Welcome to Gaia! ::

Connor the Hobbit's avatar

Witty Firestarter

11,850 Points
  • Senpai's Notice 100
  • Risky Lifestyle 100
  • Sausage Fest 200
Luunna
on my phone so ill just reply to the point about sam rn:
the only reason sam was fat in the movies is because sean astin was the only hobbit who cared enough for his role to put on extra weight (because ALL hobbits are supposed to be pudgy, not just some.) the rest wore fat suits but sean put on 30 pounds or so in real weight
not sure if anyone else pointed that out but THERE YOU HAVE IT

I actually did know that, and yes they are all supposed to be pudgy, I was referring to Gollum calling him "the fat one" and such, which drew more attention to the fact that he was rounder than the others, which he wasn't really supposed to be.
Connor the Hobbit's avatar

Witty Firestarter

11,850 Points
  • Senpai's Notice 100
  • Risky Lifestyle 100
  • Sausage Fest 200
Luunna
this
would count as large??? larger then a human's, anyway, and for the movie, they needed that conveyed.
why is this even a big deal, i have the distinct feeling that this is you looking for reasons to be upset

No, that would not count as large. They are the same proportional length as a human's feet, just slightly wider, like the feet of a pregnant woman, or as mentioned, anyone who goes barefoot.
And yeah I'm totally nitpicking, but I'm one of those people that pays attention to detail and appreciates things he did do like making sure even just extras had elaborate costumes.

EDIT: foot example
left: guy with Jackson hobbit feet. right: me with my slightly wider/flatter than average feet from being barefoot all the time
User Image
Connor the Hobbit's avatar

Witty Firestarter

11,850 Points
  • Senpai's Notice 100
  • Risky Lifestyle 100
  • Sausage Fest 200
Luunna
had tom been in the movie, he would have been nothing but a huge time-and-money-sink. they would have needed a lot more time to do him any sort of justice (and even then, people would still probably have complained) and he added nothing to the story. i saw half an hour mentioned somewhere about tom, and im just gonna say it would have taken WAY more then half an hour for tom bombadil to be adequately developed and displayed on film without the entire audience hating him - and even then, i have a feeling they would have
the only good thing that he would have added is the scene with the barrow-wights, and even then, you could switch him out with literally any character and it would have had the same effect

I suppose i agree here, but his character was one of my favorites and it was a bummer to not have him in the movie...
Connor the Hobbit's avatar

Witty Firestarter

11,850 Points
  • Senpai's Notice 100
  • Risky Lifestyle 100
  • Sausage Fest 200
Luunna

again, i'm forced to ask:
who ******** c a r e s
i dont remember boromir's hair colour being relevant at all to the story
is there a plot i missed where the fact that boromir has brown hair is integral or are you just nitpicking again
the change was probably visual to keep him from looking too similar to aragorn

totally just me nitpicking~
Sam not being brown skinned was a bigger deal to me... It bugged the hell out of me that all the hobbits were so pale... save Frodo and Pippin, who both carried much fallohide blood and were supposed to be pale. I sensed a bit of racism.
Connor the Hobbit's avatar

Witty Firestarter

11,850 Points
  • Senpai's Notice 100
  • Risky Lifestyle 100
  • Sausage Fest 200
Luunna

man why are you getting so up on the visuals in this movie
who cares if the wargs were more hyena-like
i enjoyed their design a lot more then the typical fantasy giant wolf because it actually looked sort of scary as opposed to just being a big dog

I would have enjoyed their design if they were perhaps hyena shaped (the huge shoulders make them very intimidating) but with grey or brown fur and a more wolf-like muzzle... they just looked too much like giant hyenas, though I agree they shouldn't just be giant wolves either...
and yeah, I nitpick at details. It's a story that means a lot to me.
Connor the Hobbit's avatar

Witty Firestarter

11,850 Points
  • Senpai's Notice 100
  • Risky Lifestyle 100
  • Sausage Fest 200
Luunna

Quote:
Sam didn't go with Frodo into Shelob's lair

this
is an issue, why, exactly?
ive noticed that when people decide to rag on the movies, they choose the smallest things to pick at and make them out to be the end of the world
when transferring a story between mediums, things have to be sacrificed in the name of telling a good story.
which is, in the end, what jackson did.
he told a good-a** story.

