Lord of the Rings Facts. First time making any content, used the funnyjunk comic maker thing so we'll see how it goes. Thumb for more mah ... Thank you for the facts you have my thanks lord of the ring facts comp Aragorn


Anonymous comments allowed.
#1 - mattdoggy (07/06/2013) [-]
Thank you for the facts   
you have my thanks
Thank you for the facts
you have my thanks
#28 to #1 - europe (07/06/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#19 to #1 - anon (07/06/2013) [-]
and my bow!
#6 - tmgrskat (07/06/2013) [-]
"He lived by the name of Estel, the Elvish word for hope."   
Well, I guess we found the REAL HopeMan.
"He lived by the name of Estel, the Elvish word for hope."
Well, I guess we found the REAL HopeMan.
#3 - jakatackka (07/06/2013) [-]
I like it. Keep it up! A recommendation for next time - use a more legible font color.
User avatar #13 to #3 - galgawine [OP](07/06/2013) [-]
yeah I wanted to do the white text with black outline or black text with white outline, whichever it is, but I couldn't figure out how to do it?
User avatar #47 to #13 - whichever ONLINE (07/07/2013) [-]
...Whichever it is
#4 - baaltomekk (07/06/2013) [-]
The first paragraph is misleading. It reads as if arathorn was two when he died and left a child...
#61 to #4 - anon (07/07/2013) [-]
Yeah i was also very confused.
#24 - hellsjester (07/06/2013) [-]
fun fact #2
this guy was only a sub plot-point in the hobbit and was only briefly mentioned not a main story device....
User avatar #46 to #24 - MrDeadiron (07/06/2013) [-]
actually he died in the book back when they tried to retake the mines of Moria, its his son I believe who hunts them
User avatar #60 to #46 - finni (07/07/2013) [-]
His son leads the battle of the five armies. He didn't hunt them down exactly. The Goblins of the misty mountains were the ones who tried to hunt them down, but his son, Bolg, leads the Goblins later. We don't know when he decided to join the Goblins.
User avatar #25 to #24 - thesimonved (07/06/2013) [-]
It was the same with Radagast, ******* hate this guy in the movie, and the necromancer. Jackson should have just made two movies, strictly following the books plot.
User avatar #32 to #25 - subaqueousreach (07/06/2013) [-]
Nope, The Hobbit was great; what you need to stop doing is comparing it to the books.

If it was exactly as the books were you'd be bored to tears throughout the movie because nothing would surprise you and you'd already know the whole story from reading the books.

I've read the hobbit, I know the issues people have, but I view the movies as a separate, almost alternate reality to the books. Which could make sense considering Tolkien wrote the books in an alternate reality Earth.
User avatar #68 to #32 - thesimonved (07/07/2013) [-]
The movie was okay, but it's too childish imo. The hobbit was not a kid's book, but rather the prequel of LotR. And Radagasts story is seriously too childish....those rabbits and hedgehog saving...how old am I, 6?

I liked the balance of the original trilogy between funny, sad, serious, etc...., but the new movie is too farcial....
User avatar #69 to #68 - subaqueousreach (07/08/2013) [-]
But isn't that part of who Radagast is? He's a druid, friend of the animals and the trees and even the dirt. Of course he's probably going to seem odd and immature to people who live in an age of technology and cultural civility.

Why wouldn't he try to save that small cursed hedgehog with all his being? These animals have been his companions for all his life as far as we know, the only beings aside from the other wizards of the realm he's had regular contact with. Of course you wouldn't cast a second thought to a poisoned hedgehog, it's just a hedgehog after all. However to him it was probably a dear and trusted friend, or held importance to another who was his friend. Wouldn't you do everything in your power to save your friend if you knew you possessed the skill to do it?

As for the rabbits, they're clearly faster and more cunning than the Wargs and predators of the forests. Asking them to carry his transport is a no-brainer. Why would any intelligent person not utilize that obvious advantage, regardless of how ridiculous it may appear to others? In the end you're alive and well and that's what matters.

Casting it off as jovial and immature because you feel it's unnecessary is a very immature way of thinking in itself.
User avatar #70 to #69 - thesimonved (07/08/2013) [-]
I thumbed your comment up because it was flawless logic and good argumentation. I guess everyone has his/her own opinion. And I personally liked the old movies better.

