Newsgroup: it.arti.fantasy
Titolo: [LONG] Questo dovrebbe chiarire i vostri dubbi riguardo il film de ISDA

Here we go ...
1. It seems that a ton of readers are concerned about the physical portrayal
of the main characters within the ‘Fellowship’. Specifically the following:
The use or lack of use of ‘small people’ to accomplish Hobbits, and the
decision to use CGI to shrink folks. Then there is the ‘pointy eared’ elf
thing. Not to mention whatever Gandalf is, how you plan to deliver dwarves.
Basically the question is how do you plan on delivering the different types
that make up the ‘company’? And why you decided to go in that direction, and
is it ‘faithful’ to the look that’s been established by the cartoons,
illustrators, etc?
As everyone has read, we have made a decision to portray hobbits by reducing
"normal" sized actors. This decision was made for several reasons:
1/ It seems to be what Tolkien had in his mind, from the way he described
hobbits.
2/ It gives us the greatest pool of actors to choose from.
3/ The hobbits are our chief heroes, who we must totally connect with over
the course of 3 movies. That ruled out the use of CGI hobbits as I felt any
artificial method of creating a character would be an impediment to our
bonding with them. They would be a gimmick, rather than a real character.
Dwarfs like Gimli will either be a real little person, or a normal height
actor reduced like the hobbits. A decision has yet to be made. Elves will be
actors, but with a certain "Elven" look.
Hobbits, Dwarfs and Elves will probably all have subtle prosthetics, but
these tests have not yet been done. I know that battle rages over pointy
ears. We have yet to decide on the final looks for all these different
races.
I do want to make them "real" ... not too fantasy-like or cartoony. They
must be believable. My favourite illustration of a hobbit is in the edition
of THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING with Alan Lee's illustrations. Look at the
picture of Frodo and Gandalf sitting in Bag End. That's not just a good
guide for how I imagine a hobbit - it's also a good reference for the tone
or atmosphere I'm aiming for in the films.
2. Another major question that fans have had, has to do with the decision to
make “THE LORD OF THE RINGS” prior to “THE HOBBIT”. Describe what made you
decide to go with the trilogy first, what made you step over ‘THE HOBBIT’
and do you think that after your filmic journeys into Middle Earth with this
trilogy, do you think you will want to visit Bilbo and his adventures from
the first book?
United Artists have owned the US distribution rights to THE HOBBIT for many
years (but not the right to actually make it). I know that Miramax
approached UA a couple of years ago about doing some kind of partnership,
but was not successful. That made up Miramax's mind to do THE LORD OF THE
RINGS first.
I am happy to be doing the trilogy first, since it is much more complex and
interesting than THE HOBBIT. THE HOBBIT has a very simple story with very
little character development. It would actually be harder to adapt into a
satisfying movie than THE LORD OF THE RINGS (and that has not been easy!).
New Line Cinema have the right to make THE HOBBIT (UA still owns the
distribution rights), and have every intention of doing it following the
trilogy. I don't know if I would be involved. It depends on my mental
condition in 3 years!
3. There seems to be quite a bit of doubt about ‘only’ having $130 million
to make the trilogy. How do you plan to stretch that money out, while still
giving these films the rich world that Tolkien envisioned? I.E... Cite
examples of enhancing New Zealand locales with CGI, How much practical
effects work vs CGI, and what will you try to do practical and what will you
try to do CGI?
This is a very understandable concern. Let me explain:
Dollar for dollar, New Zealand is a cheaper place to make movies than the
US. A camera that costs US$3000 per week to rent in the States may only cost
NZ$2000 here. Add to that, the exchange rate savings ($US1 = $NZ2) and that
camera in New Zealand only costs $US1000 to rent - a third of the price.
Following me?
It basically means that the $US130m will buy 3 movies that have the screen
value of closer to $350m. It is only this economy that has made THE LORD OF
THE RINGS trilogy affordable. Believe me, nobody in Hollywood would commit
$350m to make 3 movies back-to-back. It would never happen. These books have
been "unfilmable" for 45 years, and would continue to be unfilmable.
But please don't be concerned about the "quality" of these movies. It is
enough money to make 3 mind-blowing films! There will be money on screen to
compare to anything that has ever been made.
4. This one comes from Julian of Sydney... Though he plays a massive
underlying role in the books (he is the Lord of the Rings after all...), the
character of Sauron's appearance (the Dark Lord) is never described in any
detail (except for his catlike, yellow eyes [windows into nothingness] and
his burning hot, black skin - black as in not african american black, but
jet black). Also there is no direct dialogue with Sauron in the book, only
flashbacks to historical events ie. his interrogation of Gollum, his fight
with Isildur when the One Ring is taken along with his mind-communication
through the Isenguard Palantir orb. So, my question is - how will Peter
depict Sauron visually in the movie, and what will his voice sound like? I
think part of the reason why Sauron was so intriguing and impressive as a
character in the books, was very much because his presence was always felt,
rather than personified as one being - the reader was left pretty much to
imagine what he may have looked like. I can see that Peter will probably
have to portray him in the movies, but I just hope he doesn't make him into
a stereotypical cinematic villain. After all Sauron's power and historical
descent from goodness to hellish evil, makes Satan look like a cute little
puppy dog... And remember one of the biggest and most powerful cinematic
scenes will inevitably be the party's confrontation with the Balrog in
Moria - but the Balrog was a mere servant of Morgoth and then Sauron.
This is a great question, and one that we have been grappling with for 18
months. We still don't have a definitive answer. The Sauron of the books is
sketchy at best, which makes it hard to turn him into a screen villain to
carry 3 movies. Imagine not really seeing Darth Vader for all 3 Star Wars
films. You just can't do it.
We obviously have Sauron's various emissaries to represent him, but just how
Sauron himself appears is still a puzzle we are trying to solve. I agree
that you can't reduce him to being a big guy striding around in black
armour - but he cannot be limited to a flaming eye either. It's tough. We'll
keep working on it.
5. Lots of people wrote in with this one, so I’ll summarize it on up. You
mentioned in your statement that you want to make movies that you think