This is prolly one of the least nitpicky things that bugs me.
Jackson didn't have to change that part for it to be great, and I honestly thought the two friends stumbling through the darkness hand in hand was more more powerful.
Connor the Hobbit's avatar

Witty Firestarter

11,850 Points
  • Senpai's Notice 100
  • Risky Lifestyle 100
  • Sausage Fest 200
Luunna

Quote:
Sam was waaaaay too mean to Gollum in the movie, though he was a douche to him the books too.

sorry but why SHOULDNT he be mean to gollum
gollum is a s**t and sam knew what he was going to do from the first second he saw him. sam just needed to lay down some dominance

EDIT: ALSO tolkien wrote in a letter that, had gollum not interrupted frodo's claiming of the ring, there would have been two possible outcomes:
1. frodo realizes that he does not, and never will, have the proper ability to fully claim the ring and kills himself in the fires of mount doom
AND 2. a nazgul would have approached mount doom on a fellbeast and coaxed him out with false subservience, wherein sauron would have come out and crushed frodo, then taken the ring for himself
so really even if sam was too mean to gollum and made him crack (which he didnt and would have probably still happened even if sam didnt intervene at all) then it was still for the better
YOUR MOVE

That's just my pity for smeagol coming out...
now that I think about it though, I totally forgot my point, you win for now, but I may get back to you on this one
Connor the Hobbit's avatar

Witty Firestarter

11,850 Points
  • Senpai's Notice 100
  • Risky Lifestyle 100
  • Sausage Fest 200
Luunna

FROM THE TOLKIEN SOCIETY:

Q: Do Hobbits have big feet? Are they fat?

A: No, Hobbits don't have big feet. Mr. Proudfoot (and no doubt his family) has large feet (for a Hobbit) (and both were on the table) but no other Hobbit is described as having big feet. The idea that Hobbits have big feet seems to have begun with the Brothers Hildebrant, who did numerous popular illustrations in the 1960s and 1970s. They also showed Dwarves with very large feet. Tolkien did not.

The main description of Hobbits in LotR is in the Prologue: For they are a little people, smaller than Dwarves; less stout and stocky, that is, even when they are not actually much shorter. Their height is variable, ranging between two and four feet of our measure ... Bandobras Took ... was four foot five and able to ride a horse. He was surpassed in all Hobbit records only by two famous characters of old. That story is told in LotR. Ironic then that poor Merry was left behind by the Theoden because he wasn't large enough to ride one of their war-horses. Merry eventually grew taller than Bandobras (possibly in revenge for being left behind by Theoden). (No: it was the Entdraught that did it, and Pippin grew too.)

Tolkien goes on: ... they seldom wore shoes, since their feet had tough leathery soles and were clad in a thick curling hair, much like the hair of their heads ... and further: The Harfoots were browner of skin, smaller and shorter, and they were beardless and bootless; their hands and feet were neat and nimble ... the Stoors were broader, heavier in build; their feet and hands were larger ... the Fallohides were fairer of skin and also of hair, and they were taller and slimmer than the others ... And he says The Harfoots ... were the most normal and representative variety of Hobbit and also the most settled. The four Hobbits of the Fellowship appear to have been Harfoots with (in the case of Merry, Pippin and Frodo at least) some Fallohide ancestry.

Humans who go barefoot all their lives often develop feet wider and stronger than modern feet, but not feet which are abnormally long (or rubber). The quartermasters of Lord of the Rings movie could have saved the cost, and the fitting time, and the discomfort to the actors of all those rubber feet and invested in some good curly wigs for the actors' feet instead!