But who am I to question others taste ....except for Justin Bieber he's a talentless douche
User avatar #71 to #70 - subaqueousreach (07/08/2013) [-]
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I'm glad to know there are civil people on Funnyjunk =P

And I can agree with you on the fact that Justin Bieber is a total and complete douche.
#31 to #25 - anon (07/06/2013) [-]
I've read the hobbit a dozen times, a page to page recreation in film would simply be boring. I really like the fact that PJ is expanding on the original material and pulling in stuff from the vast amount of other works tolkien did.

3 Epic films are a much more interesting way to present Middle Earth than snippets here and there in the back of books.
User avatar #54 to #31 - creepingquincy (07/07/2013) [-]
the movies are amazing, I just wish they used more real actors than CGI like in the LotR movies
User avatar #39 to #31 - finni (07/06/2013) [-]
I agree with you, Anon. As a Hobbit fan myself, I was really afraid that the Hobbit would be messed up compared to the books, so I was afraid of looking forward to it, but now, I have to say that The Hobbit is my favourite film of all time! And that's mostly due to Peter Jackson's expansion of the film to include as much as possible.
User avatar #55 to #39 - daentraya (07/07/2013) [-]
I still prefer The Lord of the Rings movie, since they are a rare example of the movies being better at telling the story in all it's glory and wonder. The books should be read for having all of the details and things that the movie had to leave out. But dahm those movies. I've seen them all 3 times, and only the third time did i understand most of what was going on
User avatar #56 to #55 - finni (07/07/2013) [-]
The reason why I name the Hobbit my favourite film of all time is because it goes through so much of the book and much more. I remember when I sat there and saw it and all that nerdgasm I got form that movie... And also, I love dwarves and I have ever since I watched Narina prince Caspian. Dwarves became my favourite mythical creature and now they finally sort of had their own movie.

This is all just my opinion and I'm fine with keeping it to myself, but if you disagree I won't argue. This was just perfect for me
User avatar #57 to #56 - daentraya (07/07/2013) [-]
I liked the movie. I had expected a movie that followed the books entirely with it's cozy kinda childrens story mood, and it did bother me a little that the dwarves decided to heroically throw themselves into battle a few times when they shouldn't have. I didnt imagine the caves at all like the movie portrayed it, and it was simply epic as **** , especially with the run fight scene. The dwarven gold chamber also looks way more gorgeous than i could ever have imagined on my own.

It's like they tried to make something epic and badass out of what should be more of a fairytale
User avatar #58 to #57 - finni (07/07/2013) [-]
That's because they did. People who have watched Lord Of The Rings expected sort of something the same, so Peter Jackson had to make his adaptation more epic.

I was a little scared at the beginning of Erebor because I though "Oh God.... please don't let this be like a total overdone CGI movie like Star Wars is...". I was afraid it would be too much CGI and too little Middle Earth, but he managed to do it very good. The rest of the movie was awesome.
User avatar #59 to #58 - daentraya (07/07/2013) [-]
It's a bit of a shame. The Hobbit was a childrens story, a cozy adventure to read with a cup of tea, not a big epic that will drag you into a world of war. It really lost some of it's original charm because they tried to make it into something it's not. I will still prefer to read the book on cozy evenings over the movie, but the movie is good, and that's that
User avatar #27 to #24 - europe (07/06/2013) [-]
Which is one of the things that bothered me so about the movie
User avatar #33 to #27 - finni (07/06/2013) [-]
It didn't bother me that much. Peter Jackson needed to make the Hobbit suitable for an adult audience and he therefore needed to change some of the things from the book to the movies. I think he made a pretty good job with his adaptation. Having a main villain is needed when you're making a film like that
User avatar #48 to #33 - hellsjester (07/07/2013) [-]
yah but you don't stretch out a sub point just so you can make 3 movies out of one book. it's under handed and scummy.
User avatar #52 to #48 - finni (07/07/2013) [-]
I disagree. I like that we get as much content as possible and he's bringing in more story into the films from other books. There are a lot of scumbag movie makers out there, Peter Jackson is not one of them.
User avatar #35 to #33 - europe (07/06/2013) [-]
Nonsense, the movie would've been perfectly fine without a main villain
User avatar #37 to #35 - finni (07/06/2013) [-]
For you and me, maybe, but when you make a movie you have to have somebody to always push you back. Some sort of villain. As I see it, Azog was a great candidate, but perhaps his son, Borg, would be a better candidate since he actually appears at the end of the book and there wouldn't be such a mess with Tolkin's work.
User avatar #30 to #24 - finni (07/06/2013) [-]
Yes, and he died at the battle of Moria, like Thorin first said he did. His son, Bolg, later lead the Goblins in the battle of the five armies.