Professor Tolkien would be proud of. What about the Tolkien estate? How
closely are you working with Christopher Tolkien and what is your
relationship with him going to be during this project? If you have talked
with him about the project, what has he thought thus far?
We are dealing with the "estate", rather than Christopher personally. They
have made their position very clear: While they are in no way opposed to a
film(s) being made, they do not want to be involved.
The reason is basically simple: if they had any involvement, then the films
would become "official" - in other words, they would be seen as being
endorsed by the estate. This is a situation that the estate does not want,
as they consider themselves to be protectors of Tolkien's written word, not
film makers. I don't think the estate will be reading scripts or commenting
on the movies. We keep them informed on progress, which they appreciate, but
they want their involvement to be very arms length.
I said something here in NZ in an interview, which is worth repeating: You
shouldn't think of these movies as being "THE LORD OF THE RINGS". THE LORD
OF THE RINGS is, and always will be, a wonderful book - one of the greatest
ever written. Any films will only ever be an INTERPRETATION of the book. In
this case my interpretation. The Tolkien estate has no reason to want to get
involved in somebody else's interpretation of the Professor's work.
6. Here’s one of the chief fears from fans, and lots of them are curious
about what you think. Fantasy film has been with us straight from the
beginning. It has been mined by Korda, Fairbanks, Harryhausen, Pal, etc. At
that time their films were quite successful. But in the last twenty years
the fantasy film has nose-dived into granite. What is wrong with the modern
fantasy film, what is missing, and how is this going to be any different
from the parade of fantasy duds that have been kicking sand in the face of
fantasy lovers for a generation now?
One of my chief reasons for wanting to spend nearly 5 years of my life
making these films has been that I don't think that fantasy has been well
served by cinema. So I agree with your comments. I can't get into a deep
debate about the last 20 years of fantasy, but I have been disappointed by
the films as well. Either the style has been wrong, or often the scripts
have been terrible. Starting out with strong scripts (and we are obviously
dealing with great material) will put us ahead of a lot of other fantasy
films. Not making the movies self-consciously fantasy will help too.
7. This comes in from Chyren, and is echoed by a good 40 others.
“Given that the books in LOTR are long and deeply indebted to Tolkien's
technique of creating 'Literary Depth' by having a complex backstory, how
can this be even slightly presented in a film version? In other words, LOTR
was the end-tale of a huge three-millennium history of Middle-Earth. How can
you allude to this on screen without just creating another Sword & Sorcery
style crappy Willow film that is just plain confusing?
A good comment, and one that we feel strongly about too. As we have written
drafts of THE LORD OF THE RINGS, we have layered in more and more depth with
each subsequent draft. Some of it is important to the story (Isildur,
Elendil, etc) and some is not. However, it creates the feeling of a real
world. No movie can ever go into the depth than Tolkien did obviously, but
we are going to use prologues, flashbacks and narration to paint a picture
of Middle-earth that will hopefully be more than superficial.
Not being confusing is vital. That has been a fault of many fantasy films.
We have to make movies that both readers and non-readers can enjoy and
understand (I know the concept of having to cater to non-readers is
frustrating, but it is important. Don't worry - we won't allow it to
"dumb-down" the material). There are ways of doing that, and I am confident
we will get there, without compromising the integrity of the work too much.
It's a huge help to have 3 films to work with.
"AND..the books themselves are not structured to easily equate to a
screenplay. Most of the first book is a gentle stretch of journey and masses
of exposition (which occurs mainly when the Hobbits reach Elrond's House).
There not much full-on action or even interesting stuff until the end of the
second and third books. How much junk are you going to have to cut out? How
much of the books will ACTUALLY reach the screen?”
It is true that most of the cuts will come out of the first book. We have to
reach Rivendell a little quicker than the book does, as that is the point
that the story picks up. I don't agree that there's not much interesting
stuff in THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING, but it does lack a urgency. That is one
of the biggest problems with adapting the books - Tolkien gave his
characters a fairly leisurely journey - I don't mean the length of the
journey, but rather the lack of dramatic tension, especially pre-Rivendell.
For the movies, we will have to make motivations a little tighter and more
urgent. We have to focus on The Ring, Sauron and the threat to Middle-earth.
There is not much room for other stuff that is not directly connected to
this narrative spine.
“Chyren comments: I realize that movie making is totally different from the
art of a book, and that books can't be translated onto the screen totally.
That's me, I know these things. You do realize, don't you, that whatever you
do, some percentage of rabid Tolkien fans are always gonna attack you for
'butchering' their bible?
I'm in no doubt about that. Remember ... it's just my interpretation.
God, I wouldn't be in your shoes for quids, mate! Still, as long as it's
better than that Ralph Bakshi debacle, I personally don't mind what you do!”
Making it better than the Bakshi version would be good.
8. Probably the most asked question, even though you asked not to ask about
it, is about Casting. So this question won’t be “Who is Gandalf” “Who is
Aragorn?” Instead I’m going to try to weasel some info out of you that will
stir the debate pot a bit. What is your casting philosophy going to be with
this series of films. For example, while I was on THE FACULTY set, Elijah
Wood often talked to me about this project. He cited over and over about how
much he loved the books, and how he’d love to be anything in it. This is
most likely a feeling that a lot of talent in Hollywood will have. Will you,
if talent lowers it’s wages, cast big name actors in smaller parts? (ie Sam
Jackson in Star Wars Episode One) Or do you plan on avoiding the Where’s
Waldo style of casting?
The basic philosophy is to cast unknowns as the hobbits and use better known
actors for the smaller roles, i.e. Elrond, Theoden, Denethor, etc. I would
be happy casting unknowns for all roles, as fresh faces will bring a sense
of reality to the films, however I'm sure New Line will want some names. We
