J. R. R. Tolkein interest -

Discussion in 'Casual Photo Conversations' started by rodeo_joe|1, Jun 19, 2021.

  1. I came across this old slide the other day:
    It features what are supposed to be the inspiration for J. R. R. Tolkein's "The Two Towers"

    In the foreground is Perrott's Folly an C18th tower featuring a series of small hexagonal rooms connected by a steep staircase. Its purpose for being built is open to surmise.

    Beyond it, to the left, can be seen the top of the other tower. An ornate Victorian construction (1870) that's part of Edgbaston waterworks.

    This was taken many years ago, and this view of the two towers is no longer available. A small block of houses has been built on the grassy site, and tall surrounding trees also obscure the view.

    Any no-longer-to-be-seen items of interest in your collection?
    Last edited: Jun 19, 2021
  2. No so significant but this view from my bedroom window shows a scene sadly no longer visible - the view of the fields being completely blocked by new houses.
    [​IMG]ultra flashgun by Mike Kanssen, on Flickr

    I never did work out the guide number of the lightning strike.:)
  3. I guess you can't get much more transient than a flash of lightning!
    michaellinder likes this.
  4. The Ship Inn in Soar Lane, Leicester, once a great stop off for bike rides, now sadly gone, swept away by redevelopment of the whole area. It was in nearly original condition too, couldn't they have tweaked the plans sslightly to keep it? Shot with an M.P.P Microcord.

    Not far away on either side of the Soar are the tower of the Space Centre, and the old Wolsey factory water tower. Both are still there but the area around the water tower has been redeveloped for housing.

    My take on The Two Towers:
    The Two Towers.jpg
  5. Tony Parsons

    Tony Parsons Norfolk and Good

    K3 64 01 - 140_2502 - TONY0921 - Jay.jpg

    Three days after taking this shot, from my window, the tree on which the Jay is perching
    was cut down - in the middle of the breeding season. Environmental Protection at the
    Council were informed - and did predictably nothing. Not even a reply to my letter.

    Sadly, when the tree trunk was cut down, an error on the part of the vandals meant
    that it fell on top of, and demolished, their garden shed.

    Instant Karma
  6. Not two towers, just half a tower
  7. I just finished reading the trilogy for the third time.
  8. Tony Parsons

    Tony Parsons Norfolk and Good

    I greatly prefer the printed books to the films - the subtle psychological issues raised in the books are completely lost in the film versions, in my view.
    danac, Roger G and Vincent Peri like this.
  9. I first read The Lord of the Rings in 1967. Yes the films, although they did a pretty good job of telling the basic story, omitted many parts of the books, such as the Tom Bombadil episode. And left out the all the stories, songs and legends which gave the books their richness and depth.
  10. Tony Parsons

    Tony Parsons Norfolk and Good

    Surely Tom Bombadil was a central, if not pivotal character ? He was the one character on whom the ring had no effect - and not only that, he could see characters who were wearing it.
    danac likes this.
  11. The films beautifully expanded on the love interest between Aragorn and Arwen. Eowyn's unrequited attraction for him was also well done. The casting was perfect. When Viggo Mortensen was contacted about playing Aragorn he had no previous knowledge of Tolkien's works. His son had to excitedly convince him to take the role. I must agree that the books were better than the films though. The last two of the three Hobbit screen versions were a disgrace however. I lost all respect for Peter Jackson after that.
    za33photo and Tony Parsons like this.
  12. Tony Parsons

    Tony Parsons Norfolk and Good

    In my view, even the stated love interest was better represented in the books, as you had to interpret everything in the light of your own experiences (or lack thereof), so it became more personal. The films merely represented the director's version of everything which was only hinted at on the printed page. And I agree 100% about the Hobbit films - he took a book about adventure and self-exploration, and turned into yet another (yawn) Hollywood Blockbuster. Fine for the accountants (or Auditors of Reality), but, I feel, less so for the more mature discriminating audience.

    Mind you, the scenery was impressive in all the films - as Janice Nicholls said 'I like the backing'.
    danac and za33photo like this.
  13. The Buddha would have been a king if not for the 4 sights.


    Return of the King
  14. Also much of the CGI in the Hobbit was downright cheesy, for reasons unknown to me.
    Tony Parsons likes this.
  15. I learned years ago to never under any circumstances compare any movie to the book it is based on. You just get frustrated. Let each stand or fall on its own. There something in this thread about photographs though…..,

    Rick H.
    Tony Parsons likes this.
  16. Dustin McAmera

    Dustin McAmera Yorkshire, mostly on film.

    'Shall I ever look down into that valley again, I wonder.'
    KW Pilot Super, HP5, HC110, Hobbiton in the Shire.
    michaellinder and Allen Herbert like this.
  17. Now perhaps also room for a correction?
    The gentleman's last name is Tolkien. Not Tolkein.
  18. Mind you, the scenery was impressive in all the films - as Janice Nicholls said 'I like the backing'.[/QUOTE]

    Hi Tony I'm thinking that must have fallen on a few deaf ears. I'm amazed that I've dragged the reference from the depths of my failing memory.
    Tony Parsons likes this.
  19. A magnificent journey of imagination both in the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings.

    But it is really about the books.
    Tony Parsons likes this.

Share This Page