# Finished Lord of the Rings trilogy a few days ago...



## RhondaRN (Dec 27, 2009)

I finished Lord of the Rings  Trilogy a few days ago.  Took me awhile because it is massive, plus I had some times during which I could not read due to personal things going on.  I LOVED the book!  I think it was the most detailed book I've ever read but it was amazing.  It totally took me to another world.  I read it in Kindle version and it was over 27,000 Kindle pages and I was amazed that the last 15 percent of the book was dedicated to all the people's history, and their family's history, and the language and words and maps and all sorts of things.  He had to have an amazing mind to come up with all this in the 1950s.

After finishing the book, I watched the trilogy on DVD since it was right here handy (my daughter's DVDs) and I have to say that it was extremely well made.  I think it was one of the most well made movies I've ever seen.  I think it did the book total justice.  It was much faster paced than the book in that everything moved along faster, where as the book took so much time in the descriptions.
  
Anyway, just wanted everyone to know what a great book AND DVD set this was in case you've never read it.  I also am fascinated to know that the book was not written as a trilogy, but one whole book.  You can't simply stop at one book nor stop at one DVD until it is finished or you will never be satisfied because the books in and of themselves are not complete until the last.  Which also goes to show you that it was really one story.


----------



## Madeline (Jun 5, 2010)

I agree.  I read it all back in the end of my high school/college years, before the movies came out.  Then I saw the movies. 

I, too, am just stunned at his genius.  I believe we owe present day fantasy to his incredible creation. 

I heard that he and CS Lewis had an informal competition to write an allegory and/or fantasy novel.  CS Lewis came up with the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe series, while he came up with the Lord of the Rings. No offense to Lewis, but if this is true, he definately "won".. 

Both series are just really neat stories that are definately in my top 10!  

(I also have The Hobbit on my to read list, only because I love the world!)


----------



## D. Nathan Hilliard (Jun 5, 2010)

I think modern fantasy really does owe much of it's existence to The Lord of the Rings. 

While writing styles have changed, along with readers tastes, you can recognize much of the templates that Tolkien set out in a lot of modern fantasy epics.


----------



## The Hooded Claw (Oct 12, 2009)

I love Tolkein's trilogy and re-read it every few years.  Though actually I think I like The Hobbit better than the Lord of the Rings.  I picked up the Trilogy in Kindle version when the price was lowered last year, but haven't got around to reading it on my Kindle yet.


----------



## Madeline (Jun 5, 2010)

Hooded, well that is good news because The Hobbit is on my to-read list.  

What about it do you like better?


----------



## Anne (Oct 29, 2008)

Madeline said:


> Hooded, well that is good news because The Hobbit is on my to-read list.
> 
> What about it do you like better?


The hobbit is on my list too.


----------



## William Meikle (Apr 19, 2010)

D. Nathan Hilliard said:


> I think modern fantasy really does owe much of it's existence to The Lord of the Rings.
> 
> While writing styles have changed, along with readers tastes, you can recognize much of the templates that Tolkien set out in a lot of modern fantasy epics.


Not to take anything away from Tolkien, because LOTR did indeed lead to much of what we call contemporary fantasies, but other people, working on slightly different templates, also played their part, from Lord Dunsany, George MacDonald, E R R Eddison, Robert E Howard's Conan, Rice Burrough's John Carter, A E Merrit in Dwellers in the Mirage and The Face in the Abyss, Poul Anderson in The Broken Sword, through to Fritz Leiber's Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser and Michael Moorcock's Eternal Champion in the late '60s early '70s.

Check out The Broken Sword especially, for a different take on many of the motifs, and even names, that Tolkien and Anderson both took from the same source material to create different fantasy novels.


----------



## D. Nathan Hilliard (Jun 5, 2010)

williemeikle said:


> Not to take anything away from Tolkien, because LOTR did indeed lead to much of what we call contemporary fantasies, but other people, working on slightly different templates, also played their part, from Lord Dunsany, George MacDonald, E R R Eddison, Robert E Howard's Conan, Rice Burrough's John Carter, A E Merrit in Dwellers in the Mirage and The Face in the Abyss, Poul Anderson in The Broken Sword, through to Fritz Leiber's Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser and Michael Moorcock's Eternal Champion in the late '60s early '70s.
> 
> Check out The Broken Sword especially, for a different take on many of the motifs, and even names, that Tolkien and Anderson both took from the same source material to create different fantasy novels.