won't be able to afford huge stars. Sean Connery won't be Gandalf (one of
the most enduring pieces of net mythology). We couldn't afford him, he
wouldn't live in NZ for a year, and I don't think he's right for the role. I
love Connery, but I want Gandalf to be fresher than that. I like the Patrick
McGoohan idea somebody mentioned ... that type of thinking is the right way
to go. We have a couple of other strong ideas for Gandalf (I won't say who,
but I've never seen their names on the net). We will no doubt audition a 100
actors to find the ideal Gandalf.
The idea of "stars" stepping forward and declaring themselves Tolkien fans
is interesting ... let's see what happens.
Depending on the answer, is this because of a sound you want to the
dialogue? And speaking of dialogue will it be in Tolkien’s tongue?
We have written the scripts in a reasonable "Tolkien" style ... on occasions
using his dialogue verbatim. The older characters, i.e. Gandalf, Theoden,
Denethor are pure Tolkien in their dialogue style. The younger hobbit
characters slightly less so, but still not hip or modern. Sam will be pure
Sam, and Gollum will be pure Gollum in style.
We will use other languages, particularly Elvish, on occasion, with English
sub-titles.
9. Another major vein of curiosity has been the scale of these films. Using
terms that will light our imagination and paint a picture for us, how big
will these films be? This involves the scale of battles, vistas, creatures.
They will be very epic in scale - but one of the great things about THE LORD
OF THE RINGS is the fact that they are very grounded in character and
relationship. So imagine a tight personal, very emotional story set against
sweeping vistas, huge cities and vast armies.
The battles will be the biggest you have ever seen (I promise).
We have two wonderful artists working for us on conceptual designs ... Alan
Lee and John Howe. Both have done many Tolkien paintings before, and I loved
their interpretation of the characters and places. We are creating original
designs, not copying their earlier art, but a look at the previous work of
Alan and John's will give you a strong sense of the visual style I am aiming
for.
It also deals with the texture of the film, the aspect ratio and the score.
What are your thoughts on how you’ll bring this to screen?
We will shoot in Super 35, giving us a 2.35 ratio. We have flirted with the
idea of 70mm, but the problems with CG effects at that resolution are too
daunting.
The score will be classical sounding. I'd like a create a Celtic feel
without being Celtic if you get what I mean ... something non-cliched. No
composers have been considered yet. There are no plans to use any of the
existing Tolkien-inspired music.
10. Jason out of Australia had this question for ya: “Will any of the
poetry/songs in Tolkien’s work be kept in the films?” And to follow up on
it, if you do keep them how will you portray them?
There will be a little of it, but not much. A little on screen, a little on
the soundtrack. It's a difficult thing to work into a dramatic telling of
the story.
11. Given the massive following these books have, and the fact that this is
the number one most inquired question, and the fact you’ve stated that you’
ll need 15,000 extras for certain scenes, I’ve chosen Mike of Finland to ask
the question. “Where and when will the casting take place?
It will start in October in LA, London, Australia and New Zealand.
What should I do to appear in the film?
You would need to audition and be the very best person for that particular
role, out of the 100 - 200 actors that we will test for each character.
Do I need an agent to be considered for a speaking role? Do you hire only
professionals for the major parts or do qualified amateurs have a chance as
well?
There are no rules, but you would have to connect your nearest casting
director and convince them you were good enough.
What requirements do you have for the extras?” Of course I have to admit
that just about everyone I know wants to be an orc, it’s akin to being a
stormtrooper. The surest way to increase tourism to New Zealand is to
announce a desire for extras, and there will be fans booking flights
instantly.
We will find our extras in the New Year. They will be cast in New Zealand
and will have to be precise physical types depending on if it's for Orcs,
Elves, Men, etc. It is possible that we may approach the army for most of
our extras.
12. This question comes from Ryan of New Zealand: “A lot of things are not
described explicitly in the books, but hinted at or told second hand, and
I'd like to know how you will go about showing us show us those things.
Some of the "second hand" stories will be told on-screen in a more
straightforward chronology. Others will be left as narration. You will
definitely be seeing a lot of things dramatised on film that Tolkien related
as expositionary dialogue.
Please tell me whether the Balrog will be a solid creature or a shadowy one,
and whether it will be winged,
We are still working on the Balrog designs. He will be a real creature, but
we will try very hard to capture the feel that Tolkien describes in this
sequence. Our designs have wings at the moment, but that can be changed if
it is not correct.
whether Legolas - who is never really described - will have blond hair and
pointy ears like all those Dungeons and Dragons freaks out there picture
him,
Don't know yet. It will start with casting an actor and working from there
on his final look.
and whether we will get to see - perhaps in a flashback - the combat of
Gandalf and the Balrog after they fall from the bridge in Moria,
I don't think so.
and likewise if there will be visual flashbacks of the ent's storming of
Isengard,
Yes, that will be seen.
and of the history of Middle-earth as related in various parts of the story
by Gandalf, Elrond, and Aragorn?
Most of the Middle-earth history we show will be related to events important
to our immediate story, i.e. Isildur's death, defeat of Sauron during the
Second Age and the history of Gollum and the Ring.
We will be detailing some of the Elven history as well as a sense of the
Numenorians and the rise, and decline, of Gondor. That will mostly be in
narration and not on-screen.
13. This comes from Sir Etch-a-Sketch: “Describe the tone that you will be
using to tell this story. You’ve stated that you don’t see it as a Fantasy
Film, but as telling a true story. What do you mean by that, and cite
examples.”
It might be clearer if I described it as an historical film. Something very
different to Dark Crystal or Labyrinth. Imagine something like BRAVEHEART,
but with a little of the visual magic of LEGEND. (LEGEND had a lackluster
script in my view. It looked great, but the visual style was too unreal,
overwhelming and not suitable for this story).
It should have the historical authority of BRAVEHEART, rather than the
meaningless fantasy mumbo-jumbo of WILLOW.
14. Jacob of W. Virginia asked this one, which is echoed by about 20 others.
