I heard this rumor:

[Eowyn, The Lioness]

Has anyone heard a rumor about the Two Towers coming out in theaters before december 2002? I heard this from a friend and I don't know where they got it from. Just wondering (and hoping) if it was true. Please let me know if it is.:confused:

[Darth Tater]

You're friend doesn't know what he/she is talking about ;)

[HOBBIT]

ditto. rumors are rumors...

[Arathorn]

There's one about the DVD version having about 4.5 Hrs of footage in it and not just 30 to 40 mins and hopefully that it will be a director's cut and not simply separate outtakes.

There's even an online petition to the producers.

The articles/features are in http://www.theonering.net

[Lightice]

There are two time scales out, which the longer is propably the right one. First time scale published, had FotR at december 2001, TT at summer 2002 and RotK at december 2002, but then was published the longer, and propably the right time line, FotR at december 2001, TT at december 2002 and RotK at december 2003.

[Liviaine]

From what I have heard, they will be released every Christmas, but that may change, according to a few resources.

[HOBBIT]

Well yeah.....athough about 50 other people have already said this.. TT Dec. 2002...RotK Dec 2003. right? looks right to me

Us Potter fans must wait to. They are either done or 90% done with the second harry potter film....and its the same sort of fixed dates for Potter: Nov. 2002, Nov 2003, Nov 2004, Nov 2005, Nov 2006, and Nov 2007.....right? I think thats right. Just wanted to make a comparison there :D

[luinilwen]

i completely agree with you that the films will be released annually, for LOTR and HP alike.

however (and don't let this distress you, my fellow HP fan), it has not been confirmed whether they will continue to make the HP movies. I'm certain they will complete the second movie (a lot has been invested in it already!), although the making of the further five seems somewhat dubious.

firstly, i think it will be difficult to do the third and esp. fourth books as films (especially if they choose to be as close to the book as the first movie).

secondly, each harry potter story is more or less an individual story with closure at the end (not so much in the fourth book i know *waiting with baited breath for fifth book*). not so with LOTR, hence PJ's commitment to make all three movies in one hit.

i still think they'll take the whole year before releasing TT for editing, market research, marketing, to market FOTR on VHS and DVD, and to bring hype back to it's peak. i think we'll all be a bit rabid by xmas this year :D

[Nibs Cotton]

Since ticket sales did so well,I doubt he'd want to change the release date.and that was against,and on the heels,of some of the best movies of the year.

[Gerbil]

Agreed, and the same is true for the HP films. HP and the philanthropist's scone took far too much money for them not to plan the whole series.

My wish was that TTT and RotK were rescheduled slightly to come out earlier than the HP films. I reckon this would damage HP and help LotR MASSIVELY.

HP did so well partly due to the fact it was the first reasonable film of mass-market appeal to come out in about 5 months. But I've yet to find a single person who says that the tedious, long-winded, stereo-typical drudgery of Harry Potter was better than FotR.

[HOBBIT]

Originally posted by Gerbil
Agreed, and the same is true for the HP films. HP and the philanthropist's scone took far too much money for them not to plan the whole series.
*cringes* dang did you mess up the title...sure you know what you are talking about? ;) lol Is it tasty?

My wish was that TTT and RotK were rescheduled slightly to come out earlier than the HP films. I reckon this would damage HP and help LotR MASSIVELY.
Thats your opinion.

HP did so well partly due to the fact it was the first reasonable film of mass-market appeal to come out in about 5 months. But I've yet to find a single person who says that the tedious, long-winded, stereo-typical drudgery of Harry Potter was better than FotR.
Hmm you sure don't like Potter or seem to even know who or what he is do you? I'm sorry I even brought Harry Potter up, but the deed is done (I was just trying to make a comparison, you don't have to jump on Potter). Actually, many, many, many people (not saying me, I liked Lotr better, but Harry Potter was a pretty great film too) will say that they liked Harry Potter better.....that is a FACT, not opinion. hehe.

[Gerbil]

How did you guess I'm not a HP fan? *looks mystified*

I've actually got nothing against kids reading them, or even adults.
What has got me worked up about HP is the number of adults reading it and saying they are the best books they've ever read.
All that tells me is they need to read a lot more.

Personally I'm lucky enough not to be surrounded by people who like HP, which (if the film is anything to go by) is about as clicheed and stereotypical as it's possible to get. (although to the uneducated, LotR is a rip off of D&D ;), although a fair number of my friends have read them. But they also read a lot, which gives them a much better basis for comparison.

[orald]

_________________________________________

originally posted by Gerbil:

What has got me worked up about HP is the number of adults reading it and saying they are the best books they've ever read.
_________________________________________

I agree,shows how many adults haven't read ,The Hobbit,and LOTR.

