# Why was Legolas in The Hobbit?



## Daniel Thomas (Feb 6, 2018)

I personally love the book more than the movies of the hobbit. So it makes me super mad when they change the plot of the books and put Legolas in it. Don't get me wrong I love Legolas but it just wasn't the same with him in there. Does anybody no why they did that?


----------



## octoburn (Feb 6, 2018)

The Hobbit films' problems go way beyond adding Legolas to the narrative. Hell, you could easily have him in there without changing the plot an ounce. The fact is, Legolas was probably present for many of the events in the Hobbit, simply because his father, Thranduil (the Elvenking in the Hobbit) was a fairly major secondary character. He was likely present during the Dwarves captivity as well as the Battle of Five Armies.

I had zero problems with them including Legolas in the Hobbit films, it is the manner he is incorporated into it that is an issue.


----------



## Daniel Thomas (Feb 6, 2018)

octoburn said:


> The Hobbit films' problems go way beyond adding Legolas to the narrative. Hell, you could easily have him in there without changing the plot an ounce. The fact is, Legolas was probably present for many of the events in the Hobbit, simply because his father, Thranduil (the Elvenking in the Hobbit) was a fairly major secondary character. He was likely present during the Dwarves captivity as well as the Battle of Five Armies.
> 
> I had zero problems with them including Legolas in the Hobbit films, it is the manner he is incorporated into it that is an issue.


I see what your saying but the fact is he was not mentioned in the book that is the only reason why I have a problem with him. I loved his part in the movie I was just asking if the director thought the movie would be more liked if he was in it.



octoburn said:


> The Hobbit films' problems go way beyond adding Legolas to the narrative. Hell, you could easily have him in there without changing the plot an ounce. The fact is, Legolas was probably present for many of the events in the Hobbit, simply because his father, Thranduil (the Elvenking in the Hobbit) was a fairly major secondary character. He was likely present during the Dwarves captivity as well as the Battle of Five Armies.
> 
> I had zero problems with them including Legolas in the Hobbit films, it is the manner he is incorporated into it that is an issue.


Also I know he was alive then. p.s. What is your faviorte part in the hobbit mine was when gloin pulled out the photos of his son(Gimli) and his wife.


----------



## octoburn (Feb 6, 2018)

Daniel Thomas said:


> I see what your saying but the fact is he was not mentioned in the book that is the only reason why I have a problem with him. I loved his part in the movie I was just asking if the director thought the movie would be more liked if he was in it.



The reason for that was simple: Legolas did not exist in Tolkien's world yet. When he wrote the Hobbit, he was years from imagining Legolas even existed. Even his father did not have a name at that point. He did not "discover" either character until he wrote LOTR.

I'm sure that Jackson knew that putting Orlando Bloom in the film would definitely be a draw for a specific demographic


----------



## Azrubêl (Feb 7, 2018)

Effective use of caps lock, and I will add to it -- why did they make him look like a CGI ripoff of himself?


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (Feb 7, 2018)

Azrubêl said:


> Effective use of caps lock, and I will add to it -- why did they make him look like a CGI ripoff of himself?



I agree, here's my addition - Why does Legolas look older than he becomes 60 years later? 

(Sure, actors age, so I'm just nitpicking, but he just felt off aesthetically during the two movies.) 

CL


----------



## Azrubêl (Feb 7, 2018)

CirdanLinweilin said:


> I agree, here's my addition - Why does Legolas look older than he becomes 60 years later?
> 
> (Sure, actors age, so I'm just nitpicking, but he just felt off aesthetically during the two movies.)
> 
> CL



Haha exactly, he actually does look older. Do they just not notice these things? Or not care? Honestly, I think it's just a Hollywood problem. I hate the aesthetic rut we are stuck in, taking away from the content.


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (Feb 7, 2018)

Azrubêl said:


> I hate the aesthetic rut we are stuck in, taking away from the content.



Devoid of life, it is. I agree so much with this.


CL


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (May 17, 2018)

DT: With all due respect, I can't believe you really needed to ask the question, but just in case you found Octoburn's last sentence too oblique, the answer is:


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (May 17, 2018)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> DT: With all due respect, I can't believe you really needed to ask the question, but just in case you found Octoburn's last sentence too obscure, the answer is:




CL


----------



## Alcuin (May 18, 2018)

A woman named Lindsey Ellis has set forward what seems a convincing reason for three _Hobbit_ films in the second part of a three-part series on Jackson’s _Hobbit_ trilogy. Part 1 is here, Part 2 here, and Part 3 (which I’ve not seen) here. In Part 2, Ellis posits that an ever-increasing number of hands in the till (that is, Hollywood studios demanding a cut of the revenues), the filmmakers were first forced to increase the number of films from two to three (face it: it’s difficult to present _The Hobbit_ even if faithfully to Tolkien in one 2½ hour film), then fire their first (and preferred) director Guillermo del Toro and replace him with a reluctant Peter Jackson, and finally introduce a love triangle involving the Elf Tauriel, a character concocted by the filmmakers. 

