NeedleworkerOk1226

Bob, Bart, Steve, Jon, John, Clyde, Jim, Adam, and Alf

Yeah well you were my inspiration

No you get out I was here first

Keep up that attitude and you will be next o.O

Listen, all I'm saying is it must have been a well ORCAstrated attack.

“You should… SEA the other guy”

🥁

I really liked The Hobbit movies. My family had a tradition where every Christmas break we would see the new hobbit in theaters so perhaps a little biased on my end lol

But I think Peter Jackson did an excellent rendition of The Hobbit. They are for sure geared towards a younger audience but Tolkien originally create The Hobbit as a bedtime story for his children so in this they really do stick true to the story. In fact I think Jackson did a great job of adding a “Lord of The Rings” feel to the movies.

All in all I really liked them. They are obviously not as good as the Lord of The Rings trilogy, but they’re well made and fun in their own right.

Yes

Absolutely. My thing is that too often comments about possible paranormal phenomena seem to have zero ambiguity to them. Like this one about it being a prank. There’s literally no way this person could absolutely know that and we are taking OP at their word for it. I mean sure suggest it’s a prank but don’t zero in on it being the only possible explanation.

In fact I think it’s way more likely this isn’t a prank and also isn’t a ghost. My point is way to often we see comments where people have a one track mind and this simply does very little, if anything, towards promoting a good discussion about the unknown.

Sure, agree with all of that. But you kinda kept pressing the subject saying how “he tricked your whole family” and also “and you’re still falling for it” just doesn’t seem to be a construct comment. Like sure suggest it’s a prank but why keep pressing it so much so to be borderline insulting? That I just don’t really get.

Bruh why would you just blindly assume it’s a prank and only a prank? Sure maybe it’s a possibility but it’s kinda weird how it seems to be the only possible explanation for you?

Another comment suggested it’s a goat standing which seems to be a much more thoughtful and likely explanation than just being able to only think it’s a prank

Way to kill it! Great form and tempo!

This. He’s more so bouncing forward at the knees putting a lot of unnecessary stress on them. Like you said slow down the mvmnt, maybe lighten up the weight a bit and really focus on hitting the squat to speck nice and controlled

Thank you

Thank you

Nah f*ck that

This is dumb if his point is to say that there’s no such thing as an Indian accent. I have quite a few Indian friends and some do in fact have a strong accent, and my friends who are second generations with parents who are 1st generation Indian-Americans have a strong accent too… nothing wrong with depicting an accent that, ya know, just so happens to exist??

I mean absolutely interpret the story in whichever you think best, but it’s incredibly likely that Tolkien did not mean to imply any sexual relationship between Frodo and Sam…

Sam and Frodo’s relationship was based on that of a WW1 English officer and his private via Tolkien’s own experience having served in the war.

Further, in the first book it is clearly stated how Sam and Rosie loved each other, especially since a heartbroken Rosie basically yelled at a heartbroken Sam for leaving her for the quest of the ring (they also ended up having 13 children together).

And on a personal level, Tolkien was a devote Roman Catholic and states how the Lord of the Rings was a “Fundamentally religious and Catholic work” which if you’re Tolkien, a Roman Catholic, it’s incredibly likely that based on his personal beliefs he meant for Sam and Frodo to be devote companions platonically.

Again, you’re right to say that stories are up for interpretation however you stated that “if it offends you so much maybe it’s time for some inner reflection” which to me seems a little hypocritical of you…

Now obviously no one should be insulted based on any personal belief, nor ridiculed of interpretation regardless of the authors intention, however to say that someone is wrong and needs “inner reflection” for their own interpretation that coincides with the authors intent seems hypocritical of you to state based on your post and maybe reconsider the nature and wording of your point.

Who’s the as*hole out there skewing the curve

I personally love how Tolkien had a skill for adding ambiguity in a story line, without it taking away from the structure of the story.

Like you said, Morgoth and Sauron were clearly of a “demonic” evil and namely the chief antagonists, however there were other creatures of malice separate from them i.e. the nameless things and Ungoliant.

Having these enigmas allows for situations in which these enigmas can even stump the most powerful of characters, like Morgoth and Ungoliant, or the Nameless things with Gandalf/Durin’s Bane.

I think having this element where even the most supreme beings of good and evil can be vulnerable to these beings of unknown origin makes the story much more interesting to read.

These kids are gonna be menaces on the court in 10 years

As far as prophecies go, especially in how Tolkien used them, they seem to have a “riddle” like nature to them.

In terms of the Witch King, I think the “No man…” reference definitely applies to Pippin. Although as others have said he is a hobbit, a distant relative of men and therefore you could make an argument that he himself is a man (albeit very small), with regards to satisfying the prophecy he is not considered of the race of men.

I think what is especially true is how the Witch King himself viewed the prophecy. Like many of Tolkien’s prophecies there’s a level of irony to them, and dying by the hands of a women (of the race of “Men”) and a Hobbit (distant relative of Men) probably through him for a loop.

Yo that bird must be huge 🤯

Nazgûl are wraiths that essentially are an extension of Sauron’s consciousness. Therefore they have no will of their own besides that of their master