As for being stout, Tolkien says often that the Hobbits enjoyed eating and drinking. People who do hard physical work (like farming) can eat lots without becoming fat. The average Hobbit however appears to have been at least well-covered. Fattish in the stomach, shortish in the leg, remarks Tolkien in Letter 27. But they were not always stout. Like humans, they were inclined to expand as they got older. In Rivendell ('Many Meetings'), Frodo finds that Looking in a mirror he was startled to see a much thinner reflection of himself than he remembered: it looked remarkably like the young nephew of Bilbo who used to go tramping with his uncle in the Shire ... Frodo, who is middle-aged, has been getting stout, but he soon thins down again when he starts walking. (And running.)

Pippin says to Bergil son of Beregond in Minas Tirith, I am nearly twnety-nine ... though I am but four feet, and not likely to grow any more, save sideways. Pippin is young - somewhat like a twenty-year-old human - and clearly expects to be broader when older. He was wrong about growing upwards, though (see above, Entdraught).

It is a tradition among film-makers and some illustrators to make Sam Gamgee fat. In the story, Sam is never called fat, and as a young Hobbit (and a hard worker) is probably fitter than any of them. Pauline Baynes's illustration of the Fellowship, done while Tolkien was alive, shows all four hobbits of much the same build. In the movie The Two Towers, Gollum calls Sam stupid fat hobbit (which always gets a laugh). In the book, Gollum calls Sam cross, rude, nasty, suspicious, not nice and Nasssty. And silly (several times), along with thinking him stupid and slow (wrongly, as it happens). But never fat.

Why make Sam fat? It could be "Watsonisation". In Sherlock Holmes movies (not in the books), Dr. Watson is sometimes made into a stout, bumbling fool, apparently for a low-cost laugh. (Sean Astin, who plays Sam in the movies, was told by his agent to put on weight or the part would go to a fat guy in England, rumoured to be comedian Johnny Vegas. Fine comedian though Vegas is, it's a scary thought that Peter Jackson might have seen in him the image of Sam Gamgee. However, Sean dutifully put on weight and remarked to one interviewer that he stopped when he realised that PJ would be happy for him to go on getting fatter indefinitely. The movie does not explain why their Sam is more or less the same size when he leaves Hobbiton and when he reaches Mouth Doom after some weeks of semi-starvation.) Hoever, the makers of the current Lord of the Rings movies may have made Sam stout, but at least they haven't made him a fool.
Connor the Hobbit
I actually did know that, and yes they are all supposed to be pudgy, I was referring to Gollum calling him "the fat one" and such, which drew more attention to the fact that he was rounder than the others, which he wasn't really supposed to be.

i would think something like that would have a place in your post if you knew, is all
and i can understand where youre coming from with sam (though i'll need a credible sauce about the bit with him being told by his agent to pack it on otherwise the part would have gone to a comedian, that sounds fishy and made up) but the thing is, gollum is the ONLY person who commented on it, and hes the only character who would have. if aragorn was cracking fat jokes and pippin was constantly trying to get him to do the ******** truffle shuffle, i'd get it, but it was like three lines of dialogue from someone who has already been established to be a petty and horrible creature
also: manual labor =/= slim-and-trim figure. muscle definition doesnt really work that way, so feasibly, you could be very muscular, but look chubby.

Connor the Hobbit
No, that would not count as large. They are the same proportional length as a human's feet, just slightly wider, like the feet of a pregnant woman, or as mentioned, anyone who goes barefoot.
And yeah I'm totally nitpicking, but I'm one of those people that pays attention to detail and appreciates things he did do like making sure even just extras had elaborate costumes.