[HOBBIT]

Wow, you guys have reached a new low. You are making fun of adults for (a)making their own decisions .....and (b) reading good literature ....(c) enjoying themselves, having a good time...maybe even making them better readers (like maybe they read Harry Potter so much that they read Lotr, if they already had not, and others....)...........

Belive it or not, but not everyone thinks that Lotr and the Hobbit are the best books ever written. Even to some who have read the books in their entirety do not belive that they are the best thing since sliced bread...to some - Lotr is just another great book that they have read. Yes, it is very unique and the reader enjoyed it, but its just one of dozens of that genre to them....

Are you also saying that any adult who has or has not read lotr that forms their own opinion on what their favorite book is are stupid? (i know, i messed that sentence up, but you get what i am saying)

Have you ever thought that if an adult read lotr (if he/she already hadn't) they may still have HP as a favorite..or some other book?

HP to you, maybe, is just another childrens fantasy book.....hmm just another book for 10 year olds...umm NOT! Harry Potter is a book (AND MOVIE) that can be enjoyed by all ages...all around the world. The books were NOT WRITTEN FOR KIDS - SIMPLY MARKETED FOR CHILDREN. They are GREAT books if you give them a chance, which you HP bashers obviously have not....Picking up book no. 1 and laughing at it does not count........I also don't get why as Lotr fans you must always be rivals with HP. They were both great books...

You can't really compare them........
I mean HP was written like 50 years later
by two different people
with two different styles
Lotr takes place in a sort of mythological world
HP takes place in the present day world.
They are about different things, people, different plots, different references....COMPLETELY DIFFERENT WORKS OF GREAT LITERATURE. Why compare them? Why say one is better than the other? They are both great and I enjoyed them both.
Almost only similarities: 'fantasy' genre, author has initials in front of title (J.R.R. Tolkien, J.K. Rowling), they both 'deal with magic and magical things' - but both in very different ways.

Get mature people. :D I am the official Harry Potter defender. If you knock it down, I will put it up.

this is getting off topic though, way off topic.

lets get back on it shall we? or continue this thr

[luinilwen]

i'm 17 and have lot's of friends (and i mean the vast majority *sniff*) who simply don't read. who cares if HP is garbage or too commercial? i'm seeing a lot of kiddy winks forsaking their gameboys and reaching for a book! let's hope that those kids will then reach for the narnia series and the hobbit and LOTR and grow up to be a group of teenagers that actually read!

in the mean time, those of us who enjoy HP can read and view as we may, those who don't enjoy shouldn't worry their curly toe hairs about it.

*climbs down from soap box and puts her hanky away*

harry potter has it's place in society, not necessarily on this board, though. so please no more potter bashing my dear comrades? :) :) :)

[HOBBIT]

Well yeah I was going to say that too, but I went to sleep instead. Kids who have never really read in their lives got into the Harry Potter series (hmm some adutlts too) wanted more. They discovered that reading was fun.........all those "books to read if you liked Harry Potter" lists....hmm I believe Lotr was on almost all of those lists. But people don't assume that if a person's favorite book isn't Lotr that they either haven't read the books or are stupid in some way...it doesn't work that way :D

OK I could do for a change in topic here.
But go ahead everyone if you want.

[Gerbil]

I've got nothing inherently against HP, and the points to do with kids reading is fantastic - the more that read the better for sure.
The same is true with adults. It just smacks me as a bit mad that it takes a kid's book to make them do so.

And saying HP is not written for kids is, I believe, completely untrue. Of course they were. That would be like saying the Chronicles of Narnia were not written for kids. Of course they were. The fact they had strong adult / religious undertones and themes was beside the point.

And at no point ever did I say that my judgement was formed on me thinking LotR the bestest book of allest time :P
I am not narrow-minded enough to think that my favourite book means it must be everyone's favourite, simply that there are better offerings in a multitude of genres than HP. The fact it's in the same area as LotR though doesn't help it much ;)
But yes, LotR is not perfect - I remember not finishing it the first two times I tried to read it because it's unwieldy, and as a youngster, FotR was actually very boring to me.

My point is, many adults who form such opinions are doing themselves a dis-service by not reading more and getting a wider sense of literature that is out there. And I'm fairly certain that if they did, many would NOT count HP as the bestest books of allest timest :)

[HOBBIT]

And saying HP is not written for kids is, I believe, completely untrue. Of course they were

Well, you are 100% incorrect. HP was only marketed for kids...not written (and sitll not) for kids. In almost every interview (and in the biography about J.k. Rowling), J.K. Rowling states that she wrote the books for herself....many authors do. She was surprised when they told her that it was going to be marketed for kids. All ages can enjoy it because it was written for them.