Film producers apparently follow a formulaic system: so many minutes of gore and gratuitous violence, so many minutes of (goblin or Nazgûl or rabbit-sled) chases (in standard films, cars and motorcycles; in Western oaters, horse and train chases), an of course the obligatory evil villain explaining his evil villainous plans. Which is why the schlock coming out of that place is as awful as the people who inhabit it: unwatchable and unentertaining for the most part, IMO.) They don’t give a hoot if you _enjoy_ their films: they just want to show a profit, if not through sales, then through Hollywood accounting, which is said to put Enron and Bernie Madoff to shame. 



Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> DT: With all due respect, I can't believe you really needed to ask the question, but just in case you found Octoburn's last sentence too oblique, the answer is:


Besides teenage fan-girls. Here are some similar examples from the first Beatles tour of the US in 1964. (Hint to younger TTF-ers: these are your grandmothers. The more things change, the more they stay the same.)


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (May 18, 2018)

Alcuin said:


> A woman named Lindsey Ellis has set forward what seems a convincing reason for three _Hobbit_ films in the second part of a three-part series on Jackson’s _Hobbit_ trilogy. Part 1 is here, Part 2 here, and Part 3 (which I’ve not seen) here. In Part 2, Ellis posits that an ever-increasing number of hands in the till (that is, Hollywood studios demanding a cut of the revenues), the filmmakers were first forced to increase the number of films from two to three (face it: it’s difficult to present _The Hobbit_ even if faithfully to Tolkien in one 2½ hour film), then fire their first (and preferred) director Guillermo del Toro and replace him with a reluctant Peter Jackson, and finally introduce a love triangle involving the Elf Tauriel, a character concocted by the filmmakers.
> 
> Film producers apparently follow a formulaic system: so many minutes of gore and gratuitous violence, so many minutes of (goblin or Nazgûl or rabbit-sled) chases (in standard films, cars and motorcycles; in Western oaters, horse and train chases), an of course the obligatory evil villain explaining his evil villainous plans. Which is why the schlock coming out of that place is as awful as the people who inhabit it: unwatchable and unentertaining for the most part, IMO.) They don’t give a hoot if you _enjoy_ their films: they just want to show a profit, if not through sales, then through Hollywood accounting, which is said to put Enron and Bernie Madoff to shame.
> 
> Besides teenage fan-girls. Here are some similar examples from the first Beatles tour of the US in 1964. (Hint to younger TTF-ers: these are your grandmothers. The more things change, the more they stay the same.)



These pictures are just horrible to view.

Do not be offended, but even though I agree with your post, I cannot "_like" _it.

Excuse me while I go vomit.

CL


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (May 18, 2018)

Whassa matter, CL? Not into Beatlemania? 

Alcuin: did you ever see "I Want to Hold Your Hand"?

I thought I read that the delays led del Toro to leave for another project, BTW, but I could be wrong.

Edit: Oops, it's "I _Wanna _Hold Your Hand", from 1978. First film directed by Robert Zemeckis.


----------



## Alcuin (May 20, 2018)

CirdanLinweilin said:


> These pictures are just horrible to view.
> 
> Do not be offended, but even though I agree with your post, I cannot "_like" _it.
> 
> ...


No offense taken!  They _are_ awful pictures, but at least they’re (mostly) teenage girls looking forward to seeing their idols, rather than teenage boys training for combat making war-faces. There is a reason marketers (and other unscrupulous purveyors of schlock) prey upon teenagers: youth in well-ordered societies are as yet uncalloused and unaware of the predators in their midst who seek to take advantage of them, like the Hobbits of the Shire who were unprepared for The Boss and his Big Men, much less for Sharkey. The archaic (those who preceded those whom we generally call “ancient”) Athenians were proud of their youth, who grew up in a rough and tumble society full of risks and hazards: Theseus was a teenager when he killed the Minotaur; but as Athens grew rich and powerful, Athenian society seemed more secure, and their youth became surely and rude. In short, I chose those photographs because they _are_ disquieting; but compare them to  the one *Squint-eyed Southerner* posted: identical facial expressions: only clothes, backdrops, and color photography are different. 



Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> …Alcuin: did you ever see "I [Wanna] Hold Your Hand"?


No: I was never a huge Beatles fan, and the university cinema rarely played first-run movies in those days. 


Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> I thought I read that the delays led del Toro to leave for another project, BTW, but I could be wrong.


You could be right, too: Ellis’ explanation makes for an interesting YouTube video, though, and fits the narrative she’s spinning, which in turn rationalizes the (entertaining but awful) cinematic results.


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (May 20, 2018)

Alcuin said:


> No offense taken!  They _are_ awful pictures, but at least they’re (mostly) teenage girls looking forward to seeing their idols, rather than teenage boys training for combat making war-faces. There is a reason marketers (and other unscrupulous purveyors of schlock) prey upon teenagers: youth in well-ordered societies are as yet uncalloused and unaware of the predators in their midst who seek to take advantage of them: much like the Hobbits of the Shire, who were unprepared for The Boss and his Big Men, much less for Sharkey. The archaic (those who preceded those whom we generally call “ancient”) Athenians were proud of their youth, who grew up in a rough and tumble society full of risks and hazards: Theseus was a teenager when he killed the Minotaur; but as Athens grew rich and powerful, Athenian society seemed more secure, and their youth became surely and rude. In short, I intended the photographs to be disquieting because they _are_ disquieting; but compare them to  the one *Squint-eyed Southerner* posted: identical facial expressions: only clothes, backdrops, and color photography are different.


Very good point. I hadn't thought about that. 

The point about marketing is a nail on the head.

Nice Alcuin!

CL


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (May 21, 2018)

I have to confess I don't see anything inherently horrible or awful about any of those pictures. 

No time for a discussion now-- my wireless service has been offline for the past 3 days. I'm online briefly only because I'm sitting in the grocery store parking lot in town. They're supposedly working on the problem, but no date when it will be fixed. Until then, my presence here will be intermittent.

Cheers all.


----------



## Alcuin (May 21, 2018)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> ...my wireless service has been offline for the past 3 days. I'm online briefly only because I'm sitting in the grocery store parking lot in town. They're supposedly working on the problem, but no date when it will be fixed.


Technology is wonderful until it doesn’t work.


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (May 21, 2018)

Alcuin said:


> Technology is wonderful until it doesn’t work.


Or until it pulls a Skynet.

_*Cough Alexa, Siri, Cortana, cough*_


CL


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (May 22, 2018)

Well,well, on my return home, service was restored. I'm sure it was pure coincidence. And no, CL, my smartphone hasn't tried to Terminate me (yet!). 

There don't appear to be any clips from the movie, Alcuin, but here's the trailer:






I don't have any objection to Legolas being in the movie; my views on it follow Octoburn's, especially in his first sentence! My OP was intended to be light-hearted, not condemnatory.

Ellis may well be right about what happened in the making of the movies; film production is notoriously a mish-mash of inputs from all kinds of sources. I'm reminded of William Faulkner's advice to authors tempted to write for Hollywood: write your script, go to the California state line, and gingerly push it across. Then go home.

Sometimes the mixed sources, budget limitations, confused and contradictory direction, and general stumbling in the darkness yields a Casablanca; sometimes it results in the Hobbit movies. The bottom line is, well, the Bottom Line: if they made money, the Bosses feel justified. And I can't blame them for that; that's what they set out to do.*

Junk Food is a big money maker too, because people like it. I just try to avoid it where I can.

*I see that the number of cinemas in China has just passed the number in the United States. China is a big consumer of Hollywood films. Any guesses as to what sort of actors will soon be getting more film work?


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (May 22, 2018)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> Well,well, on my return home, service was restored. I'm sure it was pure coincidence. And no, CL, my smartphone hasn't tried to Terminate me (yet!).
> 
> There don't appear to be any clips from the movie, Alcuin, but here's the trailer:
> 
> ...



Only actors and actresses off the top of my head, is Jet Li, Liu Yifei, Gong Li, and Donnie Chen. I don't know if this is important or not, but all four are appearing in Disney's Live Action _Mulan. 
_
And you know China will be _all over _that one.

CL


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (May 22, 2018)

Oh, that's interesting, I didn't know that. Thanks.