He did kill Thorin's grandfather though and the thing about what happened at Moria is all true, except that I don't think Azog killed Thrain at the battle or Moria and it was Daín who killed Azog after he had killed his father, Náin.

The Hobbit is actually just child story, a very good child story, but still a children's story, so the thing about someone following them all the way to Erebor is not true. The Goblins only started following the Dwarves after Gandalf had slain their king (The fat one in the movies).
#10 - fuckyouto (07/06/2013) [-]
Oxymoron, Smart funnyjunkers.
#36 - finni (07/06/2013) [-]
Fun Fact: In the original work of Tolkin, Thorin didn't have such a grudge on the elves. He didn't like them too much, no, but he didn't hate them as he does in the movie. In the book, there is no mention of the elves of Mirkwood, or any elves at all, who were near when Erebor was attacked.

One thing I myself has hard to understand is why Thorin hate all elves, when it was only the elves of Mirkwood, High Elves, who denied the Dwarves aid. My guess is that it's because Petter Jackson categorises the Elves as one group, Dwarves as one and so on.
User avatar #38 to #36 - galgawine [OP](07/06/2013) [-]
Dwarves and Elves have always hated each other anyway because of the ancient wars over the Elves not paying the Dwarves for making their crown to hold the Silmarills. Like how Gimli didn't like Legolas at first and how he was a dick to Haldir.
User avatar #41 to #38 - finni (07/06/2013) [-]
I know, but in the book the Dwarves have more of a grudge against the elves more than pure hatred like in the film. The film also furthers the hatred with the "no aid" thing.
User avatar #42 to #41 - galgawine [OP](07/06/2013) [-]
ok I know what you mean now, like how Thorin was disgusted to hold orcrist in the film but in the book he doesn't give a **** if its made by elves. The hate is a little exaggerated I suppose
User avatar #44 to #42 - finni (07/06/2013) [-]
Yeah sort of. I think it's good since it builds up the drama, but I don't get why he held it against all elves and not just the High Elves.
User avatar #21 - galgawine [OP](07/06/2013) [-]
I made and uploaded a Part 2, if anyone would like to see it, heres the link www.funnyjunk.com/funny_pictures/4670579/LotR+Facts+Part+2/
User avatar #5 - flotorious (07/06/2013) [-]
#73 to #65 - thewitchking (07/09/2013) [-]
User avatar #77 to #76 - thewitchking (07/12/2013) [-]
Thanks man, I really appreciate it.
#72 to #65 - thewitchking (07/09/2013) [-]
Can you do some facts about me?
Can you do some facts about me?
#29 - tomfrankham (07/06/2013) [-]
i like this, definitely make more of these, these interest me
i like this, definitely make more of these, these interest me
User avatar #34 - jinxter (07/06/2013) [-]
"Lord of the rings facts" also known as Aragorn Facts.
User avatar #45 to #40 - jinxter (07/06/2013) [-]
I wasn't complaining, I love these.
#62 - mygfspillow (07/07/2013) [-]
Can you do one for each character please?
User avatar #63 to #62 - galgawine [OP](07/07/2013) [-]
Theres not really enough info about each individual character for me to make a comp for each one so I'm bundling them together to present more info in one place.I have another tab open right now working on Legolas Aragorn and Gimli, and I made one for the the Hobbits if you didn't already see that one
#64 to #63 - mygfspillow (07/07/2013) [-]
I did see that one. Liked it very much.
User avatar #66 to #64 - galgawine [OP](07/07/2013) [-]
#67 to #66 - mygfspillow (07/07/2013) [-]
Thank you!
#51 - welodog ONLINE (07/07/2013) [-]
I'm glad to see a LotR post ! I have so many related pictures>.<!

If anyone wanted to see them that is
#2 - anon (07/06/2013) [-]
#22 - cheno (07/06/2013) [-]
Don't get me wrong, I really like this post but everything stated in the post can easily be found in the books (like he basically stated at the end of the post).

Still, thumps for you!
User avatar #20 - makedonski (07/06/2013) [-]
I have a replica of his sword
User avatar #18 - turboderp (07/06/2013) [-]
Do this.
User avatar #17 - snusmumrikken (07/06/2013) [-]
#16 - theolesen (07/06/2013) [-]
Thumbs up dude great work, it's always nice to know more about LOTR
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)