[Gerbil]

Really? Blimey!
I wonder then, was she shocked it it being marketed for kids, or simply marketed at all? :)

The only way I can rationalise them being for adults is if they are the fantasy equivalent of Mills and Boons. It's not got enough literary meat in it. Of course, this is all from my perspective, and I read a lot. Personally I prefer books that have some sort of depth to them. Current fave examples are LotR (naturally :) and the Dune series (although not prequels ;). I'm sure you'll admit they carry a different weight to their words than the HP story.

Perhaps where I'm getting mistaken is over what the general population of reading adults wants. To use my earlier example, there's a hell of a lot of women reading light romance rubbish. I don't understand that. Do people really want pure escapism with no mental processes involved? That's scary to me 'cos it's so far from what I want.

[jerseydevil]

Maybe it's not what you want Do people really want pure escapism with no mental processes involved? That's scary to me 'cos it's so far from what I want. But many people do want to escape. And people are able to make their own choices. Many TV shows that are number 1 in the US - I feel are stupid - Millionaire, Survivor, etc. But people have a right to their opinions and are free to read and enjoy what they want. I use my right to change the channel.

LOTR for me was an escape from reality - but it's not really light reading - especially since I also read the Silmarillion twice while in HS. HP is a good book/series and was a good movie. Maybe it is more simple than LOTR - but why would that make it any less than Tolkien's books. It's just different.

It's good to see that the child that was picked on by his evil relatives for 12 years is able to find himself in the center of another world. Maybe more people can relate to that more than they care to admit - whether it's being picked on in school, coming from abusive family, or whatever. Many books are just a way of escaping the mundane life - and everyone has a mundane life if they do the same thing day after day - even if they do enjoy it.

I loved Harry Potter (read them twice) I will be getting book 5 the first day it comes out too. I do love LOTR more - but the books are so different, it's impossible to compare them.

[Gerbil]

I guess the thing I don't like about 'light' reading is that my personal view on life is that too many people take the easy options which are ultimately less rewarding.

I'm not saying HP are bad books (in my opinion they are, but of course everyone is entitled to their opinions and I'm all too aware people will disagree), simply that reading something like LotR takes more mental effort and as such is more of an experience. Books like HP I just read. It's a story. LotR I was able to be sucked into, like it was another reality.

Let me put this clearly.
I hope HP makes more kids read more.
I am kind of glad that HP makes adults read more.

But where do they go from there? Is it a stepping stone, or do they just stop there with HP the be-all and end-all of their literary aspirations? That would be quite quite tragic.

THat's why I've not really got a problem with, say, you liking HP. You've obviously read more, and like it on it's merits over other works. You have a basis for comparison.

But for someone to read it and simply label them the best books ever, I find it more an indication on the person saying it than the books themselves.

[jerseydevil]

Since I'm a computer person - I think all day. Analyzing, developing and coding programs. I just don't always want to go home and think.

I have read a lot also - Shakespeare, Dostoyevsky, Dickens - not just fantasy. I also read a lot about New Jersey and American History (especially the American Revolution). In high school, I read a lot about Bristish History - especially about the Plantagenets. In college I was reading a lot of Russian History - mostly about Peter the Great and the Romanovs.

Just because a person may love the Harry Potter books - does not mean they are illiterate fools. Katherine Kurtz is also one of my favorite authors - with the Deryni series. Her first books - books 4,5,6 in the series at this time - were much lighter and basic than the books that she wrote later on. Few books can touch the Camber trilogy which makes up the first three books of the series. Harry Potter was JK Rowling's first book - she may grow as a writer too. Even if she doesn't match up to Tolkien's literary style - what does it matter? The Harry Potter books are enjoyable - and enjoyment is the most important thing.

I have a friend that felt the only way he could truly consider himself well read is if he read War and Peace. I am not like that - I read because I enjoy the subject matter or I like the author. I am not going to base my decisions on what I read because some "literary experts" praise or condemn it.

After reviewing the first post, I guess this discussion has completely gone off thread now. :)

We cross posted - so I'm just going to reply to your post above. I agree LOTR draws the reader in much more. At least in my opinion. The history of Middle Earth is almost like an extension of our own and makes the books so much more real. With HP - there is always this level of disbelief at things. But it is pure fantasy and HP are just fun books to read.

[Gerbil]

<snip JD's list of other authors he's read>

See? I knew you were well read - which is why I'd be more inclined to trust your opinion of say, HP, than someone else who has only read HP :)

[HOBBIT]

Gerbil, can you even form an opinion on Harry Potter? I mean have you read the books? And, as I said earlier, I don't mean did you pick up one of them, quickly skimmed through said "man this is easy" or "this is to childish" and put it down....I mean did you really read it? Even if you have only read the first book, thats enough to form an opinion on...even though you should read all of them before doing that as they get progressively better. These are not kids books man.....a lot of kdis had trouble reading book no. 4....the reading level and character development went up so much..its like when harry ages so does the quality of the story. Its great. Someone who calls Harry Potter and the sorcerer's stone (or philosophers stone in Europe) "HP and the Philantricants Scone" just has no right to go criticizing.

