The Hunt for Gollum

[Rumil]

Hello all,

A new, independently made web-film on 'The Hunt For Gollum'

http://www.thehuntforgollum.com/trailers.htm

Looks interesting!

First 2 trailers online, release date 3rd May,

Looks in impressive for 'film-fan-fic-film' sort of thing from the trailers!

[Erendis]

Yeap,I 've found it in December and since then,I can't wait the 3rd of May to come!

[Rumil]

Hi Erendis,

too right, looking forward to this (though a little gingerly in case it turns out awful).

I must say the trailers look as if a lot of work has gone into making them look compatible with the PJ films.

[Rumil]

Blimey,

this gets better and better, there's another film coming out at the end of 2009 called 'Born of Hope', looks like a biopic of young Aragorn,

see here-

http://www.bornofhope.com/Welcome.html

And both shot around the UK (thought I recognised some bits of North Wales!)

[Kuruharan]

Wow...I had no idea these were being made. :eek:

It looks pretty good.

Good find!

[Bêthberry]

Thanks, Rumil, for the links. These look fascinating, especially (to me) because they are fan-made. They are yet more evidence of how readers invest Tolkien with something special, something very few other authors inspire.

Quite extraordinary.

[Tuor in Gondolin]

The quality of the trailers is better then I
thought it would be, although perhaps a
bit too much PJish (not enough of an
individual style and feel). Still, not an
uninteresting or unworthy effort.

[skip spence]

I can only mirror sentiments already expressed here. It seems a very ambitious project but apparently they've copied PJ:s visual style almost to every last detail, which to me is a shame, as a copy will always pale in comparison to the original. The biggest eye-opener though is the sheer quality of that trailer: sweeping birds-eye views of snowy mountains, fighting-scenes with lots of fully and ably costumed actors, a believable CGI-Gollum. Very impressive indeed. Perhaps it won't be long before we see a fan-filmed Silmarillion or Children of Hurin as well...

[Bêthberry]

Perhaps it won't be long before we see a fan-filmed Silmarillion or Children of Hurin as well...

Or even a fan-filmed Hobbit before the PJ/GDT one? :smokin:

[Kuruharan]

Or even a fan-filmed Hobbit before the PJ/GDT one? :smokin:

Talk about a treat. :D

I do agree that the copying of the PJ visual style is a disappointment (to say nothing of the lack of dwarves in these films...such a scandal), but I'm hoping that if these projects are successful there will be more like them by individuals who are willing to break from the PJ mold.

Who knows, maybe *we'll* get inspired to make our own film. ;)

[Thinlómien]

We watched those trailers with Noggie last night... amazingly well made, both of them, but I must say I was a little disappointed still. The Hunt for Gollum looked so good, but they had copied the characters to the last detail (imitating PJ's cast's voices etc), so I could not really enjoy it (like, I can enjoy PJ's stuff most of the time, but a bad copy of it... no :().

Born of Hope looked better in this regard, but some things in it made me raise my eyebrows a bit... I guess that what you get in originality you lose in canonicity... :rolleyes: Anyway, it seems more interesting to me out of these two films, also because it seems to have a lot more of a plot than the other one.

Who knows, maybe *we'll* get inspired to make our own film.Give me the time, the money and the skill I know I would... :D

[Kuruharan]

*makes note*

We'll hold you to that! ;)

[Erendis]

Well,I have to admit that I liked the PJ-ish look of the trailers.It brings me back to the good days of December 2003...Former glories...
This feeling is exactly what ''Born of hope''mishes.I wish them luck as well,though!
Oh,by the way,was Gilraen fair-haired?

[Rumil]

Hi all,

well, Hunt for Gollum is in the news, see here-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8022623.stm


Cheers all,

[Bêthberry]

Thanks for the link, Rumil.

But what's this! They have anticipated--possibly upstaged-- the "bridge" film that PJ et al were rumoured to be writing! :eek: :D


The 40-minute story is set between The Hobbit and the Fellowship of the Ring.

