The Hype of the Rings

With the Fellowship of the Rings just around the corner, the Slashdot Submissions bin is overflowing with stories about the film since it premiered in the UK already for you lucky brits. If you don't mind a little spoilage, here is the guardian's review, the BBC review, the telegraph review, some pictures from the premiere, and one last review. Also, Scifi.com is reporting that the film has already been pirated. The reviews have their nitpicks, but on the whole its looking good. M : LOTR tattoos!

Comments

Glasses At BK

[ackthpt]

I saw an ad for collectors glasses at Burger King.

This sort of thing often drags some of the enjoyment out of these films. Sell. Sell. Sell. I guess, someone's gotta come up with crap for eBay and Flea Markets.

pirates

[osiris]

No shit its been pirated already. im sure ive seen some releases of it floating about the divx/vcd trading groups for at least a week. i mean, this has got to be one of the biggest films for a long time, its hot stuff to get your hands on.

some of these people have links right in the film industry and can easily get films before they are released. just dont count on dvd quality though.

so its no suprise that people are flogging copies of it already. its probably been running rampant through south east asia for weeks. i know when i lived there it wasnt hard to get movies on vcd before they were released.

cant wait to see this movie in the cinema though :) i wouldnt watch a crappy copy of it.

Please, let's not spread the DivX

[Hairy_Potter]

Please, let us geeks do one thing right, for once, and respect the memory of J.R.R Tolkien and his family and pay to see this movie, instead of rushing off to edonkey, KaZaa, or alt.binaries.erotica.furry-feet to download a crappy handheld Sonycam divx of the film.

Please, geeks, leave your computer, go to a theater, mix with fellow geeks and lovers and LOTR and watch this in a theater, 40 feet wide in Dolby, as it was meant to be seen. Who knows, you may even like meeting other people!

Re:Please, let's not spread the DivX

[cygnusx]

> not because I'm deluding myself that J.R.R.
> Tolkien, the author of the similiarly themed
> book would have cared, or that his estate has
> any interest, rights or say in this film

This URL seems to differ with you:

It is a myth almost as cherished as JRR Tolkien's tales of Middle Earth: that nearing the end of his life, and under pressure from the taxman and a wolfpack of sharp Hollywood suits, the cloistered Oxford scholar signed away the rights to The Lord of the Rings for a mere £10,000.
But like many good yarns that have grown in the telling, it is - the Guardian can reveal - just that, a myth.

...

Far from the £10,000 of lore, he got $250,000 (then worth about £102,500) and a percentage of the royalties, which could eventually be a massive fillip to his estate, already fat from the sale of 100m books around the globe. The estate's solicitors confirmed yesterday that it would get more royalties if the film took two and a half times its costs.

Devil's Advocate: The Purposes of the Crap

[d.valued]

(Lemme open up by saying I may or may not agree with what I am about to say. This sort of duplicity makes me an excellent candidate for political office.)

So far, I've seen the Burger King glasses, the action figures, a great many re-published copies of the book with the movie as the cover. I've seen the board game, the cartoon, the ten-minute TNT blip, the one-hour Sci-Fi blip. The bedsheets are on order at my local K-Mart, the costumes are being put on back-order, the card game is selling briskly, and the pornographic feature based upon the film is in high demand at the local adult bookstore.

All this stuff (with the possible exception of the porno) goes to help defray the insanely high intial costs of the trilogy. Keep in mind, for those of you who've been living in a cave since, oh, the last millenium, that they a) shot all three films at once and therefor WILL be released; b) they cost a LOT of money. If you think that $6000 for a Microsoft-proof laptop is a painful yet fun investment, think that the studio coughs up mega-million dollar budgets with shocking regularity. In fact, I'm torn on whether the casinos or Hollywood are the folks to duplicate for the handling of insanely large quantities of cash.

The crap has a double purpose. It gets people Movie Stuff, and simultaneously promotes the film.

Peter Jackson Interview

[DaoudaW]

I'll admit I was worried after reading stories like Feedback: Not the subtractions, but the additions about changes made to the story during the making of the film.