EDIT: foot example
left: guy with Jackson hobbit feet. right: me with my slightly wider/flatter than average feet from being barefoot all the time
SNIP
your foot looks like any other foot ive ever seen in my life and also have fun with glass and s**t on the ground
and yes it would. anything referring to size and there being more of it, lengthwise or side-wise, is larger <:T
that is how size works
also you can throw all of the quotes that you'd like at me, im not denying thats what tolkien said. im asking you why its such a big ******** deal, which is what youve yet to address, and i have a feeling you never will with anything other then 'im just nitpicking'
which, if thats the best youve got, does not really make it valid criticism
bottom line: youre trying to convince me that living in a world where my most favourite pair of slippers wouldnt exist would somehow be better and its not gonna happen lmao

Connor the Hobbit
I suppose i agree here, but his character was one of my favorites and it was a bummer to not have him in the movie...

fair enough, i dont hate tom or anything but i get why he wasnt there
if its any consolation, he was in that one game for the ps2 and he had some bitchin-a** theme music

Connor the Hobbit
totally just me nitpicking~
Sam not being brown skinned was a bigger deal to me... It bugged the hell out of me that all the hobbits were so pale... save Frodo and Pippin, who both carried much fallohide blood and were supposed to be pale. I sensed a bit of racism.

fair enough again but
>racism
i dont know about THAT
i figured he was tanned from laboring in gardens all day. given the class-based relationship of sam and frodo, i'd have to more call tolkien himself into question then i would the movie lmao

Connor the Hobbit
I would have enjoyed their design if they were perhaps hyena shaped (the huge shoulders make them very intimidating) but with grey or brown fur and a more wolf-like muzzle... they just looked too much like giant hyenas, though I agree they shouldn't just be giant wolves either...
and yeah, I nitpick at details. It's a story that means a lot to me.

oh gosh for a second i thought you were saying that their muzzles were wolf-like i was about to ask what kind of wolves you were looking at that had faces like THAT
no but see my thing is youre not picking at the story. what the wargs looked like and the size of sam has next to nothing to do with the actual story, realistically speaking

Connor the Hobbit
This is prolly one of the least nitpicky things that bugs me.
Jackson didn't have to change that part for it to be great, and I honestly thought the two friends stumbling through the darkness hand in hand was more more powerful.

not at this scene yet so i cant really argue this point, but i loved that scene in the jackson movies
will need to see how it goes lol
Connor the Hobbit's avatar

Witty Firestarter

11,850 Points
  • Senpai's Notice 100
  • Risky Lifestyle 100
  • Sausage Fest 200
Luunna
your foot looks like any other foot ive ever seen in my life and also have fun with glass and s**t on the ground
and yes it would. anything referring to size and there being more of it, lengthwise or side-wise, is larger <:T
that is how size works
also you can throw all of the quotes that you'd like at me, im not denying thats what tolkien said. im asking you why its such a big ******** deal, which is what youve yet to address, and i have a feeling you never will with anything other then 'im just nitpicking'
which, if thats the best youve got, does not really make it valid criticism
bottom line: youre trying to convince me that living in a world where my most favourite pair of slippers wouldnt exist would somehow be better and its not gonna happen lmao

The point is they aren't supposed to have big feet. The giant feet were extremely distracting. they looked ridiculous. May have well have thrown in the rainbow robe.
and have fun with glass? really? honey I've been barefoot for as long as I can remember, my feet are like leather, i can walk across glass just fine
luunna

fair enough again but
>racism
i dont know about THAT
i figured he was tanned from laboring in gardens all day. given the class-based relationship of sam and frodo, i'd have to more call tolkien himself into question then i would the movie lmao

The harfoot breed of hobbit, which is most hobbits, are described as having brown skin, and sam specifically is described as having brown skin. Frodo described as having fair skin.
but I wasn't saying Tolkien was racist, in fact he's said so in several WWII time letters that he's not, I'm saying Jackson is racist because everyone in that movie was pale, but it was mostly a joke... kinda...
Quote:

oh gosh for a second i thought you were saying that their muzzles were wolf-like i was about to ask what kind of wolves you were looking at that had faces like THAT
no but see my thing is youre not picking at the story. what the wargs looked like and the size of sam has next to nothing to do with the actual story, realistically speaking

