The technology bit makes old space movies look terribly dated. I saw Alien not long ago, and it has aged terribly in the tech department IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 I think a lot of space movies (2001 included) do not age well. The technology bit makes old space movies look terribly dated. I saw Alien not long ago, and it has aged terribly in the tech department IMO. Independance Day is from far my best one ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quebecois Posted June 24, 2007 Share Posted June 24, 2007 Yet a lot of people consider this the greatest movie of all time. Haha, looks like movies might be subjective? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted June 24, 2007 Share Posted June 24, 2007 Haha, looks like movies might be subjective? You still don't understand what I was saying. I don't like the movie but I'm still acknowleding that it's great. That's different than saying all movies are the same and cannot be judged, we can only have our tastes. A good movie is a good movie whether you liked it or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted June 24, 2007 Share Posted June 24, 2007 Not a big Mel Brooks fan. Didn't think much of Blazing Saddles or Young Frankenstein, but History of the World Part I was pretty good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.