It is interesting the emphasis put on the "love" that went into the making, as opposed to money-making.

[Rumil]

Hi Bethberry,

sort of an interesting choice of subject for the film, perhaps not an obvious one, even given that LoTR and The Hobbit are 'taken'.

Though I did hear somewhere that JRRT once woite something on 'The Journeys of Aragorn' that has sadly been lost.

I wonder if they found the Aragorn/Viggo looky-likey chap before deciding!

Cheers,

Tim

[Kuruharan]

sort of an interesting choice of subject for the film, perhaps not an obvious one, even given that LoTR and The Hobbit are 'taken'.


I think it is nothing short of a brilliant choice, precisely because it isn't obvious but at the same time does maintain that tie with the stories that people are the most familar.

I am secretly hoping that the next step in this what will hopefully become a developing saga will be somebody making something regarding Aragorn's travels in Rohan and Gondor.

I guess its not such a secret hope now...*has fevered visions of seeing Aragorn burning the Havens of Umbar on film*

(hopes somebody with a passion for filmmaking and a ton of time on their hands is reading...)

[Tuor in Gondolin]

And since it seems to be primarily about Strider, films
on early Aragorn/Arwen and her brothers journeys
to avenge their mum.

[Erendis]

films
on early Aragorn/Arwen and her brothers journeys
to avenge their mum.

Hi Tuor!

Well,this is an absolutely incredible idea!The story of Elladan and Elrohir is one I keep saying to those that know LOTR only from the film-especially from the cinema version -,as it is my firm belief they shouldn't have been excluded.So,for the audience of the net,those fan-films is a good way to expand their image of Middle -Earth to a far larger image.

Anyway,I' M COUTING THE HOURS TO THE PREMIERE!:eek::D

[Boo Radley]

Making popcorn over here, Boss!:D

[Elmo]

I thought it was pretty entertaining, very well made. Could have been a little less wham blam though, a little more thoughtful perhaps? Amazingly done on that budget though, acting was surprisingly good. Could have been a LOT more original too much PJ for my liking, I'm scared about talking more until more people have seen it.
HD link (http://www.thehuntforgollum.com/player_film-hd.htm)

Low Def link http://d2xm3akt98wlh.cloudfront.net/player_film-low.htm

[Elmo]

Oh yeah Snowdonia is beautiful!

[Eönwë]

I would have gone with this link (http://www.thehuntforgollum.com/player_film-hd.htm), but yeah, I'm going to watch it.

[Elmo]

I would have gone with this link (http://www.thehuntforgollum.com/player_film-hd.htm), but yeah, I'm going to watch it.
arrghhh that's much better :(

[Kuruharan]

I just finished watching it.

They definitely mimicked PJs style, right down to the style of cuts and everything.

I still enjoyed it though. Very impressive for what they had to work with.

I do have a few nit-picks.

*spoilers of a sort*

Gandalf was sure in the film, years prior to when he was in the books, that Bilbo's ring was the One Ring.

It seemed a little odd that the other ranger didn't know who Aragorn was.

Then there is the bag business, but that is forgivable because of their understandable desire to cut down on CGI.

[Elmo]

Highlight for spoiler
That scene with Arwen is identical the PJ one. Aragorn gets wounded, and sees her!

[Thinlómien]

Technics and costumes and pictures - wow! One wouldn't believe it's amateur work.

Acting - well... not good but some of PJ's actors were pretty bad too.

Script - *cries* There was no point in it, no plot and the dialogue was horrible! And the uncanonicity... *sigh*

But still, overall, quite nice. Not going into details before more people have seen it.

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I have no problem with the bag, a clever way to do it (and it was cute at times :) ).

Otherwise, like Lommy said: effect - really brilliant. Acting: poorer. Script: basically, there was none, let's face it.

And it is basically an attempt for a PJ-clone.