the whole point of the movie is a visual presentation, so yes, I will nitpick at visuals..
Connor the Hobbit
The point is they aren't supposed to have big feet. The giant feet were extremely distracting. they looked ridiculous. May have well have thrown in the rainbow robe.
and have fun with glass? really? honey I've been barefoot for as long as I can remember, my feet are like leather, i can walk across glass just fine


but
why tho
why does it matter so much
i didnt find the feet distracting at all so instead of just yelling at me louder about how the hobbits had smaller feet in the books (which ive acknowledged and you can shut up about now) i would appreciate some reasoning that makes sense other then THIS IS HOW IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN IT MATTERS BECAUSE I SAID
and also >honey
oh no not a condescending pet name
i'd like to see you walk across sharp glass, and would like proof sometime that you can actually do it without shredding your feet to s**t
as it stands i am reluctant to believe you, seeing as there is zero reason for you to walk around with no shoes at all times. aside from isolating yourself from everything and everyone, i guess
unless youre hobbitkin or something
in which case im leaving because NOPE definitely not gonna touch that can of worms

Connor the Hobbit
The harfoot breed of hobbit, which is most hobbits, are described as having brown skin, and sam specifically is described as having brown skin. Frodo described as having fair skin.
but I wasn't saying Tolkien was racist, in fact he's said so in several WWII time letters that he's not, I'm saying Jackson is racist because everyone in that movie was pale, but it was mostly a joke... kinda...
sorry but if thats the case im failing to see how this makes jackson racist against anyone but hobbits
and if he is i still fail to see the problem given that hobbits are not real
im really finding it difficult to understand any of these points you keep vehemently throwing against me when you just repeat them louder at me when i ask for clarification
also: tolkien wrote it and i was specifically talking about the relationship of his characters at the source - which is incredibly class-based. if sam is actually supposed to have a darker skin colour naturally instead of being tan and ruddy (which if he is im welcoming you to provide me with proof) then that was his invention, not jackson's, and chances are, it was changed to keep this from being pointed out and affecting people's enjoyment of the film
because if i recall harfoots are largely farmers, and so it would make sense that working outside all the time would cause them to develop a natural tan. if you dont have any proof that this isnt the case then you really cant say that anyone's interpretation to the contrary is wrong
im willing to give tolkien a pass if thats the case, however, since the books were written in the 40's

Connor the Hobbit
the whole point of the movie is a visual presentation, so yes, I will nitpick at visuals..

lmao you turned into an a*****e pretty quickly
(again)
(despite me being fairly civil and even friendly at points in the last post)
that aside, man, i didnt realize movies were strictly supposed to be a spectacle. i was WONDERING what all the talking was! like jeeze get your story out of the way of my FANCY SPECIAL EFFECTS right
go watch lost highway or anything else by david lynch and tell me film is solely about visuals again bro
and if you're acknowledging that youre nitpicking visuals, just say that bro. better then trying to cover it up with 'NO I CARE ABOUT THE ~STORY~ THATS WHY I NOTICED ALL OF THIS IRRELEVANT BULLSHIT'

also: guess you dont have much to say about anything else i brought up
Connor the Hobbit's avatar

Witty Firestarter

11,850 Points
  • Senpai's Notice 100
  • Risky Lifestyle 100
  • Sausage Fest 200
Luunna
Connor the Hobbit
The point is they aren't supposed to have big feet. The giant feet were extremely distracting. they looked ridiculous. May have well have thrown in the rainbow robe.
and have fun with glass? really? honey I've been barefoot for as long as I can remember, my feet are like leather, i can walk across glass just fine


but
why tho
why does it matter so much
i didnt find the feet distracting at all so instead of just yelling at me louder about how the hobbits had smaller feet in the books (which ive acknowledged and you can shut up about now) i would appreciate some reasoning that makes sense other then THIS IS HOW IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN IT MATTERS BECAUSE I SAID
and also >honey
oh no not a condescending pet name
i'd like to see you walk across sharp glass, and would like proof sometime that you can actually do it without shredding your feet to s**t
as it stands i am reluctant to believe you, seeing as there is zero reason for you to walk around with no shoes at all times. aside from isolating yourself from everything and everyone, i guess
unless youre hobbitkin or something
in which case im leaving because NOPE definitely not gonna touch that can of worms

