PC Gaming News
Page 3 of 20 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 191
  1. #21
    I don't think I've mentioned this, but yay, Martin Freeman.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Jack View Post
    Glorfindel is actually a prince of the Elves, but supposedly a reborn elf after he died after killing a Balrog single-handedly. Tolkien reused the name from older stories and didn't want to change it, elven naming is the same like English actors it seems, no same names allowed.
    Ah, so that was it. He was in the Silmarillion as well right?
    Quote Originally Posted by djacob View Post
    Hopefully they'll be able to pull off the invisibility without it seeming hokey though.
    I do hope they'll change the effect from LotR. It was good there the shadowy realm, but it doesn't really fit the Hobbit.
    Even if the invisibility isn't done in a way that makes it more comic-relief than anything, I'm sure the kids will laugh, and the parents will follow suite.
    Oh no, laughter.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Age View Post
    Looks pretty good.I wonder if Turbine will turn it into a game like Lotr
    lol

    Quote Originally Posted by djacob View Post
    Hopefully they'll be able to pull off the invisibility without it seeming hokey though.
    Well it's described perfectly in the actual book so why not just follow that.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Akirai Annuvil View Post
    Ah, so that was it. He was in the Silmarillion as well right?
    It's a confusing matter really. Tolkien first wrote parts of the Silmarillion and Glorfindel's story was one of them. In it, he fought a Balrog one on one and killed it, but died as well. Que Legendary Elf.
    In LotR, another Glorfindel appeared, sent out by Elrond to the route the Nazgul were most likely to be because he was so high-tier he could solo them. Which he did in another instance. It later turned out the names were the same, Tolkien would have changed it if he noticed sooner but afterwards was reluctant to do so. Since elven names are supposed to be unique, the former and the latter are the same, and Tolkien later explained the Valar sent him back to Middle-Earth as a sort of predecessor to the Istari/Wizards.

    It's pretty much "whoops, I wrote two badasses with the same name, better make them the same with an Elf-Jesus backstory."

  4. #24
    Huh, I don't get that part. How can elven names be unique, there must be hundreds of thousands of them (counting all the Quendi), or even millions.

  5. #25
    Because Tolkien said so, and because he only had to name maybe a hundred of them.

  6. #26
    But when did he say so...

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Akirai Annuvil View Post
    Oh no, laughter.
    Yeah, I know it probably seems a silly thing to complain about, but I remember seeing the Fantastic Four in theaters, and every single time that the guy who was stretchy used his power, there was a full blown uproar. By the end of the movie I was thinking, "No, don't use your power stretchy man." Heh.

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by raspberry jam View Post
    Well it's described perfectly in the actual book so why not just follow that.
    Because they filmed it backwards. Imagine you only saw the LotR movies. Remember the visual and sound effects when Frodo uses the ring.
    Now imagine that same ambience when Bilbo uses it in the Hobbit.
    Doesn't quite match up does it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Jack View Post
    It's a confusing matter really. ~
    The Balrog part was during the Fall of Gondolin right? I vaguely remember that.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Akirai Annuvil View Post
    Because they filmed it backwards. Imagine you only saw the LotR movies. Remember the visual and sound effects when Frodo uses the ring.
    Now imagine that same ambience when Bilbo uses it in the Hobbit.
    Doesn't quite match up does it.
    Ok no, I mean don't show what it looks like for him at all. Just show him invisible (uh, I mean don't show him... well you know what I mean), but you should see some kind of blur when he moves. Like in Predator. And there should be a vague outline of his shadow. IIRC. Nothing more is needed.

  10. #30
    Moderator Achievements:
    Recommendation Second Class10 PostsVeteran10K Posts1,000 Posts
    MixedVariety's Avatar
    Posts

    15,314
    Quote Originally Posted by raspberry jam View Post
    Ok no, I mean don't show what it looks like for him at all. Just show him invisible (uh, I mean don't show him... well you know what I mean), but you should see some kind of blur when he moves. Like in Predator. And there should be a vague outline of his shadow. IIRC. Nothing more is needed.
    Yes, if I recall the book correctly (and I may very well not) it wasn't pure invisibility; there was the possibility of a weak shadow or blur showing up. I think an effect similar to the Predator would be perfect.
    mv

Posting Permissions

Posting Permissions

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off