Otherwise, UNCANONICITY level: horrible. "Where did you hear that rumour?" Why would somebody speak of that there? And how did HE get THERE anyway? Nonsense!!! Also things like that Gandalf (and the less Aragorn) did not know about the Nine before Saruman (even in the movies!)... and such.

Overall, I give it more points than to PJ: given that it was an amateur work, it is really amazing - especially the effects. Only it is so close to PJ and the way these "cool" movies are made nowadays that it hurts... (dialogue and such)

[Bêthberry]

Listening to that voice over narration, I receive an inspiration.

Perhaps we can have a Barrow Downs competition, on a separate thread, where each of us provides a version of the voice-over narration. And then we can entice Fordim Hedgethistle back to run a poll to see whose narration is the most popular, whose is the most canonical, whose is the most effective, whose is the most spine-tinglingly enticing, etc.

What say ye all? :Merisu:

[Thinlómien]

What say ye all? :Merisu:That'd be cool. :p

I'm still wondering why Aragorn speaks Czech, though. :D Cute!

[Pitchwife]

Very well done, great fun to watch, and very little that struck me outright as contradicting the book, at least at the first viewing. Nice job!

I was kind of reluctant to nitpick on premiere night, but as Kuru started it before me, I might as well go on:

* s*p*o*i*l*e*r*s *

Gandalf was sure in the film, years prior to when he was in the books, that Bilbo's ring was the One Ring.
This bothered me, too, so I checked the chronology in the Tale of Years:
3001 Bilbo's farewell feast. Gandalf suspects his ring to be the One Ring. The guard on the Shire is doubled. Gandalf seeks for news of Gollum and calls on the help of Aragorn. [...]
3009 Gandalf and Aragorn renew their hunt for Gollum at intervals during the next eight years [...]
3017 Gollum is released from Mordor. He is taken by Aragorn in the Dead Marshes, and brought to Thranduil in Mirkwood.
So the makers of the Hunt actually condensed 16 years into 40 minutes (much like Peter Jackson did with the time between Bilbo's party and Frodo's departure, and maybe with the intention to make their chronology match Jackson's?). According to the book, Gandalf may not have been sure about the Ring when he first talked to Aragorn, but he had a strong hunch. Altogether, I think the film's treatment of the matter is defendable.

It seemed a little odd that the other ranger didn't know who Aragorn was.
Agreed - that whole scene was a little odd indeed. The other Ranger introduces himself as Arithir, son of Ar-whatsoever (btw, should they have the royal prefix in their names?). Aragorn introduces himself with "I'm Strider" - using his Bree nickname, not his Dúnedain name. Arithir says "I've heard of you" - now, is this the way the Dúnedain greet their chieftain, the Heir of Isildur???
Or did the makers assume that Aragorn used 'Strider' as a sort of incognito, and the fact that 'Strider' = Aragorn, the Heir of Isildur was known only to the top ranks of Dúnedain hierarchy?

Another point: Is it just me, or does anybody else also think that those Mirkwood Elves might have showed up a few seconds earlier? I almost expected them to applaud coolly and say something like, "Nice swordsmanship." (Aragorn smiles happily and collapses from exhaustion.)
And of course Aragorn looked even younger than Viggo, who looked way too young for my taste.

Good moments:
- Orc dialogue: exactly the right tone (cf Ugluk and Grishnakh, Gorbat and Shagrat);
- How Aragorn discovered the use of fire against the Nazgûl;
- That flower Aragorn reached for when he was poisoned - was that supposed to be Athelas? (I like to think it was.)

And the bag was a clever solution, as Legate already said. "Bagses! Bagses! We hates it, my preciousss!":D

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

Agreed - that whole scene was a little odd indeed. The other Ranger introduces himself as Arithir, son of Ar-whatsoever (btw, should they have the royal prefix in their names?).

No, they certainly shouldn't, unless it is a forgotten cousin of Aragorn. Anyway, this guy is just horrible - what is he doing there? Apparently, all parts of Middle-Earth are full of traveling Dúnedain who have been everywhere from Rhun to Harad.