Connor the Hobbit
The harfoot breed of hobbit, which is most hobbits, are described as having brown skin, and sam specifically is described as having brown skin. Frodo described as having fair skin.
but I wasn't saying Tolkien was racist, in fact he's said so in several WWII time letters that he's not, I'm saying Jackson is racist because everyone in that movie was pale, but it was mostly a joke... kinda...
sorry but if thats the case im failing to see how this makes jackson racist against anyone but hobbits
and if he is i still fail to see the problem given that hobbits are not real
im really finding it difficult to understand any of these points you keep vehemently throwing against me when you just repeat them louder at me when i ask for clarification
also: tolkien wrote it and i was specifically talking about the relationship of his characters at the source - which is incredibly class-based. if sam is actually supposed to have a darker skin colour naturally instead of being tan and ruddy (which if he is im welcoming you to provide me with proof) then that was his invention, not jackson's, and chances are, it was changed to keep this from being pointed out and affecting people's enjoyment of the film
because if i recall harfoots are largely farmers, and so it would make sense that working outside all the time would cause them to develop a natural tan. if you dont have any proof that this isnt the case then you really cant say that anyone's interpretation to the contrary is wrong
im willing to give tolkien a pass if thats the case, however, since the books were written in the 40's

Connor the Hobbit
the whole point of the movie is a visual presentation, so yes, I will nitpick at visuals..

lmao you turned into an a*****e pretty quickly
(again)
(despite me being fairly civil and even friendly at points in the last post)
that aside, man, i didnt realize movies were strictly supposed to be a spectacle. i was WONDERING what all the talking was! like jeeze get your story out of the way of my FANCY SPECIAL EFFECTS right
go watch lost highway or anything else by david lynch and tell me film is solely about visuals again bro
and if you're acknowledging that youre nitpicking visuals, just say that bro. better then trying to cover it up with 'NO I CARE ABOUT THE ~STORY~ THATS WHY I NOTICED ALL OF THIS IRRELEVANT BULLSHIT'