“What types departures will you be taking with the telling of the story and
how did they come about?”
This is the 64 thousand dollar question I guess!
I'm not going to answer this in huge detail, as we are still working on the
scripts. We have about 300 pages written as 2 long movies. We now have to
convert them into 3 scripts of maybe 110 pages each - so we do have a little
more room to explore new ideas.
Our philosophy is simple. We don't want to make any radical changes to the
basic events or characters in the books. So Sam will NOT become a girl
(another piece of rumour-mill bullshit that's been floating around for a
year), or have a gay relationship with Frodo, or anything silly like that.
We will have to remove certain events or characters, but they will be clean
lifts. As somebody pointed out earlier, THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING will need
the greatest pruning.
Any changes that we do make will be centered on developing characters or
events in the spirit that Tolkien created them, but maybe taking them
further than he did. For example, the Aragorn/Arwen romance is a lovely part
of the story ... but if it was filmed exactly as Tolkien wrote it, they
would have maybe 10 minutes screentime together over 6 hours of film. So we
have to find a way to include Arwen in more of the story, to have a chance
at creating a meaningful screen romance. However, we won't do anything
radical like adding her to the Fellowship, as that would be departing too
much from what we all know and love. It's a fine line that we walk.
15. To gore or not to gore. There are gigantic battles in this film, how
will you film these and what is the threshold of gore for the films?
These films will be PG13, but I would like them to be a hard PG13. The
battles can't be BRAVEHEART violent, but we could maybe think about a
slightly "harder" version for laserdisc release.
16. In getting New Line to sign on the dotted line, it has been said that
their faith came from the script and the reel of tests that you and WETA
showed them. What was on this reel, and what work has Weta and the 50 some
odd people that have been laboring away come up with?
When we talked to studios about getting involved, we screened a 36 minute
video documentary we made very quickly before we left. This documentary
style video had interviews with key crew and design people and lots of
footage of design paintings, models, armour and CG tests.
Cool stuff included on the tape: An Uruk-Hai in full armour and prosthetics,
and Orc make-up test, models of Helm's Deep and Rivendell, marquettes of
Elven armour and weapons, Gollum marquettes, a Cave Troll and a Balrog
concept. CG tests included a CG Troll and a couple of huge Helm's Deep
battle shots using a piece of WETA software called MASSIVE that has been
developed over the last 2 years expressly to achieve huge battle scenes for
THE LORD OF THE RINGS. MASSIVE allows us to have 200,000 CG extras that we
don't animate, but they use a complex form of Artificial Intelligence to
fight each other. You basically press a button, sit back and watch these
huge battles unfold before your eyes. It's amazing and a little frightening
as it ushers in a new era in CG effects.
Bob Shaye watched the tape in total silence and then declared that he wanted
to make 3 movies. Bob deserves the credit for making a trilogy ... it was
his idea.
The 36 min tape would be a great addition on a laserdisc box set.
17. What made you go, “Peter Jackson needs to make THE LORD OF THE RINGS”?
What are you most excited about this project?
It gives me a chance to break new ground in the movies. Every film genre has
been done well over the last 100 years, but not this type of fantasy story.
If we get it right, it will be the first time. No film maker could ask for a
greater challenge than that.
18. How open will this project be? Meaning what types of things will you be
showing us fans in the years leading up to this film.
It will be like the SW Trilogy I suppose. Expect the same level of
secrecy/revelations. I will try and kept a steady stream of information
flowing. I know how frustrating it is.
How quickly do we get to see designs, models, sketches, stills, trailers,
toys, a rough cut, etc...
I don't know the answers to that ... a trailer? That seems a million years
away to me right now. New Line will control all of this and our relationship
with them is only just beginning.
19. Richard of New York asks: "Will the films be titled “Fellowship of the
Rings” “Two Towers” and “Return of the King” or will you go with LOTR1, LOTR
2, LOTR 3? What do you theorize the running time to be?"
I assume that we will use the book titles, probably with THE LORD OF THE
RINGS kinda of a wrap around title, like STAR WARS.
For those who are interested, when we were making 2 movies with Miramax, we
were thinking of calling them THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING and THE WAR OF THE
RING.
I imagine the films will have an approx 6 hour running time.
20. What gets you shaking like a kid on Christmas Morning on this project?
In otherwords, when you look at the films, what are you dying to capture on
film, and how will you do it?
These types of intangible questions are the toughest. I guess I'm lucky to
have only one!
I want to take movie-goers into Middle-earth, in a way that is believable
and powerful.
Imagine this: 7000 years has gone by. We take a filmcrew to Helm's Deep ...
it's now looking a little older, but still impresses as a mighty fortress.
The Art Dept set to work, patching up holes and removing tourist signs. The
current owner strikes a hard bargain, but New Line money finally gets us
permission to film there for 6 weeks. Rohan heraldry is studied and
faithfully reproduced. Theoden's original saddle is in a museum - far too
valuable to use in the movie, but an exact copy is made. Archeological
expeditions have unearthed an incredibly preserved mummified Uruk-hai
carcass. We make exact prothestic copies of these viscous killers ... use CG
to give us a 10,000 strong army. We have cast actors who look like Aragorn
and Theoden. In an amazing casting coup, Legolas has agreed to return from
Valinor with Gimli to recreate their part in this cinematic retelling of the
events at the end of the Third Age. They stand on the battlements of the
Deeping Wall, wind blowing in their hair, leading a group of extras proudly
portraying the brave garrison of Rohan soldiers ... Uruk drums roll up the
valley ... huge lighting rigs flash simulated lightening ... rain towers
send gallons of water into the air ... on an assistant director's signal,
twenty 35mm cameras start rolling simultaneously ... the battle of Helm's
Deep is about to be captured on film.
Sure, it's not really THE LORD OF THE RINGS ... but it could still be a
pretty damn cool movie.
Cheers, Peter J
--
Posted from 
ro...@mercury.tread.it
 [195.120.31.80]
via Mailgate.ORG Server - 
http://www.mailgate.org