Oh absolutely. I didn't mean to slight some of the other great founders of modern fantasy in the slightest...I have an especially soft spot in my heart for Leiber's Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser...I just meant to say that Tolkien ended up laying many of the templates to what the average person would consider the epic fantasy novel.


----------



## Magenta (Jun 6, 2009)

You should now read The Hobbit. 

Unfortunately it will be a long while before that movie is completed...(although there are other not so good versions already in existence, I'm looking forward to the one Peter Jackson is producing.)


----------



## Gertie Kindle (Nov 6, 2008)

I didn't read The Hobbitt and LotR until after I'd seen the first movie.  I was completely lost. I decided the time was right to take the plunge.  I read The Hobbitt first and I'm glad I did. It explained a lot about Bilbo and Gollum. 

I have to agree that Peter Jackson did an amazing job with the movies. It's one of the few book to movie transitions that I actually enjoyed.  You could see how Jackson must have loved the books because he caught the flavor of the worlds perfectly.  

Every once in a while (usually when TNT is showing the marathon), I pull out the DVDs and watch them back to back.  They draw me in every time.


----------



## The Hooded Claw (Oct 12, 2009)

Madeline said:


> Hooded, well that is good news because The Hobbit is on my to-read list.
> 
> What about it do you like better?


Big part of it is that in the trilogy Tolkein inserted long interludes where it gets slow and/or gushy! I've been known to skip some when rereading! Arguably the whole story is so long and epic we need these breaks of course. And somehow I just like Bilbo better than Frodo!


----------



## hsuthard (Jan 6, 2010)

You sure were quiet while you were reading! I'm glad to see you back posting!


----------



## D. Nathan Hilliard (Jun 5, 2010)

The Hooded Claw said:


> Big part of it is that in the trilogy Tolkein inserted long interludes where it gets slow and/or gushy! I've been known to skip some when rereading! Arguably the whole story is so long and epic we need these breaks of course. And somehow I just like Bilbo better than Frodo!


Agreed. While I loved the trilogy, I completely understood the reason for Jackson's leaving Tom Bombadil out of the story.


----------



## jonconnington (Mar 20, 2010)

RhondaRN said:


> I finished Lord of the Rings Trilogy a few days ago. Took me awhile because it is massive, plus I had some times during which I could not read due to personal things going on. I LOVED the book! I think it was the most detailed book I've ever read but it was amazing. It totally took me to another world. I read it in Kindle version and it was over 27,000 Kindle pages and I was amazed that the last 15 percent of the book was dedicated to all the people's history, and their family's history, and the language and words and maps and all sorts of things. He had to have an amazing mind to come up with all this in the 1950s.
> 
> After finishing the book, I watched the trilogy on DVD since it was right here handy (my daughter's DVDs) and I have to say that it was extremely well made. I think it was one of the most well made movies I've ever seen. I think it did the book total justice. It was much faster paced than the book in that everything moved along faster, where as the book took so much time in the descriptions.
> 
> Anyway, just wanted everyone to know what a great book AND DVD set this was in case you've never read it. I also am fascinated to know that the book was not written as a trilogy, but one whole book. You can't simply stop at one book nor stop at one DVD until it is finished or you will never be satisfied because the books in and of themselves are not complete until the last. Which also goes to show you that it was really one story.


Kind of amazing the impact iot had when you consider how little fanfare it received when it first came out. Tolkien was really ahead of his time, and in the 50's it seen almost as art-house fare. Wasn't until the 60's came along that people really started to take now...bless their hippie souls....


----------



## Sean Sweeney (Apr 17, 2010)

Love LOTR (I read it at least once a year, like Sir Christopher Lee does), and yes, every fantasy author -- and even some non-fantasy authors -- has been inspired in some way by Professor Tolkien's genius.


----------



## PhillipA82 (Dec 20, 2009)

Lord of the Rings is my favorite


----------



## Joel Arnold (May 3, 2010)

Rhonda - I envy you! I remember reading that trilogy for the first time back in high school and being so amazed by it. Now here I am, 41 years old, and am thinking I should re-read it! Probably won't have the same impact on me as the first time, but maybe I'll see it from a more mature perspective? Anyway, glad you enjoyed it!