But after hearing last nights interview with Peter Jackson on World News for Public Television, my fears have been allayed. Jackson was asked what John Ronald Raoul would have thought about the movie. Peter said (approx.), "I hope he'd see the love we put into it over the years. But I think he'd be grumpy about many of the changes we had to make."

He seemed to have a deep understanding of Tolkien the man, and was quite aware that he'd meddled with literature that had been canonized. The seriousness with which he approached his task impressed me.

I don't see why not...

[Bonker]

I mean, if you're a big enough fan to spend however long it takes to download a 700mb DiVX AVI, aren't you probably going to go to the theater several times, just so you can see it on the big screen, the way it was 'meant' to be seen? Aren't you also going to buy the 2 DVD Box Set collector's edition next year and have all-night Fellowship of the DVD parties watching it over and over again with all your closest geek buddies?

Case in point.... if your an anime fan: I just bought 2 $25 DVD's this week. One was the Utena Movie and the other was the 'Oh My Goddess' movie. Neither is 'perfect' in the way that most fanboys will perceive any one of the 3 LOTR movies. Still, they are fun movies. Before they were released in the U.S., however, I obtained low-quality DivX and VCD anime fansubs of these two titles.

Even though I 'pirated' the movies, the American dub/sub houses and indirectly, the Japanese studios, still got their money from me.

Therefore, I encourage *true* Tolkein Fanboys and everyone else who plans to eventually legitimately see or buy this movie to download it to your heart's content

Re:what about the Hobbit?

[Marcus Brody]

Actually quite an insightful comment.

Why has the Hobbit been ignored for so long, whilst they are making LOTR for the second time?

In contrast to LOTR, the Hobbit is ideal film material. Its short, nice tight storyline, gripping throughout, doesnt lag anywhere, get tired or have dull spots and is a kids classic.

I dont see why they didnt make the Hobbit first as a primer/tester for the LOTR.

False delimma

[cduffy]

Trust me, I'm going to pay to see the movie.

I might also download the crappy DiVX, but I'll pay to see it first.

The two aren't necessarily exclusive, 'ya know? I can't see *any* fan of Tolkien being happy watching only a low-quality copy of LoTR on a computer screen.

Re:Ralph Bakshi

[SeraphtheSilver]

That's because rotoscoping was a retro-technique that Linklater dug up, not because Bakshi was _that_ cutting edge. It was invented in the mid 70's IIRC. Bakshi just appropriated the technique (and improved it) for his own use.

And to be honest, the Bakshi version is a butchering of the story. He himself admits it. He started animating the first one under the auspices of a studio who then changed their mind and canceled the project. He was almost finished the first movie then, but he thought that it wouldn't make sense by itself without the others. So, on his own time and money, he quickly wrote in and animated the most important scenes from the last two books, giving it the 'squeezed' feeling that bugged me even back when I was a kid. The results were less than stellar by his own admission.

-Seraph

Re:The tattoos

[synaptic]

> The Fellowship actors' tattoos all depict the
> Tengwar symbol for 9.

Three Rings for the Elven-kings under the sky,
Seven for the Dwarf-lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for Mortal Men doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness band them
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie.

Re:$300 Million

[Squirrel Killer]

I doubt it. They probably expect to recover between a third and half the cost on the first movie (ie $100-150 million) then the mostof the rest of the up-front costs on the second movie, leaving the third movie to be mostly or pure profit. Merchandising dollars, which they've been for several months now with movie related books, etc..., help pad the bottom line.

Straight to video would waste the potential theatrical take, even if the first movie tanks, there's still enough die-hard Tolkien fans and pure fantasy fans for the second and third films to bring in enough revenue to cover the theatrical release and some money on the side. Hey, didn't even "Dungeons & Dragons" make money?

My guess would be that if the first film tanks, the second film would be released with the same production values (maybe not as much hype), but would be released to video much sooner. The third film would probably be rushed out the door with much lower production standards (worse special effects, cheaper soundtrack, no redubbing lines to cover on-location mistakes, certainly no more new photography (yes, I know they're done with principle shooting, but I could see them going back for more if need be)) and go to video quickly as well. That way, New Line will still get the theatrical take, but can start bringing in video revenue quickly to start making up the losses. Never the less, all three will be made and will make it into theaters.