[Elmo]

Do you reckon that strange Dunedain is a spy for Sauron? Only reason he wouldn't know who his flipping chief was! Sauron didn't know about Aragorn so it is possible. Or maybe it was just simply bad plotting :smokin:

[Rikae]

Well,I for one am disappointed. The one advantage amateurs have is the freedom to be original and creative, and these folks lifted every line and every shot directly from PJ. One could have gotten almost the same result by piecing together clips from LOTR, to be honest.

"By fans for fans" clearly refers to movie fans - I eagerly await something by and for book fans!

[Gwathagor]

Well,I for one am disappointed. The one advantage amateurs have is the freedom to be original and creative, and these folks lifted every line and every shot directly from PJ. One could have gotten almost the same result by piecing together clips from LOTR, to be honest.


That's exactly the same impression I got. *shakes head* Heck, I probably could have written a better script.

[Erendis]

Oh,you are all such mothers-in-law!
Yes,there were inaccuracies.
Yes,Arithir looked like the spy in "at the sign of the pancing poney"(and why wouldn't he be?)
Yes,I didn't like the Elves-coming-after-the-fight-thing too.
BUT:

All the drawbacks of these realy cute film are almost the same with PJ's.Does any of you dislike the trilogy?
Also,they might have been more original,but I sense that if they had,the film wouldn't have recieved the critics it has.Afterall,like I said in the past,films like that are a motif for the movie-only fans to search more about the books.Guess what would have happened if it turned out to be like the midieval scenes in BBC's documentaries:p
Come on,guys,we should be supportive!

And let us not forget it is an amateur film!
On my behalf,congratulations!

[davem]

Those disappointed in HFG may be interested in Channel 4's new drama 1066: The Battle for Middle-earth (see me post on it here http://forum.barrowdowns.com/showpost.php?p=595297&postcount=1

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

All the drawbacks of these realy cute film are almost the same with PJ's.Does any of you dislike the trilogy?

Of course. I think that's our duty ;)

But anyway, hey, I approve of this film. *points up to previous posts* I think they were better than PJ, the only unfair advantage he had in contrary to them were some really good actors and also having the script practically written down by Tolkien himself. Who knows if PJ's script would have been any better if he wrote it all by himself :p (And if you take the moments where PJ changed the script in contrary to the books and showed his own initiative, one may really wonder ;) )

But hey, thinking about it now with a bit of distance, I like the movie - especially the bag. And even the shots were pretty good, the setting, the environment, even the camera (the fainting scene). Those guys did a good job. Showing too little initiative in making it un-PJish: well, no can do. Because, who knows what would be the reception of the setting if it looked completely different from PJ's way of portraying things; one might complain "but Aragorn surely did not look like this" and stuff like that, but this way, you just take it like a prequel to the movies and know on which terms you are.

[Rikae]

All the drawbacks of these realy cute film are almost the same with PJ's.Does any of you dislike the trilogy?


You must be new around here. ;)

I'm still wondering why Aragorn speaks Czech, though.

I'm quite sure he was speaking German! :D

[Tuor in Gondolin]

Originally Posted by Erendis
All the drawbacks of these realy cute film are almost the same with PJ's.Does any of you dislike the trilogy?

Liked FOTR, (except for Frodo's wimpishness)

But the other two.....Way too much tampering by PJ. When he and his girls
stick to JRRT all three movies are rather good (and scenery and
actor selection is generally excellent).

[Rumil]

Hi all,

well I got round to watching it at last,

First of all I reckon it's a magnificent achievement to put a film like this together on a budget of tuppence-hapenny and have it look so good. The crew and cast should be heartily congratulated for their hard work.

Thing I liked were, similar to PJ, the wonderful scenery - Misty Mts, Mt Doom, Woods, Mountains and Hills, the Gladden Fields etc. Gollum was spot on, I especially liked the 'bag-gambit', reminded me of Bilbo...