Ringrazio aRaGoRN per aver postato questa lunga intervista a Peter Jackson.
Leggendola, a occhio e croce direi che fa ben sperare per i tre film. Io
personalmente, se fossi un regista non mi azzarderei mai e poi mai a tentare un
film su di un'opera cosi' complessa e soprattutto cosi' conosciuta e cosi' amata
da milioni di lettori in tutto il mondo, comunque mi pare che dall'intervista
emerga che Jackson mescoli in giusta dose entusiasmo e senso pratico, un pizzico
di follia, le manie del lettore entusiasta e l'occhio critico del regista che sa
che fare un film e' diverso dallo scrivere un libro.
Per tutta l'intervista sembra tenere i piedi per terra, risponde in modo preciso
e tecnico, salvo lanciarsi nell'ultima parte in una splendida "visione" del
fosso di Helm; cosi' facendo, sembra quasi suggerire che finche' lavorera' a
preparare il film si terra' molto attento agli aspetti pratici, il budget, il
cast, i trucchi eccetera, ma al momento di girare ci si dovra' tuffare "full
immersion" nella fantasia.
Che dire? Staremo a vedere.
-- 
se volete scrivermi, togliete il solito NOSPAM dall'indirizzo
    ((((    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
jgs {  '>   --------------------------------------------------
    / ,\      Few women admit their age. Few men act theirs.
   /_/ /    --------------------------------------------------
===//="==== Claudia Rege Cambrin (c.rege...@NOSPAMlist.it)
  /         --------------------------------------------------