Note that I don't expect the films to tank. I expect "Fellowship of the Ring" to do quite well, "Two Towers" to do a little less well, and "Return of the King" to do better than "Fellowship". I don't know if the theatrical take will reach $300 million, but I wouldn't be surprised. Even if it just breaks even in the theaters, New Line wins big with all of the merchadising and potential video revenues.

-sk

Re:The tattoos

[PhilHibbs]

It sounds much better in Black Speech:

Ash nazg durbatulûk
Ash nazg gimbatul
Ash nazg thrakatulûk
Agh burzum-ishi krimpatul

Funny, I just happened to read Tolkien's view on

[sphealey]

Funny, I just happened to re-read Tolkien's view on a movie version of LOTR last night. In a 1957 letter to his agent in response to an offer from an American studio, he basically said two things (a) he had no philosophical objection to movies and wouldn't mind if someone tried to create a screenplay/movie version (b) however, since he didn't trust Hollywood, his specific instructions were "either Art or Cash", meaning either full artistic control, or enough cash up front to drown his sorrows.

So I would say ol' JRR had pretty clear vision in these matters.

sPh

fun question to try to answer

[speek]

What is LOTR about?
It's a fairly straightforward plot about defeating evil. That said, that's NOT the important element of this story that makes it so popular, IMHO. The scale is immense, however, both in time and space, and that IS a big element, I think. I think you ought to go read the books (preferably before seeing the movie) and find out for yourself what the story is about.

Why is LOTR popular?
1. Detail, detail, detail. That scale I mentioned above is present here to. The depth of detail in these books is amazing. You get an entire world, it's history, and nearly all the important people of that world make an appearance at one point or another. You get the impression after reading it that you haven't missed anything from that world.
2. The plot is essentially, small, defenseless person saves world - becomes big hero! So, it's got the necessary element to appeal to pre-teens who have no voice in our world.
3. Wise old man appreciates young would-be hero. Again, something most pre-teens yearn for that they don't have.
4. Nothing is out of place - in other words, the world exists and is consistent with itself, and is wholly separate from reality. No one swears - everyone talks funny like they're supposed to. No one ever steps out of character. The warriors never take their armor off, etc. You are never, ever, rudely reminded of the real world, and there is never any attempt to make a real world "point". Pure fantasy.

So, points 2-4 pull you in, and point 1 makes you a fan for life. The detail and thoroughness really is quite extraordinary.

Re:What are these movies/books about?

[SnowDog_2112]

You ask a hard question. What is it about the books that make them special? That appeal to us?

As has been pointed out earlier, the books are heavy with the themes of friendship, duty, honor, and sacrifice. These may not be easy themes, but they are universal. The story hits you in the same way a War Epic might -- innocent young man from small town goes into the hell of war and comes out a different man. He is chosen, by the ambiguous hand of fate, to carry the ultimate load on his shoulders. Along the way, he fights the good fight. He nearly dies several times. He meets up with true evil. He faces the ultimate temptations.

And at its core, it's about good struggling against evil for the right of everyone to live freely.

It's also an incredibly self-consistent world. It feels like real history, not a cheesy fantasy where the rules change every hundred pages. If you're a details nut, this book will send you in a tizzy. It's what other authors hope for when they try to develop rich backgrounds for their books.

There's also the fact that it introduced the concept of modern fantasy. Trolls, dwarves, elves, wizards, magic swords, orcs ... in fact, I almost worry that some people will see LotR and feel it's derivative, just because it's where the rest of these copies came from! [NO, I'm not trying to say Tolkien invented Elves. But the genre of modern fantasy did begin with him.]

The last item for my little checklist is its cross-generational appeal. The story has been around long enough where grandparents and grandchildren both identify with it. My mother and I have wildly varying taste in entertainment -- but we're both silly excited to see this come out.

I hope that helps.

Re:Funny snippet for those with AIX 4.3.3

[wsxyz]

Let's not forget this one...