I came from the end of a bag, but no bag went over me

There will be some who dislike it for following the PJ approach, but I think there was no alternative really, and I quite liked the 'look' of much of the Trilogy (naturally, while muttering and spluttering about the bits PJ made up while leaving so much else out, oh and the giant Hyenas etc etc etc :rolleyes:).

However, there were quite a lot of 'could have done better' moments. The Random Ranger - whats that all about? Should have been a Woodman or Beorning by rights. After the Gladden Fields there was little sense of Middle Earth location. I guess it was mostly supposed to be around and about Mirkwood, the difficult thing with a solo mission is that there's little scope for exposition. Basically Aragorn gets to stare at the ground a lot and look for footprints - not so exciting. I was rather hoping for some action on the margins of Mordor (though I guess trip to Waikato was over-budget!) and a Dead Marshes scene.

The plot was overall pretty weak. Unless you know, there's little indication that Gollum has already been captured and set loose by Sauron, who's hoping to follow him to the Ring. Also there's little feeling of the epic scale of Aragorn's task, it seems as if he pops out for a bit of a stroll and comes back with Gollum a week next Tuesday. Was it just me or were Arwen's ears a bit weird?

Some extra bits I did like were the direct book quotations, the poisoned dart scene (was that plant Elanor perhaps?), Gollum thieving fish from the woodmen (although the cottage was a little too high-tech with its Rayburn grate).

Still I think the main thing is that LoTR fan movies CAN be done, high hopes for the future!

[Gwathagor]

All the drawbacks of these realy cute film are almost the same with PJ's.Does any of you dislike the trilogy?

I dislike those drawbacks.

[Gwathagor]

First of all I reckon it's a magnificent achievement to put a film like this together on a budget of tuppence-hapenny and have it look so good. The crew and cast should be heartily congratulated for their hard work.


You're absolutely right about that!

[Macalaure]

First of all I reckon it's a magnificent achievement to put a film like this together on a budget of tuppence-hapenny and have it look so good. The crew and cast should be heartily congratulated for their hard work.

I can only second that.

It looked a bit like a copy pf PJ's Middle-earth, but that's not bad at all - the visuals were great in his trilogy.

If only they hadn't also copied PJ's script-writing. ;) Some lines didn't sound Tolkien-like, but Jackson-like, which I found to be a little out of place. I felt like there were several occasions where, with only a little more care or subtlety, this film could have been much, much better. From the top of my hat, I remember Gandalf failing to explain that Gollum knows where Bilbo came from, but not where that land lay. The encounter with the first two Orcs was great, but that mass-Orc-fighting scene later made absolutely no sense. The appearance of the Ringwraith could have been much better, too, if there had been any significance to it. (Were we even told that they were searching for the Ring, too, and were following Gollum therefore?) I might be mixing up the timeline now, but why not let the other ranger tell Aragorn that Osgiliath had been raided and that ominous riders in black had passed the bridge (and then let Aragorn count one and nine together for the viewers)? Also, Aragorn could have been a bit more afraid during the encounter - they are terrible, after all.

I would have liked to see more of Gandalf's interrogation of Gollum. Considering the darkness in that room, it wouldn't have been too hard on the CGI-ers, I think. It was great to hear about the ghost that drinks blood, but I missed Gollum telling us about his new very strong friends, and Gandalf putting the fear of fire into him.

Nevertheless it was very nice to watch it, especially considering that, after all, it was free. :)

[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I might be mixing up the timeline now, but why not let the other ranger tell Aragorn that Osgiliath had been raided and that ominous riders in black had passed the bridge (and then let Aragorn count one and nine together for the viewers)?

