Well, you need to understand, Rolling Stone likes to joke around alot. "Sexed up" probably just means more kissing.

Thank you, King, for the reply re Arwen v. Eowyn and the big do-in on the Pelennor with Witch King. As far as what Jackson is capable of--after TT, anything goes. I have to keep telling myself that the movies are <I>based</I> on LotR. I almost wish ME was not so captivating on and real to me on screen--that way I could more easily let go of the disappointment in his having changed the plot for pizzazz instead of having so little faith in audience ability to get zazzed on T's plot. It's just so painful to get so close yet fall so far. I know certain things have to be changed, but and ... oh, I'm about to do the Faramir rant. <P>I'll just end by saying I watched the DVD of TT and was struck by how many things did not really add up. We're just so zotzed by spectacle that story sense becomes secondary.<P>Oh dear. I think ... I do believe ... yes, it must be true--I have become a fanatic.<P>And proud of it!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>yes, it must be true--I have become a fanatic.<P>And proud of it!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Hear hear! You have no idea... <P>Welcome to the Downs, dininziliel! Enjoy a long and glorious stay!

_________________________________________<BR>I am sorry, but Peter Jackson did not direct that movie. He just endorsed it in the advertising. It is actually directed by a man by the name of Eli Roth<BR>__________________________________________ <P>oh....thanks for telling me....hmm...yeh well when i heard his name in the trailer i thought he directed it..and it didnt seem like somethin he would be interested in ....

Just a question.<P>Why has a throw away comment in a throw away magazine generated 84 replies (85 now - Arrgh! ) on a board that, I think, typically has very good discussions?<P>H.C.<p>[ September 16, 2003: Message edited by: HCIsland ]

lol, HC. I'd guess because it raised an interesing topic of conversation, since most people are just posting as if the scene was actually in the movie. It's interesting to discuss peoples opinions/etc. on a sex scene in RotK (if there was one). That's my best guess (& now there's 86 ).

Well, H.C., if we've OFFENDED you, we can stop...

Whether in a negative or positive fashion, a great deal of people do like to talk about any subject remotely linked to sex.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Whether in a negative or positive fashion, a great deal of people do like to talk about any subject remotely linked to sex. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Too true, Lush! <BR>And Tolkienites, however unique they may be from other points of view, are no exception to this general rule.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> Whether in a negative or positive fashion, a great deal of people do like to talk about any subject remotely linked to sex. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Indeed, Lush. The mere mention of the word (especially in conjunction with the word "Outrage") is always bound to draw a crowd. It's the bread and butter of tabloid newspapers and "gossipy" magazines.<P>Next target - 4 pages.

You are all so right. Just the use of the word has brought many people into this thread in the first place.<BR>Howere, IMHO, I don't think there will be any such romantic issues in the final installment.<BR>The romantic scenes between Arwen and Aragorn probably won't get any hotter, but they are nessesary, I'm not suprised that there were so many in TTT.

I don't relish the subject at all! I just don't want to see the reputation of my favorite movies tarnashed by fish-wrapper rumors.<P>Perhaps it IS time to talk about something else, now that rumors are quenched...

One doesn't have to relish a subject to have a response to it, I don't think. <P>Anyway, the main purpose of <I>Rolling Stone</I> is no longer aimed at reflecting on pop culture. It is aimed at subverting and sensationalizing anything that can be subverted and sensationalized.<P>While I don't think that in this particular case the editor's desire was to tarnish a movie's image in the eye of the public, they were definitely acting according to the formula of how such magazines are sold. We have better writers at the university's weekly entertainment magazine, and none of us even get paid. Says a lot about <I>Rolling Stone</I> doesn't it?<P>Anyway, as a certain prolific BD-er said the other day, "Rolling Stone, always starting avalanches..."<p>[ September 18, 2003: Message edited by: Lush ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Hey, let's see if we can make three pages of outrage about something that's never going to happen.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Hey, now that we've got under lock & key, Saucepan Man, why not shoot for 4? Seriously though, I don't think there's a problem about continuing to discuss it if no one else does...

I was wondering if anyone here has seen this picture yet. It's at <A HREF="http://www.spydirweb.com/lotr.htm" TARGET=_blank>http://www.spydirweb.com/lotr.htm</A> go to pictures under links on the left side of the page and click on Frodo

Now *that's* terribly frightening.<P>And I just have one thing to say. For all of those people who had random reponses amounting to "that stuff doesn't appeal to me at ALL!!".<P>You are indeed in the minority of the population, and more significantly, probably lieing. Realise that most people like sex, it happens to be the mechanism for continueing our species.

Gee, "mechanism": make it sound real attractive there, Beren. What would Tolkien say? Describing an age old act of pretty much all life forms with a word coined in 1662 relating to *bumbumbum* <I>machinery!</I>. The outrage! I'm so outraged I... I... oh, cookies.....<P>Oh, and I saw <A HREF="http://www.spydirweb.com/1234.jpg" TARGET=_blank>that picture</A> two years ago in Premiere magazine. (If you use that link you don't have to scroll and click around to find the pic, it'll be there, magically.)<P>Two more posts, HC, and we can start singing "99 posts of outrage on the board". (Disclaimer: This is a joke, I am in no way, shape, form, angle, or equation condoning such a mindless post).

Diamond's right - that pic's of Elijah, not Frodo, and it is not from the supposedly nude scene, if any of you were wondering - or hoping.

Hmmm maybe this will help get it to a fourth page... <P>Seriously though, if there is a "sex scene" in ROTK, it will probably be something along the lines of Aragorn and Arwen kissing and embracing sometime after their wedding and then having the doors sort of swing shut on them. The audience is left to use their imagination and there is little slandering of Tolkien. That's it. I doubt and hope their isn't.

how SICKNING is THAT?! dude...i think that PJ would have better judgment than THAT... or atleast i HOPE so but i guess well jus have to see...

I don't read the rolling stone magizine but I will fume with you and anyone who wishes to fume to! (not like I have anything against Aragon/Arwen in fact I would fume if they didn't get married but this is to much!)

My only question is, who's on top? <P>H.C.

I highly doubt that PJ would incorportate sex into ROTK. It just doesn't sound like him.<p>[ September 27, 2003: Message edited by: ArathorofBarahir ]

HC, my lad, you deserve to be spanked!!!! <P>I honestly think that picture is disturbing (even though I've seen it before), but just glance at the hair, and you know it's another "interesting" picture of Elijah. I've seen so many "interesting" pictures of that poor boy, that it's not funny any more. I sincerely feel sorry for him.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>I've seen so many "interesting" pictures of that poor boy, that it's not funny any more. I sincerely feel sorry for him. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>lol, my thoughts exactly! Sickening are the minds of photographers...