Turn on thread page Beta

RETURN OF THE KING/only reply if youve seen the film watch

    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
    Do you mean Lady Galadriel?

    There were 21 rings,
    three rings were given to elven kings, not just the wisest. Lady Galadriel has one of these as does Elrond. I'm not sure if it is Gandalf who holds the third.
    well i'm not sure either, but everyone else thinks so (see posts above)
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by -al)
    Frodo left the shire because he was a ring-bearer, like the others.

    The evil eye is controlled by Sauron, who was once a wizard. (Not Saruman, the white guy in the first two films).
    1)That makes more sense

    2)That so confused me! so Sauron is the scary voice which is heard in people's heads then? And Saruman is the one who was conveniently forgotton after the 2nd (?) film in the tower? The one that tried to kill Gandalf?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 2776)
    The eye is not evil, just the person that uses it is evil.
    Who made the eye then 2776?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by serendipity)
    Who made the eye then 2776?
    I'm not too sure I thinl it was the elves ages ago who gave it to Rowan or someone, but then got attacked and then the eyes got lost etc.

    Its in teh book, but forgot most of it now...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think the films have done themselves justice, which is what counts. Peter jackson et al took on a mammoth task that most would have been too afraid to have a pop at, and have been enourmously succesful, with three films back to back. I have to say, they surpassed any expectations I had by a mile, and the same would be true for most. Even the Tolkienites kept quiet, which is saying something...

    A lot of people don't seem to realise that the films are an interpretation, an adaptation of the books, not an exact replica for the big screen. Naturally there are differences, which in my opinion were almost always justified.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by -al)
    I think the films have done themselves justice, which is what counts. Peter jackson et al took on a mammoth task that most would have been too afraid to have a pop at, and have been enourmously succesful, with three films back to back. I have to say, they surpassed any expectations I had by a mile, and the same would be true for most. Even the Tolkienites kept quiet, which is saying something...

    A lot of people don't seem to realise that the films are an interpretation, an adaptation of the books, not an exact replica for the big screen. Naturally there are differences, which in my opinion were almost always justified.
    That is correct, totally agree with you. And it is a lot better than the last movie they made about the ring...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 2776)
    I'm not too sure I thinl it was the elves ages ago who gave it to Rowan or someone, but then got attacked and then the eyes got lost etc.

    Its in teh book, but forgot most of it now...
    Are you sure you're not confusing 'the eye' with the palanitir's? The palantir's are the crystal ball-esque things, that are used to communicate, one of which Merry picks up in Isengard. A long time before the setting of the film, several people owned them, including those in Aragorn's family line. Aragorn inherits one when he is crowned king.

    'The eye' is just a representation of Saruman as such, considering he is only a spirit.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by -al)
    Are you sure you're not confusing 'the eye' with the palanitir's? The palantir's are the crystal ball-esque things, that are used to communicate, one of which Merry picks up in Isengard. A long time before the setting of the film, several people owned them, including those in Aragorn's family line. Aragorn inherits one when he is crowned king.

    'The eye' is just a representation of Saruman as such, considering he is only a spirit.
    Yes, I was getting confused, yes it is the palantir that I was thinking.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by -al)
    Are you sure you're not confusing 'the eye' with the palanitir's? The palantir's are the crystal ball-esque things, that are used to communicate, one of which Merry picks up in Isengard. A long time before the setting of the film, several people owned them, including those in Aragorn's family line. Aragorn inherits one when he is crowned king.

    'The eye' is just a representation of Saruman as such, considering he is only a spirit.
    Thanks. Have some rep
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    Tolkien would have helped us a lot if he hadn't picked such similar names as Sauron and Saruman.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
    Tolkien would have helped us a lot if he hadn't picked such similar names as Sauron and Saruman.
    Well I was confused at first but Then it might suggest a type of bond? between them?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
    Tolkien would have helped us a lot if he hadn't picked such similar names as Sauron and Saruman.
    totally agree!! me and my mum were having an arguement over which was the name of the evil spirit - we ended up thinking that Saruman became the evil controller of the eye... :rolleyes:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 2776)
    Well I was confused at first but Then it might suggest a type of bond? between them?
    oooh good thinking, batman!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
    Tolkien would have helped us a lot if he hadn't picked such similar names as Sauron and Saruman.
    I think (think) he did it to associate that sound with evil. Similarly he named 'heroic' characters Arwen, Eowyn, Eomer etc ...
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by -al)
    I think (think) he did it to associate that sound with evil. Similarly he named 'heroic' characters Arwen, Eowyn, Eomer etc ...
    I'm sure he could have thought of two disimilar evil names.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
    I'm sure he could have thought of two disimilar evil names.
    Like Bill and Ted.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
    I'm sure he could have thought of two disimilar evil names.
    I think maybe he did it because the sibilance in the two names remind the reader of a snake, which is associated with evil.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
    I'm sure he could have thought of two disimilar evil names.
    I'm not saying that he was trying to choose a name that sounded 'evil', but he wanted evil characters to have a similar sounding name to represent a general evil, and the same applies for the 'good' characters.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 2776)
    Like Bill and Ted.
    It certainly was an excellent adventure :rolleyes:
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    edders' verdict: 9/10
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.