also: guess you dont have much to say about anything else i brought up

How have I not been civil? By disagreeing? By saying honey? It was meant to be degrading, but you've been mocking me the whole time so it's not like I have any reason to apologize. This has been a simple back and forth of point and counterpoint which has been, for me, entirely unemotional and entirely based facts from the books and simple opinions of my own.
I'll grab my books next time before I go on the computer and provide you with exact quotes and page numbers, kay?
And I'll be sure to record it next time I come across some broken glass~
And I go barefoot simply because it's comfortable for me. Shoes are confining and sweaty and I don't enjoy wearing them. I have been since I was 6 years old, 2 or 3 years before I had even heard of hobbits, and you can bet that 15 years later I can walk over just about anything fine.
As far as the other points you brought up, it seemed to me we had wrapped them up and I didn't think we needed to go on.
And finally as far as noticing "irrelevant bullshit", and I'll go ahead and be a b***h here, I guess I can just use my brain more actively than you can. I can follow the story perfectlyand pick up on every visual detail with ease. And in any case I already knew the story, so hey, why not go ahead and analyze all the ity bity details. I analyze everything, it's fun for me. My mind is a very busy place.
Connor the Hobbit
How have I not been civil? By disagreeing? By saying honey? It was meant to be degrading, but you've been mocking me the whole time so it's not like I have any reason to apologize. This has been a simple back and forth of point and counterpoint which has been, for me, entirely unemotional and entirely based facts from the books and simple opinions of my own.
I'll grab my books next time before I go on the computer and provide you with exact quotes and page numbers, kay?
And I'll be sure to record it next time I come across some broken glass~
And I go barefoot simply because it's comfortable for me. Shoes are confining and sweaty and I don't enjoy wearing them. I have been since I was 6 years old, 2 or 3 years before I had even heard of hobbits, and you can bet that 15 years later I can walk over just about anything fine.
As far as the other points you brought up, it seemed to me we had wrapped them up and I didn't think we needed to go on.
And finally as far as noticing "irrelevant bullshit", and I'll go ahead and be a b***h here, I guess I can just use my brain more actively than you can. I can follow the story perfectlyand pick up on every visual detail with ease. And in any case I already knew the story, so hey, why not go ahead and analyze all the ity bity details. I analyze everything, it's fun for me. My mind is a very busy place.
- no, by being a passive-aggressive s**t. there is a clear difference between the two my friend.
- when did i ask for an apology lol
- what how. in the post that i was referring to i was pretty civil. i even showed you my slippers man cmon. and if i am maybe im mocking you for your passive-aggressive, high-and-mighty attitude regarding the appearance of hobbits in film. also your apparent inability to read and understand text. you literally radiate smug a*****e bro
- okay heres what you keep missing, despite me asking you directly time and time again: WHY. DOES. IT. MATTER. WHY IS IT SIGNIFICANT BEYOND 'THIS IS HOW IT WAS IN THE BOOKS.' WHAT SPECIFICALLY DID IT ADD THERE AND WHAT DID NOT HAVING IT IN THE MOVIE TAKE AWAY. YOU DONT NEED TO PROVE TO ME THAT IT HAPPENED. I HAVE SAID THAT IS NOT WHAT I WANT TO KNOW. IVE TOLD YOU I AM NOT DOUBTING THIS. I WANT YOU TO TELL ME WHY THESE POINTS MATTER AS MUCH AS YOU SEEM TO THINK THEY DO. christ. i cant be much clearer then that.
- well otherwise i'll have to just ask all those animals you saved and everyone you converte to socialism and if i did that im sure i'd be here all day with all of the phone numbers and what-have-you
- c o o l s t o r y b u t i d i d n t a s k s t o p m i n i m i z i n g y o u r i n a b i l i t y t o e x p l a i n y o u r b u l l s h i t p l e a s e
- i guess if you cant buy shoes then yeah
- yes. that is called 'being a child.' most of us grow out of that and learn how to properly integrate ourselves into adult society.
- "As far as the other points you brought up, it seemed to me we had wrapped them up and I didn't think we needed to go on." NO. NO THEY HAVENT BEEN. YOU HAVENT EXPLAINED A DAMN THING YOU JUST KEEP SAYING THE SAME THINGS LOUDER LIKE IM SUPPOSED TO FORGET I ASKED YOU A QUESTION
- "I guess I can just use my brain more actively than you can." HAH okay then. active use of brain clearly presented here in your inability to read a single thing i've written and/or respond accordingly to it. good job with that active brain of yours bro
man youre one shitty hobbit. cmon bro hobbits dont go around passive-aggressively implying people are idiots. thats what tools do
Connor the Hobbit's avatar