Non voglio osare sperare che ci salti fuori un bel film.... se poi
viene fuori brutto ci resterei troppo male!
Cmq fra Episode I di Guerre Stellari e il film del Signore degli
Anelli devo dire che il cinema fantasy sta tornando alla riscossa...

or atmosphere I'm aiming for in the films.
Qualcuno sa se c'e' questa illustrazione in rete da qualche parte?
(CUT del resto, interessantissimo per cui ringrazio)
Beh, possono anche non farcela, ma mi sembra che abbiano le idee
abbastanza chiare...
Buon sardo non mente
___________________________
Cercate materiale di gioco?
Visitate la Miniera d'Argento
http://volftp.tin.it/porta
e estraete le vostre pepite!!

 Qualcuno sa se c'e' questa illustrazione in rete da qualche parte?
Non ne sono sicura, ma credo si riferisca alla immagine che puoi trovare a
questo indirizzo:
http://ftp.sunet.se/pub/pictures/fantasy/Tolkien/lee02.jpg
(Se ti interessano le immagini tolkieniane, ho una intera sottodirectory nel mio
bookmark file dedicata ad esse...)


bookmark file dedicata ad esse...)
Hmmm, meglio di no... grazie
Ripensandoci, me la prepari una piccola "guida ragionata" per la
pagina dei link della Miniera (fosse la volta buona che cosi'
l'aggiorno...).
R.


 l'aggiorno...).
Volentieri, solo dovrai avere un po' di pazienza.
Se mi potessi dare delle indicazioni su cosa intendi per "guida ragionata", che
tipo di informazioni ti interessano ecc. posso mettermici quando il capo non
guarda... ;)