Joel Arnold


----------



## Anne (Oct 29, 2008)

Rhonda: What are you reading now?


----------



## Herc- The Reluctant Geek (Feb 10, 2010)

Tolkien is an amazing writer. LOTR is meant to be a history written by the participants. The writing style changes from chapter to chapter, depending on who is telling the story. Awesome stuff!


----------



## Daphne (May 27, 2010)

You have my respect for reading all of the Lord of the Rings. My first introduction to it was the version made for BBC radio, which I now have on CD, and this is still the definitive version for me as it edits out some of the parts which I found frankly long-winded and tedious  (oh, those Ents!) and keeps the imaginative heart of the story, which is brilliant. I also think that Peter Jackson's version was visually superb, and love all the minute details they bothered about in production - engraving in elvish on the swords etc). Perhaps best of all, Peter Jackson made use of the paintings of Alan Lee and John Howe to inspire him, so when I saw the film there was a strong sense of deja vu. Still,Tolkien can't be beaten for sheer beautiful, literary writing.


----------



## RhondaRN (Dec 27, 2009)

Anne said:


> Rhonda: What are you reading now?


Anne, I reading The Winds of War now. A GREAT change from Lord of the Rings! I tend to do that....go to something totally different.


----------



## Concrete Queen (Oct 19, 2009)

I have to agree about the movies being among the best adaptations ever.  I'd read the Trilogy a couple of times before the movies came out, but I'd always kind of skimmed through The Two Towers.  I just couldn't follow who was going where to do what.  Then after the movies, I was able to follow it better. I went back and read the Trilogy again, and was amazed by not only how faithful the movies were to the books, but also how much more I got out of the books now that I knew say, what was going on in Helm's Deep.


----------



## Anne (Oct 29, 2008)

RhondaRN said:


> Anne, I reading The Winds of War now. A GREAT change from Lord of the Rings! I tend to do that....go to something totally different.


You will have to let me know how you like it. I heard that is another great series.


----------



## tdmsu (Feb 5, 2010)

I love the trilogy and The Hobbit! I read them when I high school, then again as the movies came out. I haven't been able to get into the Silmarillion, but I wanted more of the story. I noticed a book called Isildur on Amazon and for only $5 I decided to try it...
While not up to the same level as Tolkien, the book is really good - I'd recommend it to anyone interested in a "prequal" that falls in between the ancient days of the Silmarillion and The Hobbit.

Link:
http://www.amazon.com/Isildur-ebook/dp/B002U8298Q/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&m=AG56TWVU5XWC2&s=digital-text&qid=1275871586&sr=8-2


----------



## The Hooded Claw (Oct 12, 2009)

I'm tempted to recommend that you track down "Bored of the Rings" in used DTB (it is out of print now, I believe) but I would never do such a thing as recommend something that lampooned a great work of literature.  Unless I thought there was a giggle in it.  Which there is.


----------



## Guest (Jun 7, 2010)

That's great you finished them! Tolkein was a genius, a Ph.D. in mythology I believe. The Elvish language is all his own and he expands on important features in the Celtic tradition. I loved reading them too, to say the least. I hear people who routinely trash him as a bad writer, but I never saw the writing get in the way of the story. He may not be Shakespeare, but he gets the point across with a fair amount of style to boot.

I did hear about that competition with CS Lewis, who borrowed much more from the Christian tradition. I read a few from that series but had trouble getting into it. The Lord of the Rings is great because it is so big and epic. Another great series that came a little later is Lloyd Alexander's Chronicles of Prydain. Lots of fun there.

I think it's every author's dream to create a series with so much esteem. It's certainly mine.


----------



## Archer (Apr 25, 2009)

My dear Mr. Claw:
Have you read 'The Sillymarillion' yet?
It is dangerous for anyone with recent abdominal surgery. Thought I'd die laughing.


----------



## J Bee (May 17, 2010)

The Hooded Claw said:


> I love Tolkein's trilogy and re-read it every few years. Though actually I think I like The Hobbit better than the Lord of the Rings.


Glad to hear I'm not alone! I always loved the Hobbit more and was able to relate to Bilbo better. He might have been the original anti-hero for the fantasy genre. I hope the new film (films?) does it justice.