[HOBBIT]

OK you called it " HP and the philanthropist's scone" I think thats even worse :p.

[Gerbil]

Well, I'm glad JK Rowlings is improving as an author. Maybe by the end of the series it'll be worth reading. Except of course it wont, because she's already written the final chapter of the final book (see, I do keep up to date with some of the trivia :).

As for me reading it, why? I've got a fairly good idea of what I do and don't like.

As for what I called HP's book (you realise HP is actually a dinner sauce, like tomato ketchup right? ;), I'm glad you showed you read it at first by misquoting me. As for saying that me making a silly comment somehow nullifies the whole arguement is, of course, a silly comment. Does that mean your arguements are null and void also?

Defend HP all you like, but it looks to me like the roles are reversing here - you started out claiming I was dead set against HP in all shapes and forms, and needed to be more open to others judgement. Nice to see the tables turned :)

[HOBBIT]

What are you babbling about?

Lets be to the point here: you have not read the books, therefore you cannot form an opinion on them or about them. Plain and simple.

[HOBBIT]

I mean don't get me wrong, you can think that you won't like them.....but until you have read them....you can't do all the critizcizing that you have been doing. You can't say that adults whose favorite book is Harry Potter are idiots because you yourself can't judge the books....... your opinion of what you think of the books, and all your other opinions are valid....but i'm sorry your opinion on Potter is not a valid one, as much as people say every opinion is valid, that is not true! If you have never read a book, you can't go on about how much it sucks.......if you have never been to a restaurant, you can't say that you dislike it, etc, etc. Not to say that as a post your view is not valid, but as a 'book review' or something like that.

[Wayfarer]

Harry Potter and the Philanthropists Scone? :p

[Arathorn]

I enjoyed both the JRR and JK series of books. But sadly I can't say whether I could accurately give a comparison on the "which is better" scale.

LOTR/Silmarillion draws me into a macroscopic view of a world complete with language, lore, and politics. I feel like I'm reading a whole subscription set from some international daily in a forgotten realm.

With the HP set (4 of 7 so far), it feels like a school paper where you know just about everybody and you read a lot of gossip and the articles a closer to "real-time". It's a much smaller world and therefore more closely knit.

With Tolkien's world I lose myself in the world environment while with Rowling's I lose myself in the close relationships; at least that's how I feel.

Both books, however, are neither my favorite.

Give me the FEYNMAN'S LECTURES ON PHYSICS set any time!:cool:

[Gerbil]

Ah, but I am not going to read them because I've been told by friends who have read them, and who's taste in books I trust, have told me they aren't worth reading.

Not that they are bad, just that they aren't great either.

My opinion of people who read them and say they are thebest thing ever stands. If they don't have the basis of comparison to know better, then I pity them more than anything.

Bear in mind I've not yet heard one person here say they think they are the best books ever. Why? Because everyone here has read more. So to imply that my opinion is worth less than that of someone who in recent history has probably ONLY read HP, is utter rubbish.

The more we read, the more we can compare. Which I've done so. Which I don't believe these other people are able to. Which means I think they should read a great deal more.

[Starr Polish]

My opinion as a reader: They were slightly entertaining and kept my attention, especially as the series grows.

My opinion as a (amateur) writer: They weren't a masterpiece.

[HOBBIT]

*sigh* No comment...we are just repeating ourselves (Gerbil and I)...it is obvious that you are not going to change your mind, so......lets end it here. (Hmm. I guess that was a comment, but not to your reply)

[Eowyn, The Lioness]

Originally posted by Lightice
There are two time scales out, which the longer is propably the right one. First time scale published, had FotR at december 2001, TT at summer 2002 and RotK at december 2002, but then was published the longer, and propably the right time line, FotR at december 2001, TT at december 2002 and RotK at december 2003.
That's what I thought, but just thought I'd check. :D

[markedel]

HP is a good book (I found it more enjoyable then the hobbit-but I read the silmarrilion and LOTR first so I suppose I may be less attuned to Tolkien's children literature) but I'm not quite sure of it's unique appeal. Political correctness? Rare humor? I don't know I say if you want exhilerating children's literature it's all about Watership Down!

:)

[Legolas_BowKing]

The three movies should of came out in three days! :)

[jerseydevil]

I personally never considered Watership Down to be a childrens book. To me it's classic literature - just like Animal Farm. Watership Down is an awesome book though - however it is categorised. The movie is cool too.