Recently one of my friends, a computer wizard, payed me a visit.

As we were talking I mentioned having recently installed Windows 95 on my PC and that I am very happy with this operating system. I also showed him the Windows 95 CD, to my surprise he threw it into my microwave oven and turned on the oven.

Instantly I got very upset, because the CD had become precious to me, but he said: "Do not worry, it is unharmed." After a few minutes he took the CD out, gave it to me and said: "Take a close look at it."

To my surprise the CD was quite cold to hold and it seemed to be heavier than before. At first I could not see anything, but then on the inner edge of the central hole I saw an inscription; an inscription finer than anything I have ever seen before. The inscription shone piercingly bright, and yet remote, as if out of a great depth:

4F6E65204F5320746F2072756C65207468656D20616C6C2C20 4F6E65204F5320746 F2066696E64207468656D2CDA4F6E65204F5320746F2062726 96E67207468656D20 616C6C20616E6420696E20746865206461726B6E6573732062 696E64207468656D

"I cannot understand the fiery letters," I said. "No," he said, "but I can. The letters are Hex, of an ancient mode, but the language is that of Microsoft, which I shall not utter here. But in common English this is what it says: One OS to rule them all, One OS to find them, One OS to bring them all and in the darkness bind them

Of course it's been pirated. duh.

[Vortran]

If the idiots that were selling the bootlegged copies had time to make 5,000 of them how long does anyone think it took for folks that AREN'T interested in profit mongering to see the movie?

Everyone that I know in the U.S. who is interested has already seen it. I was even offered a DVD of the movie on 3 separate occasions last week. I'm much more interested in Stephen R. Donaldson's "Chronicles of Thomas Covenant," and I've never read Tolkien so I politely declined the offers.

The point is that it makes no sense to "release" the movie in UK while we wait in the USA. Wouldn't it make more sense to just "release" it in all theaters everywhere on the planet? Why go around wasting money busting pirates, when you could possibly MAKE money by releasing it in different ways? Beat the pirates at their own game.

People are more than willing to be relieved of their cash. They are much less welling to submit to the perceived control of someone who says, "You guys over there can't have this yet." People, especially Americans, HATE feeling like their being controlled... told what they can and cannot do.

Re:$300 Million

[Squirrel Killer]

I hope you're not implying that the movie will make only $150 million.

What I'm implying is that New Line, when they greenlighted this project figured that they would need to make $100 million/movie to break even. I'm sure they planned on making some money, so they want to gross at least $150 million on this one. That's not bad, it's a $50 million profit.

Remember, I'm responding to a guy who said that if New Line didn't make most of the initial $300 million on FotR, the other two would be released straight to video. I was merely pointing out that the studio made a decision that they would need to only make $100-150 million per movie to do well. They wouldn't judge that a movie is a flop just because it didn't break into the Top 20 Grossing Films of All Time. Also remember that Gladiator only made $180 million. $150 million isn't that shabby. Do I think it will make more? I think FotR has a good shot to break $200 million, but I wouldn't bet the farm on it.

Look at the Top 20 Grossing Movies of All Time (US Box Office - yes it's Amerio-centric, sue me). One of the things that they have in common is that they were all social phenomenon. Everyone saw Staw Wars and Forest Gump, every teenage girl saw Titantic 20 times, everyone talked about Sixth Sense, everyone cried when Home Alone got a sequel. Ok, ok, Twister is an exception (how did that get in there anyway?) Now, will FotR become such a phenomenon? It very well could, but to say that it will is to set yourself up for Pearl Harbor. New Line isn't betting that FotR will out-gross Independence Day, it's betting that it will out-gross Die Hard 3, and hoping it'll out-gross Jerry McGuire. But if it only outgrosses Crocodile Dundee II, they still win.

Straight to video is impossible.

That was essentially my argument. Thanks for backing me up. Again, I'm responding to a guy who said that if New Line didn't make most of the initial $300 million on FotR, the other two would be released straight to video. I was saying that straight to video would be stupid because of the loss of potential money out there for a theatrical release. Now I know that a straight to video would be stupid also because of the contract involved. (BTW - don't think the contract is a complete assurance that all three will get the six week theatrical release. If FotR were to be a complete flop and only bring in $1 million revenue, you can bet New Line will be renegotiating the contract sooner than you can say, "But the contract says...!")