----------



## jonconnington (Mar 20, 2010)

The Hooded Claw said:


> I'm tempted to recommend that you track down "Bored of the Rings" in used DTB (it is out of print now, I believe) but I would never do such a thing as recommend something that lampooned a great work of literature. Unless I thought there was a giggle in it. Which there is.


Gotta love those wiseacres at National lampoon...they recently put out a parody of Twilight, called Nitelight. The cover alone is hilarious...an eaten apple core...


----------



## karinlib (Jan 1, 2010)

I read the Hobbit in 8th grade (required reading), and liked it so much I read the Lord of the Rings 3 weekends in a row (you can read 24 hours straight, when you are 14).  I have always judged all other Fantasy series by Tolkien.


----------



## Archer (Apr 25, 2009)

jonconnington said:


> Gotta love those wiseacres at National lampoon...they recently put out a parody of Twilight, called Nitelight. The cover alone is hilarious...an eaten apple core...


Must...HAVE...IT!!


----------



## Dawsburg (May 31, 2009)

This year my summer reading goal is to get through all three volumes of Lord of the Rings. I hope I can finish it in time to get to some other books, I have tons of books I need to read and I just don't have much time during the school year to read them. But I've realized that I need to read books one at a time or I'll never finish them because I can't focus on so many stories at once (the same usually goes with writing ).


----------



## michaeljasper (Apr 20, 2010)

Wow -- I'm kinda jealous of all you folks about to read (or who have just finished) Tolkien's work! Enjoy it. It blew my 11-year-old mind...


----------



## Vyrl (Jun 7, 2010)

Ah, Tolkien. Absolutely wonderful. And, yes, I'm one of the few who loved the Silmarillion. To me, it's one of those books you can read a hundred times and still discover something new. Its style is more that of an old icelandic edda. So it can offend a contemporary reader if you're not used to it.


----------



## jonconnington (Mar 20, 2010)

Personally, I think the Silmarillion would work better as a miniseries....


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

Just grabbed the Trilogy from my brother. Realized I hadn't actually read the books since...oh, 8th grade? I figure I'm way overdue for another read-through, especially since I read the Silmarillian just a few months back.

Here's to hoping I catch waaaaaaaay more stuff this time around.

David Dalglish


----------



## jonconnington (Mar 20, 2010)

Be interesting of they ever put the Book of Unfinished Tales on Kindle


----------



## Vyrl (Jun 7, 2010)

jonconnington said:


> Personally, I think the Silmarillion would work better as a miniseries....


Or broken into separate, fleshed out, novels. But the musty thing has some charm to me.

You shouldn't take my view, though. I read and enjoyed Herodotus.


----------



## blackbelt (May 4, 2010)

Tolkien really did something amazing with the LOTR world.  He crafted a language and a map, then created a story that would explain their existence.  A really fascinating way to back into a plot, and something that explains why his work is so immersive and has managed to find such an adoring fanbase in spite of early efforts to crush it.


----------



## ReginaLovesHer Kindle (Nov 30, 2009)

I did it backwards, watched the movies fell in love with the story and then read the Hobbit and the trilogy.  I think one of the thinks that made the movies so compelling and such an honest rendition of the books, is the incorporation of the history that is included at the end of the trilogy.  So much of the back story or information told by the characters or the narrator in the movie came from the history section.  Such an amazing story.

I have yet to read Silmarillion.....


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

I think the fact that so many, many people who were obviously in love with the source material worked on the movie trilogy is what made it so good. That honest desire to just do a good job translated into everything, from the smiths working on the armor, to the actors absolutely thrilled to have the parts, to the choice of actors based not on star power but on ability to play the role, to the devotion to setting, scenes, and even word for word dialog at times, etc.

I still get chills when the music starts playing while the ents march on Isengard...

David Dalglish


----------



## ReginaLovesHer Kindle (Nov 30, 2009)

Oh I do too.  I have to admit I get teary eyed when the elves show up at Helm's Deep (even though not in the books, a great scene), and then again when the Riders and Gandalf show up.  

I only wish other fantasy stories would have been made with the same care (like the Earthsea series or the Harry Potter books).