I don't have any objection to that either; especially when I think of people like Anna May Wong, who ended up being relegated to B movies, instead of the A's she deserved. I said something about Warner Oland in another thread; I didn’t mention that several earlier Charlie Chan movies starring _Chinese _actors didn't do well; that they only became popular after casting a _Swede, _I guess says something about societal attitudes of the time.


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (May 22, 2018)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> Oh, that's interesting, I didn't know that. Thanks.
> 
> I don't have any objection to that either; especially when I thinks of people like Anna May Wong, who ended up being relegated to B movies, instead of the A's she deserved. I said something about Warner Oland in another thread; I didn’t mention that several earlier Charlie Chan movies starring _Chinese _actors didn't do well; that they only became popular after casting a _Swede, _I guess says something about societal attitudes of the time.



Welcome. Interestingly, Gong Li portrayed a Japanese woman in _Memoirs of a Geisha, _so, I'd call that range. 

Also, Liu Yifei, has her own skills in martial arts as well, so that's cool, she is starring as the titular character _Mulan. _

Jet Li, is well, Jet Li. Which means he's pretty awesome, and I love me some martial arts!

Donnie Yen. I feel like a stupid American. Please forgive me everyone, I drew a blank. 

He portrayed Chirrut Imwe in Rogue One, and his skills were amazing in that movie. 

Huh, I didn't know that about the Charlie Chan movies, that says something.

CL


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (May 22, 2018)

No more on topic than previous posts, but re your Skynet reference:

We know what Tolkien thought about the appropriation of his Shadowfax name for a hovercraft: what do you suppose he would think of this?

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2018-palantir-peter-thiel/


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (May 22, 2018)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> No more on topic than previous posts, but re your Skynet reference:
> 
> We know what Tolkien thought about the appropriation of his Shadowfax name for a hovercraft: what do you suppose he would think of this?
> 
> https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2018-palantir-peter-thiel/



I assume it would start with a fierce pen and fiercer words.

This sounds like the exact thing Tolkien was against. We all know how he felt about industrialization in _his _day, he called the Oppenheimer project "_Babel Builders"_.

This illustrates perfectly how the Palantir was extremely dangerous in the un-rightful hands. Heck, Aragorn could only handle it and at that..._barely.
_
Basically, this, if anything, justifies how the _Palantir _affected Saruman and Denethor in the most negative way possible and how power can corrupt. 

A lot of times I think...we humans should never have the power of technology we do.

Look at the Hobbits for example, in their ignorant bliss. 

Just my .2

CL


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (May 22, 2018)

Ha. Looked at that way, maybe the name is more appropriate than I thought! 

I was just checking for more about Anna May Wong; turns out one of the reasons she couldn't get lead roles in A pictures was due to the "miscegenation" rule in the Hays Code: a "white" actor could not kiss an actor in "yellow-face". So she couldn't play a romantic lead.


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (May 22, 2018)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> Ha. Looked at that way, maybe the name is more appropriate than I thought!
> 
> I was just checking for more about Anna May Wong; turns out one of the reasons she couldn't get lead roles in A pictures was due to the "miscegenation" rule in the Hays Code: a "white" actor could not kiss an actor in "yellow-face". So she couldn't play a romantic lead.



Yeah...


Well, darn. 

Poor girl, wish she had a better shot than she got.....

CL


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (May 22, 2018)

Yep.



There's still a ways to go, but at least things have changed somewhat.

The studios assumed for years that a superhero movie with black actors would flop.

Then came Black Panther.


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (May 22, 2018)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> Yep.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


She's lovely! 


CL


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (May 22, 2018)

> She's lovely!



Most definitely.


_And _talented.

Lots of images on line.


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (May 22, 2018)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> Most definitely.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'll have to go seeking, thanks!

CL


----------



## Ithilethiel (May 25, 2018)

CirdanLinweilin said:


> I agree, here's my addition - Why does Legolas look older than he becomes 60 years later?
> 
> (Sure, actors age, so I'm just nitpicking, but he just felt off aesthetically during the two movies.)
> 
> CL



And why oh why did his eye color change? Glam lenses anyone?



Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> Ha. Looked at that way, maybe the name is more appropriate than I thought!
> 
> I was just checking for more about Anna May Wong; turns out one of the reasons she couldn't get lead roles in A pictures was due to the "miscegenation" rule in the Hays Code: a "white" actor could not kiss an actor in "yellow-face". So she couldn't play a romantic lead.