Well the main thing that troubles me - like I said, and it goes even against what is in the movies (and of course the more in the books) - that nobody should know about the Ringwraith until they come to the Shire: Aragorn not before they come to Bree, and Gandalf not before Saruman (in the books via Radagast) tells him. If the Hunt for Gollum was to be considered a "prequel" to the LotR movies, it would make no sense for Gandalf to leave Frodo alone, and to be surprised by Saruman when he tells him about the Riders ("oh, but I know for about half a year by now"... not to mention that in the Books, if Gandalf knew about the Riders by now, it would be some twenty years before Frodo's departure... how lovely. "The Nazgul are back! They have crossed the River... twenty years ago." Even in the movie where the twenty years are reduced to a few days? Weeks? Months? - Gandalf would be pretty dumb to leave Frodo to the Riders).

[Macalaure]

Well, yes. It was cool, though, if only it wouldn't have given you the feeling of a random encounter.

(Thinking about it now, when Strider talks about the Ringwraiths in Bree, it does not give you the feeling that he's just teaching them general lore, but that he really was confronted with one before. Is it just me, or did I miss something?)

[Hookbill the Goomba]

There are films that stay with you for the rest of your life. They inspire us to ask deep and probing questions. However, the only question The Hunt For Gollum raised for me was 'Why?'

Now, it was well presented. The CGI was better than could be expected for a low to no budget film. The acting was pretty good and the Howard Shore music rip-offs were neat. But I think the plot was far too thin for a really good film. As has been said, there are too many shots of Aragorn bending down and looking at foot prints. And Gandalf didn't have his hat, which was an eternal disappointment.

I'd also like to know why Aragorn whispered everything he said. All the time. I mean, there's being secretive, then there's taking it too far.

Overall, though, I am impressed with what they archived. I just think that the script could have been better, the story stronger and the music more original. Much as I love Howard Shore's score, this rehash of it wasn't up to scratch. Perhaps if they'd got a nice score and a stronger plot, it would have been a much more enjoyable film.

Don't get me wrong, I did enjoy watching it. It just baffled me. When there are so many unfilled stories from Tolkien that this team could probably have done and done well. I would dearly have loved to see Farmer Giles of Ham. ;)

Incidentally, I'm still waiting for that CGI animation version Roverandom that someone should have been made by now. :D

But, yes, I'm hoping Born of Hope has more to say. Even though the Trailer tells us nothing.

[Beregond]

Well, I did like the film, and as most people agree, it was well done given a limited budget.

However, there were some things I found surprisingly disappointing. It did not bother me that they followed PJ's style, but rather that they almost replicated his scenes. Too often the dialogue and plot tread so closely to its big brother as to induce cringing. I had hoped for something more original, frankly. And while a movie of events only hinted at by Tolkien could hardly be wholly faithful to the books, I found it unnecessary for any of the made-up dialogue to be at odds with what Tolkien wrote. At the same time, I was disappointed in the lack of "bookish" details to satisfy our hunger for such things in a post-PJ world. All in all, I felt the makers of this movie fell into the same trap as PJ did - making things happen because they look good on film whether or not they make any sense (the Nazgul, the strike-first-ask-questions-later attack of the Random Ranger).

From a cinematic point of view, I thought the more obvious computer generated effects weren't the best - and of course they weren't! They didn't have the budget. But I thought the more obvious CGI weren't necessary (the Ring, and Gollum face). It was distracting because it looked so out of place compared to the beautiful photography of the rest of the film. Someone worked very hard for the CGI, but from an outside perspective I wished they had left it out altogether (except for the long shots of Gollum which were well done).

The music was good...but...way too close to Howard Shore's score. I spent the first two minutes trying to figure out if it actually WAS the LotR score or not, and the next five wondering if you're allowed to borrow musical themes like that.

*spoilers*
As for the plot, I felt Gollum's capture was too easy. It fact, the "Hunt" was up before the halfway mark. The climax didn't involve Gollum at all, and Aragorn actually lost his charge.

I didn't mean to be harsh, but my criticism stems from the expectations I had for a non-commercial fan movie. There were many positives and I enjoyed it overall. I liked the Orcs. They had less prosthetics on than did PJ's, and were the more realistic and scary for it. Also, I'm a sucker for Orc dialogue. The fight scene was pretty good (I like swordfights).