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

I find the Harry Potter movies rather enjoyable, and this comes from someone who has never read the books. They've also been fairly well received, critically. The first two movies, from what I heard, were slavish devotions to the book. That's the one major thing they fixed after a little while: you have to be brutal when you make cuts. Peter Jackson cut Bombadil, even though he was a favorite, because he knew the movie would be better for it.

The third and fourth did fairly good at knowing what to cut, though it seems like the latest one emphasized the wrong aspects of the book. Switching directors as often as they are certainly hasn't helped them, either. Can you imagine if Fellowship had been done by Peter Jackson, Two Towers by Guillermo del Toro, and Return of the King by Cuaron? Even if they all did well, it'd lend a certain unevenness to the series.

Oh, and Earthsea did get mangled. Same with Dune. Eragon amused me, because you could clearly see the directors and writers had absolutely no confidence or respect for the source material.

David Dalglish


----------



## ReginaLovesHer Kindle (Nov 30, 2009)

Yes I agree, they did not have confidence (much less love) for the source material.

Interseting about the HP movies.  I still enjoy seeing them but they are such a dissapointment to many of the HP readers I know!


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

When you have to cut out soooooo much, there's always going to be disappointment. I can only talk from an uninformed perspective, but based on movies without any baggage attached, I found every movie after the second to be an enjoyable affair.

David Dalglish


----------



## Vyrl (Jun 7, 2010)

I loved the LOTR movies with the exceptions of a few scenes. Aragorn throwing torches at the Nazgul swashbuckler style was just unbelieveable (for me). Legolas became just a bit too much of a super-hero, and the removal of the cliff-hanger at the end of The Two Towers was, in my view, a huge mistake. 

Overall, it was a stunning revelation of Tolkien's vision and it main-streamed a series that deserved wide-spread recognition for its genius. I think LOTR would still just be a province, albeit a very large province, of geekdom without the movies. 

All that said, and being a bit of a purist, I still like the books better.


----------



## altworld (Mar 11, 2010)

Vyrl said:


> I loved the LOTR movies with the exceptions of a few scenes. Aragorn throwing torches at the Nazgul swashbuckler style was just unbelieveable (for me). Legolas became just a bit too much of a super-hero, and the removal of the cliff-hanger at the end of The Two Towers was, in my view, a huge mistake.


I think its important to note that Viggo Mortensen took over the role of Aragorn from the badly cast Stuart Townsend, and went into that fight scene about 2-3 days after arriving. It worked as a scene very well.

They over did the Legolas moments, but that was a fan service by the time they got to the Mumikil.

The Two Towers ended in the right place, the entire Shelob lair would of gone on a little too long and really Sam And Frodo would of been doing nothing but walking across desolation in the third movie. At least leaving Shelob out until the third movie gave there story the cinematic push it needed.

Read LOTR every year since 13, on ROTK right now still all very magical...


----------



## Vyrl (Jun 7, 2010)

altworld said:


> I think its important to note that Viggo Mortensen took over the role of Aragorn from the badly cast Stuart Townsend, and went into that fight scene about 2-3 days after arriving. It worked as a scene very well.


It looked silly to me and, in my view, was a complete break from the reverence they, otherwise, showed for Tolkien's work. Worst of all, it diminished the horror of the Nazgul.

Viggio takes no blame for my misgivings. It's entirely in the way the scene was constructed.


----------



## D. Nathan Hilliard (Jun 5, 2010)

jonconnington said:


> Personally, I think the Silmarillion would work better as a miniseries....


Absolutely. I'm surprised (and slightly grateful) that the scifi channel didn't try to get the rights to it for that very purpose. In the right hands, I think the Silmarillion could be the TV event of an entire season.


----------



## Archer (Apr 25, 2009)

D. Nathan Hilliard said:


> Absolutely. I'm surprised (and slightly grateful) that the scifi channel didn't try to get the rights to it for that very purpose. In the right hands, I think the Silmarillion could be the TV event of an entire season.


(Archer rubs hands together and drools at the very thought!)

'Most Hosed Character' in LOTR movies was....
....drum roll, please!...

...DENETHOR!

(I still shudder at the mangling of that one)


----------



## horse_girl (Apr 9, 2010)

D. Nathan Hilliard said:


> Absolutely. I'm surprised (and slightly grateful) that the scifi channel didn't try to get the rights to it for that very purpose. In the right hands, I think the Silmarillion could be the TV event of an entire season.