I loved her in, _Daughter of the Dragon_ but once again there was that big Swede playing Daddy Fu Manchu. She was also good in, _Shanghai Express_ but that was a Dietrich vehicle all the way. Still she was exotic and impressive with her screen time. So glad at least things have changed for the better in this respect in Hollywoodland.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (May 25, 2018)

Yes, both the Hayes Code and the old studio system are long gone, for better and/or worse, depending on your point of view. There are still inequalities, but things are changing.

BTW-- the Beatles weren't schlock, IMO, but a genuine breakthrough in pop/rock, at a time when it had become moribund, through the machinations of _real _schlockmeisters pushing manufactured "teen idols" of limited talent on the public with payola schemes and other devices. See Fabian for an example. This after The Day the Music Died, at the end of the 50's.

Their popularity and influence certainly wasn't limited to teenage girls, or the English-speaking world. Example:






I promise my next post will be on topic -- or at least on Tolkien!


----------



## Alcuin (May 25, 2018)

This is still off-topic, but…

Following World War II, you’d expect that the music of the victorious soldiers, sailors, and airmen would have continued to dominate airwaves and dancehalls. It didn’t. Sure, Frank Sinatra, Doris Day, and a host of others continued to appear in concert halls and on television, but their musical genre was quickly replaced among children born after the war.

This is usually ascribed to rebellion by the Baby Boomers. Not so! During World War II, a heavy tax was placed on venues that offered musical entertainment. If a nightclub had a traditional band – big bands, like Benny Goodman or Duke Ellington – they were forced to pay that heavy tax, the Cabaret Tax. It was set at 20% of the revenues of the club in 1941, raised to 30% in 1944, and not reduced to 10% until May 1960. It was finally repealed altogether in 1965.

A 20% tax – even a 10% tax – can kill a nightclub. And kill ’em it did.

_However_, if you ran a little establishment that served beer, for instance, and had a rock-n-roll band but *no dance floor*, _that_ wasn’t taxed! Roadhouses and small clubs were immune from the tax. But they couldn’t house a big band: all they could site were small, cheaper, rock-n-roll bands: a couple of guitars and a drum set in the corner. 

The United States government taxed big bands into retirement and replaced them with what we have today. See here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here, just for starters. 

Yes, government can and does alter social norms. For the worse, usually.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (May 25, 2018)

I was going to point out that the tax wasn't the whole of it, but some of the articles in the links you provided did that for me.

I will say that the role of jazz in popular music was a bit of an anomaly, a moment in time, really, as the primal urge of jazz is toward experimentation, "progression", if you like (or don't like), whereas the tendency for audiences of popular music is toward the familiar. 

Artie Shaw recorded "Begin the Beguine", had a hit, and was ready to move on, but his audience demanded it at every performance. He soon became sick of it.

In fact, this is one thing that made Glenn Miller so popular; people came to hear his songs played exactly like the records they bought, and that's what he gave them.

I even experienced a little of that myself, playing in a band out of high school: kids at dances didn't want to hear solos or changes, they wanted to hear their records being covered.

Years later, I was talking with someone at a party, asking if she'd heard this or that band, when she stunned me by irritatedly snapping "I only listen to music I've already heard!"

Popular music, like other artforms, seems to go in cycles: a new form appears, innovative and creative, is copied and exploited by followers and imitators, and finally becomes worn out, clichéd, and predictable, until new innovators come along. This happened in the example I mentioned in my previous post, but also post-war, especially in the early 50's, to which the term "pap music" was often applied. And it happened when the experimentation of the 60's became the bloated Arena Rock of the 70's. Then came the rebellion of Punk and New Wave.

I believe I have that Smithonian set, BTW. Yeah, it's pretty awful.

Rats. You made me break my promise already, Alcuin!


----------



## Ithilethiel (May 25, 2018)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> I was going to point out that the tax wasn't the whole of it, but some of the articles in the links you provided did that for me.
> 
> I will say that the role of jazz in popular music was a bit of an anomaly, a moment in time, really, as the primal urge of jazz is toward experimentation, "progression", if you like (or don't like), whereas the tendency for audiences of popular music is toward the familiar.
> 
> ...



And unfortunately, the true innovators who birthed the original new sound are eventually lumped into the group of copycats who instead of honoring the sound by taking it into even more inventive directions chose only to exploit it.

I think that is what has happened with the Beatles with generations not there at the beginning of the craze. We cannot appreciate the unique qualities of their music as out parents and grandparents did. Can you imagine turning on the radio and expecting more Fabian but instead hearing, _I Saw Her Standing There_ or _I Want to Hold Your Hand_? It must have been mind blowing. 

