|
Post by Andúnë on Feb 26, 2004 16:53:21 GMT -5
Lol, "It’s a little tight across the chest"
|
|
|
Post by Arrie on Feb 26, 2004 17:24:25 GMT -5
Exactly...
|
|
|
Post by RastNim on Mar 4, 2004 17:46:53 GMT -5
Interestingly Dwarfs weren't supposed to be that short, Elves and Wizards and men were supposed to be really tall like 7 foot or something weird and Dwarves were like 6 foot....I read somewhere, hard to imagine I know but I think that is true, I found that out somewhere, I think...lol maybe I dreamed it.
Also in the cartoon Gimli is actually the same weight as Aragorn, Legolas and Gandalf (and Boromir) but I think that was wrong, he should be slightly shorter at least.
|
|
|
Post by Arrie on Mar 4, 2004 17:49:12 GMT -5
Well this is the cartoon with Boromir the Viking, Saruman as Ming the Merciless, etc.
|
|
|
Post by RastNim on Mar 4, 2004 18:02:02 GMT -5
Yeah I know I was just making the point he should be taller, now I seem narky, sorry I'm tired.
|
|
|
Post by Arrie on Mar 4, 2004 18:03:19 GMT -5
'Sok pi, probably the effect of too much Gimli.
|
|
|
Post by RastNim on Mar 4, 2004 18:12:11 GMT -5
But anyway, back to my point about Gimli, I think he should have been taller than portrayed in the films, I think he was a bit too short, he was barely taller than a hobbit. No wonder he was the butt of many jokes.
|
|
|
Post by Arrie on Mar 4, 2004 18:15:20 GMT -5
That is a good point, but then again they did have to make him in proportion to the Elves, though I agree he could have done with being a bit taller.
|
|
|
Post by RastNim on Mar 4, 2004 18:18:50 GMT -5
I don't think that dwarves were actually meant to be that mcuh shorter than any other being, just that they were as a race, slightly dumpier. I think to make the dwarves threatening in any way would be impossible they are just too small to take seriously.
|
|
|
Post by Andúnë on Mar 5, 2004 5:52:08 GMT -5
I get the sense though that Gimli was shown more on-the-same-scale as the Hobbits for... how should I put it... technical convenience?
|
|
|
Post by Esteldil on Mar 7, 2004 5:28:54 GMT -5
"technical convenience"
- for whom? the artistic directors? or the slash writers?
Dwarves had to be quite a bit smaller than men and elves and pretty much the same size as hobbits else how would the dwarves in The Hobbit managed to fit in those elven barrels, in which Bilbo also fitted?
huh? huh?
|
|
|
Post by Arrie on Mar 7, 2004 6:45:02 GMT -5
True, true. It's a good thing they weren't claustrophobic, isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by Andúnë on Mar 7, 2004 13:48:04 GMT -5
I didn't mean "technical convenience" like that Mind. Open air. Now. I meant the computer-y people didn't have to resize Gimli seperately from the Hobbits.
|
|
|
Post by Esteldil on Mar 8, 2004 14:35:45 GMT -5
I knew that I actually do like Gimli a little better in the films than in the books. A little light relief is good. In the books, everyone is always so serious and Gimli just didn't make a big impression. At least in the films, each character stands out in their own right.
|
|
|
Post by RastNim on Mar 10, 2004 17:55:45 GMT -5
Yeah I liked it in the films but I think the atmosphere of the books was sort of...mysterious something i can't explain which had no room for jokes. I love the way it was written and I guess I am just doing the old "why didn't they stick to th books" rant that annoys everyone.
|
|