I found Two Towers to be my favorite installment of the trilogy.

I didn't mean any disrespect to TT. Revenue doesn't have any relation to quality though. Empire Strikes back was the lowest grossing Star Wars film (including Ep. 1) but is arguably the best of the four so far. I think FotR will do well because of all of the hype over the past two years, RotK will do well because people will have had two years to see the other two and get primed for the finale. TT will do less well if for no other reason than because it's stuck in the middle. No offense, but basing revenue projections on your own like or dislike of a book or script is a sure-fire way to be wrong.

-sk

Why I don't like FotR

[zzyzx]

I made a couple of these points in other threads, but I decided to lump them all together for ease of people telling me I have no taste or something. Mind you I'm only about 50 pages into book 2, so maybe these complaints get better as time goes on, but I have read 300 pages. I can handle slow starting books, but this has transcended that. Also from reading other comments on amazon and aintitcoolnews, I get the feeling that these are systematic complaints. I'd be curious about feedback from LotR fans. Am I giving up too soon or are these just not the books for me?

1) There's no dialogue. Ok that's an exaggeration. There's plenty of long passages giving the history of the ring or of the lineage of a weapon or a song that happens to tell the history of an ancient war, but no actual character interaction. When Sam makes a comment along the lines of, "I wonder what these insects ate when they don't have hobbit," it stood out for being the only line like that in a 100 page stretch of text or so.

2) The story is subservient to the history. A well defined universe can add a lot to a story. However, I believe the story I've heard about the origin of LotR (it was written as an excuse to use the language he invented). Take out the history and the endless descriptions of the passages that they walk over and what I've read would fill 15 pages or so. Allegedly that gets better though.

3) Only the darkness is defined. One of the (legitimate) problems that people have with Harry Potter is that the villain is really poorly defined. Voldemort's motivations really aren't addressed that much for all of his import. FotR is having the opposite problem. Tolkein seemed to only like darkness. The Shire and Rivendell are more boring than anything. Tom Bombadil is a dork. To use another popular example, look at Narnia. Sure Narnia isn't 1% as well defined as Middle Earth, but there are many scenes of joy there. When Narnia is in danger, it affects me because I can see what would be lost. When Middle Earth is in danger, I don't care. At some point you have to show what people are fighting for, not just what they're fighting against.

There might be more, but those are the main ones. If I don't care about the characters or the world, it's hard for me to want to dive into the history. I need the carrot first. So will 1) and 3) get better, or should I reread the Chronicles of Narnia again?

full poem in black speech:

[dunkelfalke]

Gakh Nazgi Golug durub-uuri lata-nuut,
Udu takob-ishiz gund-ob Gazat-shakh-uuri,
Krith Shara-uuri matuurz matat duumpuga,
Ash tug Shakhbuurz-uur Uliima-tab-ishi za,
Uzg-Mordor-ishi amal fauthut burguuli.
Ash nazg durbatuluuk, ash nazg gimbatul,
Ash nazg thrakatuluuk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul
Uzg-Mordor-ishi amal fauthut burguuli.

and here it goes in other langs

Here's the Polish version:

Trzy Pierscienie dla krolow Elfow pod blekitnym niebem,
Siedem dla wladcow krasnali w ich podziemnych palacach,
Dziewiec dla smiertelnikow, ludzi smierci podleglych.
Jeden dla Wladcy Ciemnosci na jego czarnym tronie
W krainie Mordor, gdzie zalegly cienie.
Jeden by wszystkim rzadzic, jeden by wszystkie odnalezc,
Jeden by wszystkie zgromadzic i w ciemnosci zwiazac
W krainie Mordor, gdzie zalegly cienie.

And (for those who didn't read the original), English:

Three Rings for the Elvenkings under the sky,
Seven for the Dwarf Lords in their halls of stone,
Nine for mortal Men, doomed to die,
One for the Dark Lord on his dark throne,
In the land of Mordor, where the shadows lie.
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them.
One Ring to bring them all and in darkness bind them
In the land of Mordor, where the shadows lie.