None of us can truly know what is was like to experience, "the now" 50 years later unless ofc we were there. We can appreciate it but we can't really judge or understand it properly.

Ok, enough preaching to the choir. Time for more Tolkien. But it was a great convo that began about Legolas. The elf strikes again!


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (May 25, 2018)

I _wish _I could say I wasn't there.

But I was.

Yeah. I'm old. 

Otherwise, you're right. My little sister, about three years old at the time, was constantly dragging around a Life magazine with their picture on the cover, yelling "Beelies! Beelies!".

She grew up to become a musician.


----------



## Alcuin (May 25, 2018)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> I _wish _I could say I wasn't there.
> 
> But I was.
> 
> Yeah. I'm old.


Beats the alternative. 

I remember it, too. I was a small child, but I thought the antics of the teenagers were ridiculous: they looked silly even to me. 

Old, indeed! Why, I remember having to catch, kill, skin, and cook our own mammoths for lunch at school. And we only had 30 minutes, and had to dodge the saber-toothed tigers. Kids have it so easy nowadays…


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (May 26, 2018)

Alcuin said:


> Beats the alternative.
> 
> I remember it, too. I was a small child, but I thought the antics of the teenagers were ridiculous: they looked silly even to me.
> 
> Old, indeed! Why, I remember having to catch, kill, skin, and cook our own mammoths for lunch at school. And we only had 30 minutes, and had to dodge the saber-toothed tigers. Kids have it so easy nowadays…



I'm a betweener, I was born in '96. 

I don't know what the absolute heck people are doing nowadays.

I'm a young adult curmudgeon! 

People my age and younger have it _too easy. 
_
CL


----------



## Ithilethiel (May 26, 2018)

CirdanLinweilin said:


> I'm a betweener, I was born in '96.
> 
> I don't know what the absolute heck people are doing nowadays.
> 
> ...



_Me too CL...my mom says I'm an old soul.

Like the guy whose parents had to get a court order to get him out of the house! OMG...don't even get me started on that..._


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (May 26, 2018)

Ithilethiel said:


> Like the guy whose parents had to get a court order to get him out of the house! OMG...don't even get me started on that...



You have got to be _kidding _me...


You aren't kidding are you?



CL


----------



## Ithilethiel (May 26, 2018)

CirdanLinweilin said:


> You have got to be _kidding _me...
> 
> 
> You aren't kidding are you?
> ...



I wish I was kidding...

https://nypost.com/2018/05/22/parents-win-suit-to-kick-deadbeat-son-out-of-their-house/


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (May 26, 2018)

Ithilethiel said:


> I wish I was kidding...
> 
> https://nypost.com/2018/05/22/parents-win-suit-to-kick-deadbeat-son-out-of-their-house/



What is the _absolute MORDOR????????????

_
CL


----------



## Ithilethiel (May 26, 2018)

CirdanLinweilin said:


> What is the _absolute MORDOR????????????
> 
> _
> CL



Looks like being a young curmudgeon is a pretty good deal....


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (May 26, 2018)

Ithilethiel said:


> Looks like being a young curmudgeon is a pretty good deal....


I would say!

GO-LY!

CL


----------



## Olorgando (Aug 22, 2019)

To the Legolas "demographic" mentioned above I would add Thorin, Fili and especially Kili. Hel-lo, these are Longbeard Dwarves, House of Durin! Compared to that, these three guy have three-day-stubble!


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Sep 16, 2019)

More thread necromancy!

Reading through it again after a year was amusing, I confess; some, coming across it as their first exposure to the forum, might conclude that TTF was populated solely by old (in years or spirit) curmudgeons.


----------



## Squint-eyed Southerner (Jan 22, 2020)

I was going to resurrect this thread from the grave, but I forgot Olorgando had already done it (I don't consider September necroposting).

No more on topic than most posts here, but since I talked about Anna May Wong, I thought I'd add this, for Google users:









Google Doodle celebrates Anna May Wong nearly 100 years after her first leading role. Here's why she's in focus | CNN


The woman with a wry smile in Wednesday's Google Doodle is considered to be the first Asian-American movie star -- and she still has something to teach Hollywood nearly a century after she broke into it.




www.google.com


----------



## CirdanLinweilin (Jan 22, 2020)

Squint-eyed Southerner said:


> I was going to resurrect this thread from the grave, but I forgot Olorgando had already done it (I don't consider September necroposting).
> 
> No more on topic than most posts here, but since I talked about Anna May Wong, I thought I'd add this, for Google users:
> 
> ...


Oh, that's cool!




CL


----------