statura degli Elfi?
Orbene, dopo una piccola ricerca, questi sono i risultati:
secondo Robert Foster (The complete guide to Middle-Earth) "dwarves
were short (four and half to five feet tall)" - il che dovrebbe
significare da 1,35 a 1,50 (essendo un piede circa 30 cm.);
quanto agli elfi, essi "were about six feet tall" (intorno al metro e
ottanta). Ma dove Tolkien fornisce queste informazioni? Le voci della
guida che ho consultato fanno riferimento a tutta una serie di passi
di Il Signore degli Anelli e di Il Silmarillion, ma nelle edizioni
inglesi - ho potuto controllare solo quella di Il Signore degli
Anelli, ma non ho trovato nulla circa l'altezza.
Un altro "esperto" di cose tolkieniene (che pero' fa di tutto per
agire in modo poco "scientifico"), David Day, dice nel suo "Il
bestiario di Tolkien" che gli elfi "furono creati di statura uguale
alla successiva razza degli uomini", ma, ovviamente, non riporta alcun
riferimento ad un opera di Tolkien.
Comunque, per cio' che riguarda gli elfi, ho trovato in "Il
Silmarillion" un brano (cap.XII  del Quenta Silmarillion, pag.124 in
basso dell'ed. 1988) in cui si dice che "in quei giorni, Elfi e Uomini
erano simili per statura e forza" (e questo deve essere il passo che
aveva presente Day). A questo punto bisognerebbe pero' conoscere la
statura degli uomini  in quei giorni.
Quanto agli hobbit, sempre Foster sostiene che "Merry was, with
Pippin, the largest hobbit in history, at least four and half feet
tall" (cioe' almeno un metro e 35). Il prologo a Il Signore degli
Anelli parla "chiaro": "anche i piu' alti tra loro (tra gli hobbit)
sono piu' piccoli dei Nani...La loro statura e' variabile, ed oscilla
da un braccio a un braccio e mezzo." Pipino e Merry dopo la cura erano
alti piu' di due braccia (sempre secondo il prologo), mentre Sam dice
che misuravano "tre dita piu' del normale"(cap.IV del libro VI di Il
Signore degli Anelli, pag.1141, ed.1986). Dato che non e' possibile
che si faccia riferimento al braccio marino (ca 1,83) non so come
interpretare la misura. Sorvolo sulle tre dita di Sam. Ma nell'ed.
inglese il passo del prologo suona diverso ."their height is variable,
ranging between two and four feet of our measure." E circa Merry e
Pipino, vi si dice che erano alti piu' di "four foot five" (che credo
voglia dire 4 piedi e mezzo, il che coinciderebbe con quanto detto da
Foster). Dunque: da 60 cm a un metro e 20 per gli hobbit e piu' di un
metro e 35 per Merry e Pipino.
Scusate la lunghezza dell'intervento, ma se avessi avuto le idee piu'
chiare, sarei riuscito certamente ad essere piu' conciso.
Ciao
Fritz Tegularius
"Nulla vi e' di piu' inconseguente 
 della suprema conseguenza..."
  (Goethe)

Ma il Silmarillion non diceva da qualche parte che gli elfi prima erano +
alti degli uomini e che poi andarono abbassandosi sotto il livello degli
stessi?
Se ricordo bene, allora Legolas non dovrebbe essere più alto degli altri
uomini, anzi, meno.
Earendil



Vero:"All'inizio, i figli maggiori di Iluvatar erano piu' forti e piu'
grandi di quanto non siano divenuti in seguito" (cap.III del Quenta
Silm., pag.54); tuttavia, si dice anche che "in quei giorni (Prima
Era) (i corpi degli elfi) erano piu' simili ai corpi degli Uomini,
poiche' non erano stati ancora abitati cosi' a lungo dal fuoco del
loro spirito, che con l'andar del tempo li consuma di dentro"
(cap.XII., pag.125), e che "in tempi successivi, quando...Elfi e
Uomini si estraniarono...coloro della razza elfica che ancora vivevano
nella Terra-di-Mezzo declinarono e languirono, e gli Uomini usurparono
la luce del sole. Allora i Quendi...si affezionarono al lume di luna e
stelle...divenendo quali ombre e memorie, salvo coloro che ogni tanto
facevano vela per l'occidente e sparivano dalla Terra-di- Mezzo."
(ibidem).  Sembrerebbe, quindi - e io me la sono sempre immaginata
cosi' -  che piu' che di un rimpicciolirsi si tratti di uno sbiadire,
di un offuscarsi. Ed in effetti se paragoniamo Legolas ad elfi come
Feanor o Fingolfin, mi pare che si possa notare una certa differenza
di ...spessore, intensita' (insomma: mi riesce difficile pensare che
Legolas possa compiere imprese terribili, nel bene o nel male).
Anche Galadriel, che pure ha vissuto gli eventi narrati in Il
Silmarillion, appare a Frodo come "un'esile donna elfica" dopo aver
rifiutato l'unico anello (ed aver quindi accettato per se' il destino
degli elfi: perdita dei poteri e partenza per l'Ovest). 
Ciao
. 


voglia dire 4 piedi e mezzo, 
Creo che i piedi si dividano in dodici (o otto) parti... comunque non
cambia molto.


Fritz Tegularius wrote:
(CUT su un post molto preciso e accurato sulla statura di elfi, nani ed hobbit)
Prima il post sull'origine degli orchi, ora questo...
Sono senza parole. Propongo che Fritz sia nominato Filologo Tolkieniano
Ufficiale della Locanda!


ha scelto il "braccio", misura assolutamente indefinita ma evocativa.
Hai perfettamente ragione: infatti ho controllato nell'originale le
parole di Sam circa l'altezza di Merry e Pipino e suonano cosi' :
"you're three inches taller than you ought to be".
Tolkien dunque parla di inches, pollici, che sono una unita' di misura
comunemente usata nei paesi anglosassoni. La traduzione invece riporta
"tre dita", che non significa molto (o almeno mi pare).
Mah!
Ciao



Se volete dei filologi ufficiali, cercate di contattare qualcuno dei
piu'..."sfegatati"  tra i membri della Societa' Tolkieniana Italiana.
Ho udito persone citare a memoria le frasi con cui Gandalf  fa
riferimento al buon Cactaceo (e alla sua birra). A questo, nonostante
che sia socio anch'io, non ci arrivo.
P.S. Locanda? E' qualcosa di preciso?
Ciao.