So it looks in French:

Trois pour les Rois d'Elfes sous le ciel d'azure,
Sept pour les Seigneurs Na?ns dans leurs demeures de pierre,
Neuf pour les Hommes mortels destin?s au trepas,
Un pour le Seigneur des Ten?bres sur son sombre trone,
Dans le pays de Mordor ou s'?tendent les ombres.
Un Anneau pour les gouverner tous, un Anneau pour les trouver,
Un Anneau pour les amener tous et dans les ten?bres les lier
Au pays de Mordor ou s'?tendent les Ombres.

In German:

Drei Ringe den Elbenkoenigen hoch im Licht,
Sieben den Zwergenherrschern in ihren Hallen aus Stein,
Den Sterblichen, ewig dem Tode verfallen, neun,
Einer dem Dunklen Herrn auf dunklem Thron
Im Lande Mordor, wo die Schatten drohn.
Ein Ring, sie zu knechten, sie alle zu finden,
Ins Dunkel zu treiben und ewig zu binden
Im Lande Mordor, wo die Schatten drohn.

In Danish (there may be errors):

Tre har elvernes konge i dybeste skove,
Syv har dvaergenes herrer i sale af sten,
Ni har mennesket doedeligt, doemt til at sove,
In har den natsorte fyrste for ondskab og min
I Mordors land, hvor skygger ruge.
In Ring er over dem alle, In Ring kan finde de andre
In Ring kan bringe dem alle, i moerket loenke dem alle
I Mordors land, hvor skygger ruge.

And in Spanish:

Tres anillos para los Reyes Elfos bajo el cielo.
Siete para los Senores Enanos en palacios de piedra.
Nueve para los Hombres Mortales condenados a morir.
Uno para el Senor Oscuro, sobre el trono oscuro
en la Tierra de Mordor donde se extienden las Sombras.
Un Anillo para gobernarlos a todos. Un Anillo para encontrarlos,
un Anillo para atraerlos a todos y atarlos en las tinieblas
en la Tierra de Mordor donde se extienden las Sombras.

In Swedish:

Tre ringar foer aelvkonungarnas makt hoegt i det bl?,
sju foer dvaergarnas furstar i salarna av sten,
nio foer de doedliga, som koettets vaeg skall g?,
en foer Moerkrets herre i ondskans dunkla sken
i Mordorlandets hisnande gruva.
En ring att saemja dem,
en ring att fraemja dem,
en ring att djupt i moerkrets
vida riken taemja dem -
i Mordors land, daer skuggorna ruva.

And in Dutch:

Drie Ringen voor de Elfen-koningen op aard'
Zeven voor de Dwergvorsten in hun zalen schoon,
Negen voor de mensen, die de dood niet spaart,
Een voor de Zwarte Heerser op zijn zwarte troon
In Mordor, waar de schimmen zijn,
Een Ring om allen te regeren, Een Ring om hen te vinden,
Een Ring die hen brengen zal en in duisternis binden,
In Mordor, waar de schimmen zijn.

Croatian version:

Prstena Tri za vilin-kralje za koje zvijezde siju,
I Sedam za patuljke-vladare kamenih dvora mochi;
I Devet za ljude, usuda kletog shto zarana mriju,
Al Prsten Jedan za Cara Mraka na prijestolju nochi
U zemlji Mordor gdje sjene se kriju.
Prsten Jedan da zavlada svima, Prsten Jedan shto trazhi i sezhe
Prsten Jedan da spoji se s njima i u tami ih svezhe
U zemlji Mordor gdje sjene se kriju.