Witty Firestarter

11,850 Points
  • Senpai's Notice 100
  • Risky Lifestyle 100
  • Sausage Fest 200
Luunna
Connor the Hobbit
How have I not been civil? By disagreeing? By saying honey? It was meant to be degrading, but you've been mocking me the whole time so it's not like I have any reason to apologize. This has been a simple back and forth of point and counterpoint which has been, for me, entirely unemotional and entirely based facts from the books and simple opinions of my own.
I'll grab my books next time before I go on the computer and provide you with exact quotes and page numbers, kay?
And I'll be sure to record it next time I come across some broken glass~
And I go barefoot simply because it's comfortable for me. Shoes are confining and sweaty and I don't enjoy wearing them. I have been since I was 6 years old, 2 or 3 years before I had even heard of hobbits, and you can bet that 15 years later I can walk over just about anything fine.
As far as the other points you brought up, it seemed to me we had wrapped them up and I didn't think we needed to go on.
And finally as far as noticing "irrelevant bullshit", and I'll go ahead and be a b***h here, I guess I can just use my brain more actively than you can. I can follow the story perfectlyand pick up on every visual detail with ease. And in any case I already knew the story, so hey, why not go ahead and analyze all the ity bity details. I analyze everything, it's fun for me. My mind is a very busy place.
- no, by being a passive-aggressive s**t. there is a clear difference between the two my friend.
- when did i ask for an apology lol
- what how. in the post that i was referring to i was pretty civil. i even showed you my slippers man cmon. and if i am maybe im mocking you for your passive-aggressive, high-and-mighty attitude regarding the appearance of hobbits in film. also your apparent inability to read and understand text. you literally radiate smug a*****e bro
- okay heres what you keep missing, despite me asking you directly time and time again: WHY. DOES. IT. MATTER. WHY IS IT SIGNIFICANT BEYOND 'THIS IS HOW IT WAS IN THE BOOKS.' WHAT SPECIFICALLY DID IT ADD THERE AND WHAT DID NOT HAVING IT IN THE MOVIE TAKE AWAY. YOU DONT NEED TO PROVE TO ME THAT IT HAPPENED. I HAVE SAID THAT IS NOT WHAT I WANT TO KNOW. IVE TOLD YOU I AM NOT DOUBTING THIS. I WANT YOU TO TELL ME WHY THESE POINTS MATTER AS MUCH AS YOU SEEM TO THINK THEY DO. christ. i cant be much clearer then that.
- well otherwise i'll have to just ask all those animals you saved and everyone you converte to socialism and if i did that im sure i'd be here all day with all of the phone numbers and what-have-you
- c o o l s t o r y b u t i d i d n t a s k s t o p m i n i m i z i n g y o u r i n a b i l i t y t o e x p l a i n y o u r b u l l s h i t p l e a s e
- i guess if you cant buy shoes then yeah
- yes. that is called 'being a child.' most of us grow out of that and learn how to properly integrate ourselves into adult society.
- "As far as the other points you brought up, it seemed to me we had wrapped them up and I didn't think we needed to go on." NO. NO THEY HAVENT BEEN. YOU HAVENT EXPLAINED A DAMN THING YOU JUST KEEP SAYING THE SAME THINGS LOUDER LIKE IM SUPPOSED TO FORGET I ASKED YOU A QUESTION
- "I guess I can just use my brain more actively than you can." HAH okay then. active use of brain clearly presented here in your inability to read a single thing i've written and/or respond accordingly to it. good job with that active brain of yours bro
man youre one shitty hobbit. cmon bro hobbits dont go around passive-aggressively implying people are idiots. thats what tools do

- i was never passive aggressive. You may have taken something I said that way, but I'm super straightforward.
- I am a pretty smug a*****e... but that aside, can you say I've been wrong? Anything where I have been wrong or you brought up a good enough counterpoint I figured as a finished point and let go, so you've won those or we've more or less agreed (like with the wargs/wolves and I think it was you I talked about Smeagol with)
-it's called not liking shoes... It's not like I don't wear shoes to work and such
- I'm pretty sure anything I left out is because i agreed with whatever you said
- I'm referring to my eidetic memory, so yeah, my brain is literally more active. If I haven't responded adequately, then maybe you should try rephrasing your question.

The whole point of this thread is to nitpick at the details of the movie compared to the book. If you don't care how accurate the movie is then why don't you just leave this thread? And again, I'm not being passive aggressive or shitty or whatever, I'm serious. I just don't understand why you're still here.
SiobhanDeStele 's avatar

Greedy Fatcat

Connor the Hobbit


Your interpretation of LOTR and Peter Jackson's are probably different. He did a fine job, compared to what most any other Director/Screenwriter would have done to it. Remember Eragon? Not that it was a great book to begin with...

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games