Questa è la Locanda.
ciao
Roberto

 P.S. Locanda? E' qualcosa di preciso?
Ci sei dentro ;)
La Locanda delle Arti.Fantastiche e' il nome che alcuni di noi sfegatati ^___^
diamo al newsgroup.


Giustissimo... peccato che non abbia ancora trovato un vocabolario (cosa te
ne fai di sapere che il passato del verbo sila fa silie se non conosci
abbastanza termini?)
Earendil, smemorato che ha scordato la propria lingua e ha bisogno di un
vocabolario per riprendersi


In rete ho trovato un paio di vocabolari inglese-elfico ed elfico-inglese:
http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Palms/3967/elves.html
http://www.dragons-inn.org/Ifreann/tynntangial.html
E persino un dizionario elfico-italiano:
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Rampart/4722/index.html
Non essendo una conoscitrice della lingua non so dire quanto siano completi e/o
corretti...


diamo al newsgroup.
A questo proposito ti ricorderei che devi ancora pagare 
l'ultima settimana... ^__________________^
                                Ave Kallisti Eris Discordia
--
Ataru Moroboshi (Rocco Pier Luigi) - Brigate Takahashi 
Home  
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/4748
Conan 
http://hinomaru.simplenet.com/Cartoni/Conan/index.html
GURPS 
http://members.xoom.com/Tesoruccio/
------------ Lamu Mon Amour--------------------
Io sono il caos. Io sono la sostanza con cui i vostri artisti
e scienziati costruiscono ritmi. Io sono lo spirito con cui 
i vostri bimbi e clown ridono in felice anarchia. Io sono 
il caos. Io sono viva e Ti sto' dicendo che sei libero.
Global search in culo! Don Marco - Kyashan - IACA - Willix

P.S. Locanda? E' qualcosa di preciso?
Ahi!
Bello, la Locanda e' questa... per cosa credi che ti abbia appena
messo in mano il menu'? (io sono uno dei due osti, quello pacifico)
R.


                                Ave Kallisti Eris Discordia
Ecco, appunto... questo e' il mio collega...

> Voi cosa ne pensate?
E' un grande! Lo voglio conoscere!
A me piacerebbe davvero un sacco imparare a parlarla (datemi del matto, 
tanto ormai sono abituato), ma oltre ai siti che ho segnalato non ho 
trovato sito che insegni le regole per potere arrivare a quel livello.
Ma adesso che ci penso sono socio STI!!! Corro subito a chiedere :)
byez, aRaGoRN+
偽-----偽
- IHGGER #275
- 訖EB
-  La Taverna del Puledro Impennato, sito tolkieniano italiano,
-  
http://gilda.it/tolkien/taverna/
- 託SENET
-  it.arti.fantasy
-  it.hobby.giochi.gdr
-  alt.fan.tolkien
- 衰RC (Faranor)
-  #gdr
-  #tolkien
偽-----偽

Grazissime

 l'ultima settimana... ^__________________^
Uhhh...
ahhhh...
ehmmmm...
.
.
.
...sono temporaneamente a corto di soldi...
.
.
.
...non e' che vi serve una cameriera in questa locanda? ^___^;;;;





Grande Claudia! Io direi di si'. Ultimamente da queste parti circolano
gatti, topi e piccoli animaletti neri a sei zampe che camminano sulle travi
del soffitto. Una buona pulita ci vorrebbe proprio!
E poi continua ad arrivare una puzza bestiale dalla dispensa!
Kralizec il Faltyn
P. S. Se poi puoi dare una lavata alla latrina, visto che l'oste mi ci
chiude di continuo....
P. P. S. E poi finalmente una bella cameriera e' quello che ci vuole: quel
tipo coi baffi che serve ai tavoli non mi piace neanche un po'!

...non e' che vi serve una cameriera in questa locanda? ^___^;;;;
Adesso che ci penso si'.
Hmmm..... dove ho messo quel catalogo di abbigliamento per cameriere
di sexy-locande.... ^_______________^


di sexy-locande.... ^_______________^
Giammai!! Questa e' una locanda ONORATA!!
R.
P.S. Fa' un po' vedere...