Oh, dear God! Don't even suggest scifi--oops, I mean SyFy (hate the change)--screw up something that's actually decent from the start. Bad enough all those horrible "original movies" they put out.

I didn't read the LOTR until recent years, but I've read it a couple times since and am glad Jackson cut out the Bombadil parts. The movies were stronger for it, imho.


----------



## Vyrl (Jun 7, 2010)

D. Nathan Hilliard said:


> Absolutely. I'm surprised (and slightly grateful) that the scifi channel didn't try to get the rights to it for that very purpose. In the right hands, I think the Silmarillion could be the TV event of an entire season.


Agreed. Putting it in the right hands is key. I would love to see this. But ONLY if it is done well (as in Jackson LOTR movies done well).


----------



## Archer (Apr 25, 2009)

Vyrl said:


> Agreed. Putting it in the right hands is key. I would love to see this. But ONLY if it is done well (as in Jackson LOTR movies done well).


Yep. That's the vision I was drooling over...I think it could be done in three films.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

If Song of Ice and Fire does well on HBO, then we'll get a nice wave of imitators just like LotR gave us Golden Compass, Eragon, and Narnia. (I mean imitators as execs leaping onto what they think is hot, definitely not calling C.S. Lewis or Golden Compass an imitator). So if a long series of Fantasy takes off, the Silmarillion might have a shot. And to be fair to SyFy, whenever they do a miniseries they tend to be very well done and sometimes even win awards. It is only their little one-shot movies that are awful.

Obviously if SyFy got their hands on the Silmarils, they'd make them a lengthy miniseries...but I think the budget required would be beyond them. I'm thinking an animated version is far more likely. Not that there's much chance to begin with.

David Dalglish


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

I first read _The Lord of the Rings _ in 1964 and re-read it every year until 2003 with the exception of 1990 and 1992. I've since replaced the annual read with _The Dark Tower _ series by Stephen King.

Edward C. Patterson
_Namarie_


----------



## D. Nathan Hilliard (Jun 5, 2010)

archer said:


> (Archer rubs hands together and drools at the very thought!)
> 
> 'Most Hosed Character' in LOTR movies was....
> ....drum roll, please!...
> ...


What about Glorfindal? He got turned into Arwen!


----------



## threeundertwo (Jul 25, 2009)

I have read these about every other year since high school (and I'll be 48 tomorrow).  Probably the most entertaining work of fiction I will every hope to read.


----------



## rscully (Jun 5, 2010)

Tolkien was, and always will be, the master. Inspiring many of us to follow in his footsteps.
He was an amazing and imaginative man, touching millions with his remarkable stories.


----------



## R. M. Reed (Nov 11, 2009)

Is there a story in The Silmarillion? I thought it was a collection of stuff he never finished. I bought a copy once and ended up never reading it.


----------



## The Hooded Claw (Oct 12, 2009)

R. Reed said:


> Is there a story in The Silmarillion? I thought it was a collection of stuff he never finished. I bought a copy once and ended up never reading it.


I bought it eagerly when it was first released, and found it unreadable. A friend suggested I approach it as a history book instead of as a novel, and then it became interesting, though still a very dense read. I don't think I ever did finish it, but I read pieces that interested me.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

The Silmarillion was tough when I first read it also, I think I got it for Christmas in 1974? I have about 6 difference copies of it. (I have the full Tolkien effect - a Tolkien Scholar's shelf.). I've returned to it on occasion and have concluded it is inspired and linguistically beautiful, but very self-indulgent (as Tolkien admittedly was). That being said, there are few more beautiful works in the English language than the _Ainulindale._. It is Biblically beautiful. For the serious Tolkien follower, I suggest his son's 13 volume work which has most of the unpublished material, plus the original Lord of the Ring versions (a few dozen over two decades). Very revealing and adds depth to Tolkien's work.

Edward C. Patterson


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

The beginning was just great in seeing an imaginative way to create an entire world, far different than anything I'd ever read before. After a bit, especially a little after the middle, I got bored with some of the elves. Then it returned to the War of the Rings, and I absolutely loved everything there.

Certain scenes though are absolutely amazing. Where the giant spider sucks the light out of that giant tree..yeah...










David Dalglish


----------