Russian version:

Tri elfijskim wladykam w podzwiezdnyj priedel
Sem' dlja gnomow karjaszych w podgornom prostorie
Diewjat' smertnym cziej wyweren srik i udel
I odno wlastelinu na cziernom prestolie
W Mordorie gdie wiekowiecznaja t'ma:
Sztoby wsje ich sozwat', woedino sobrat'
I jedinoj czernoj wolej skovat'
W Mordorie gdie wiekowiecznaja t'ma:

In the language of Klingons of Star Trek:

elDa'joHmeHvaD chalbingDaq wej Qeb
nawqo'joHmeHvaD naghjuHmeychajDaq Soch
HumanmeyvaD jubbe' HeghmeH qichbogh Hut
joHvaD Hurgh quSDajDaq Hurgh wa'
Qotbogh Qibmey morDor puHDaq
Hoch che'meH wa' Qeb, tu'meH wa' Qeb
Hoch qemmeH lan HurghDaq baghmeH je wa' Qeb
Qotbogh Qibmey morDor puHDaq

In the Quenya language:

Cormar neld' Eldaranin undu telume,
Otso Casarceruin ondomardeltassen,
Nerte Firyain; firien martine,
Mine Loonaherun, lnamahalmaryasse,
Mordrev' ardasse yasse lumbor caitar.
Mine corma turien ilye te, mine corma tuvien te,
Mine corma tultien ilye te ar morniesse mandien te,
Mordrev' ardasse yasse lumbor caitar.

First Esperanto version:

Tri ringoj por la elfo-regoj, sub la chielo;
Sep por la dvarvo-moshtoj, en haloj de shton'.
Nau por hom' mortema, kondamnita de mortpelo;
Unu por Malluma Moshto, sur Malluma Tron',
En la lando Mordor, tenebra pro malhelo.
Unu Ring' por regi chiujn, unu por venigi,
Unu por sklavigi kaj mallume enchenigi,
En la lando Mordor, tenebra pro malhelo.

Another Esperanto version:

Tri ringoj por la elfoj sub la hela chiel',
Sep por la gnomoj en salonoj el shton'.
Nau por la homoj sub la morto-sigel',
Unu por la Nigra Rego sur la nigra tron'
Kie kushas Ombroj en Mordora Land'.
Unu Ringo ilin regas, Unu ilin prenas,
Unu Ringo en mallumon ilin gvidas kaj katenas
Kie kushas Ombroj en Mordora Land'.

In Japanese:

Mittsu-no yubiwa-wa, sora-no shitanaru erufu-no -ni,
nanatsu-no yubiwa-wa, iwa-no yakata-no dow fu-no
kimi-ni,kokonotsu-wa, shisubeki kidame-no hito-no ko-ni,
hitotsu-wa, kuraki mikura-no mei-no tame-ni,
kage yokotawaru morudru-no kuni-ni.

Hitotsu-no yubiwa-wa, subete-wo sube,
hitotsu-no yubiwa-wa, subete-wo mitsuke,
hitotsu-no yubiwa-wa,
subete-wo toraete,
kurayami-no naka-ni tsunagitomeru.
Kage yokotawaru morudru-no kuni-ni.

Re:full poem in black speech:

[DG]

Oi, this:

"In the language of Klingons of Star Trek:

elDa'joHmeHvaD chalbingDaq wej Qeb
nawqo'joHmeHvaD naghjuHmeychajDaq Soch
HumanmeyvaD jubbe' HeghmeH qichbogh Hut
joHvaD Hurgh quSDajDaq Hurgh wa'
Qotbogh Qibmey morDor puHDaq
Hoch che'meH wa' Qeb, tu'meH wa' Qeb
Hoch qemmeH lan HurghDaq baghmeH je wa' Qeb
Qotbogh Qibmey morDor puHDaq"

has to be THE geekiest thing, as in slobbering-fanboy geeky, that I have ever seen or read.

Yeesh! Quelque chose scent du fromage ici!

.

Lack of religion

[Hoi Polloi]

One thing about TLoR that bothered me was the almost complete lack of religion and spirituality in the books. How can a world were not only is magic real but quasi-deities such as Gandalf (an Istari) can wander the world for 2000 yrs and then come back from the dead after fighting the Balrog yet no one talks of divine power? Even the immortal elves remember ancient acts of the gods yet no one seems to give them any more consideration than they make an interesting story.

Every human society has created some sort of spiritual framework for the world. Tolkien seems to have completely regected this.