As I said, the scenery was amazing. This is where the movie shined. Where was it shot? It seemed to include many locations in NZ, from LotR.

The acting was pretty good, and by the end of the movie I had accepted Adrian Webster as Aragorn. Gandalf was convincing as well, as was Arwen. Too bad we didn't see more of the elves! Gollum-in-a-bag was ingenious and more or less necessary.

And, frankly, I wish the movie was longer but I guess that's a result of budget too. All in all a good effort and an enjoyable 40 minutes. I just expected more "for the fans, by the fans".

[Elmo]

It was shot in Snowdonia, North Wales for the mountains and the Forest of Dean England for the errr forest.

[Erendis]

Brand -new ,actually,dear Rikae!

Well,guys ,why such an attack to my words?-Yahoo!I made impression!:D-

Talking about the trilogy like this derives firstly from my great love for it ,since it was th reason why I read the books and secondly from the fact that it was an amateur work,made for all types of fans,not just the more sophisticated ones.
Oh,yes,Gwathagor,I crave to see an accurate trilogy too,but since nobody has so much money to waste,I 'll continue watching the trilogy.


P.S.Sorry if I sound too embarassed;it's my hormons going quite wild!;)

[Gwathagor]

it's my hormons going qyite wild!;)

Yeah, Lord of the Rings does that to me, too.

[Erendis]

Yes,it does indeed!But girls have also some others,not so pleasant reasons.....:smokin:

[Kuruharan]

As for the plot, I felt Gollum's capture was too easy. It fact, the "Hunt" was up before the halfway mark. The climax didn't involve Gollum at all, and Aragorn actually lost his charge.

I agree. The capture of Gollum should have been the climax of the film, in my opinion. More should have been made of the difficulty of actually capturing him.

Too bad we didn't see more of the elves!

Too bad we didn't see more dwarves, you mean. ;)

Building off Bethberry's idea, why just limit ourselves to the intro? Why don't we Downers just rewrite the whole thing? ;)

[Boo Radley]

Finally, I can post again!!!

OK, now that I've got that out of my system, here's my take on the movie.

First of all, I have to disassociate myself from the desire to compare it to any kind of big budget film with a cadre of professional writers etc, and judge it by what it is. A fan made film.
I give it two hearty thumbs up.

I think it was a brilliant effort and refuse to nit-pick any part of it.
Could it have been better? Sure. What in this benighted world can't be better than it is?
But this ws done out of love and not out of profit and so I stand and applaud it.

[narfforc]

I enjoyed watching this short film. I see it as just another interpretation of Tolkiens works. I have read the books, heard the radio play, seen the films and watched the stage play. Adding to my overall experience of the visualisation of Middle-earth have been artists like Nasmith, Lee, Howe and Lacon amongst others, they are all different. I do not see Viggo as Aragorn (he does a good job of it though), I see an image that differs from others, none are wrong, but are any right, only Tolkien can say. So the more the merrier, give us more.

[Rumil]

Evening all,

remember the whole Middle Earth fan-fic-film-fest-fing?

Next up is 'Born of Hope', an online fan-film looking like a biopic of young Aragorn (or perhaps I should say the story of Arathorn and Gilraen).

Mentioned this last time, but there's a fuller trailer available now

here-
Born of Hope Trailer (http://www.bornofhope.com/Videos.html#May2009Trailer)

Apparently release expected Autumn 09,

Cheers,

R

[Eönwë]

I hadn't watched it all the way until now, and I have to say that i'm impressed.

If you forget that it's meant to be related to LOTR and just imagine it as some short adventure it's not that bad as a short film. Of course, the acting/scripting wasn't that good, and the filming itself wasn't very clean.

And for an amateur film (costing only £3,000), I think I can forgive its shortcomings.

[Nazgûl-king]

I just finished watching this now, it's not bad for a fan film. I think Born of Hope was better, but this was still good. The scenery was great!