The commentator windy march
posts on 2/1/2009 10:20:52 PM
fyi, in case u dont remember me, ive comented on ur thoughts of the lord of the rings before.
once again, u prove ur stupidity, not only do i think both men are exedingly good actors, but that if u tryed 2 loock as majestic as them, even in ur grubbiest days, u would cry at theyre feet. have u ever considered the time in wich these movies were set? do u actually believe, that in a time of monthly bathing, even a king loocked any less than grubby? thats ur problem, u dont think ur coments fully through before u post them, u just spill out watever thought u think will get ur sight noticed, and its pathetic. i understand that its working, even now as i cament on wat u posted, but its still pathetic. u dont have 2 take the easy way out, i can tell that ur an articulat guy, just be real.
allways urs,
mouse
|
The commentator jon
posts on 1/22/2009 6:04:14 PM
i could be wrong mate but i dont think they had things like showers and razors in middle earth, the scruffy look is pretty much the whole point.besides it shows that theyr fighters, not js ppl who sit around all day in thrones. also the look contrasts with the elves, who never seem to have a hair out of place, n this was a gd contast to bring out the different strengths of the 2 races.
|
The commentator jon
posts on 1/22/2009 6:04:14 PM
i could be wrong mate but i dont think they had things like showers and razors in middle earth, the scruffy look is pretty much the whole point.besides it shows that theyr fighters, not js ppl who sit around all day in thrones. also the look contrasts with the elves, who never seem to have a hair out of place, n this was a gd contast to bring out the different strengths of the 2 races.
|
The commentator Adnamarine
posts on 1/21/2007 6:06:47 PM
No, he wouldn't be regal because he hasn't spent his life as a king. He's spent it as a ranger. Besides, he looks hot scruffy, and crowns don't look good on him.
|
Rose
posts on 1/21/2007 3:27:35 PM
ok, buddy, this close to taking my sword and ending your insults of my aragorn. First, he is not 'scruffy',and if he looks a sittle rough, so what? He's manly and hot. So go sit in smeagol dung. :(
|
The commentator Manda
posts on 9/16/2005 2:14:55 PM
o look it's another cool message board place. anyway we girlies like the scruffy look i think aragorn looks worse wen he's got his washed hair and crown on. as for sean bean he's fit woteva he wears.
|
The commentator BoromirAragorn
posts on 9/16/2005 1:44:30 PM
I like them both better in the movie. I think PJ did a wonderful job of both men. It's hard not to look scruffy when your doing hard work like they are. I mean being out and about for so long....
|
The commentator Adnamarine
posts on 9/11/2005 3:07:51 PM
They were scruffy when they were traveling. At Rivendell and Aragorn's coronation they/he weren't scruffy. Besides, I think they look better cruffy. Aragorn looked unnatural at his coronation.
|
aj
posts on 5/7/2005 8:04:11 PM
Who ever wrote that was a complete tosspot and obviously dosen't know anything about the story or the characters . Dnot talk about stuff you dont know about you wanker!
|
Lady
posts on 2/7/2005 8:42:40 PM
They weren't scruffy when they were in rivendell, were they? Most of the time that they were scruffy was when they were traveling, and then it would only be realistic for them to be scruffy.
|
The severely thinking impaired gilbo
posts on 2/7/2005 7:57:39 PM
I could not agree more! PJ did such a fantastic job of putting an impossibility on screen that I want to bear his children.
On the other hand, he made so many changes, left so much out, and blatantly ignored the characteritics of the people in the books that I just want to pound his pudgy Hobbit face in. The changes he made in the personalities Frodo, Aragorn, Faramir, and even poor Boromir, absolutely broke my Freekin' heart!
|
The commentator edlyn
posts on 2/7/2005 2:45:02 PM
yup i agree with corwen somewhat. aragorn was supposed to be TALL and slim, (and a bit dark, i think) - showing a degree of elvish influence (tall and slim) as he has a tiny bit of elvish blood. that's what should be distinguishing him from the other humans, his being numenorian and all that. but viggo was rather stocky and not very tall; not too slim either; he looked ALL TOO HUMAN, henpecked and insecure instead of a bit arrogant, a bit haggard, sure of his destiny, and with a heart of gold. his over-humanness was the reason why the movie Aragorn was a bit disappointing (to the Viggo fans, yes, he's very likable in his own right, but Aragorn in the book was more aloof yet vulnerable not just insecure as in the movie), not regal, not numenorian, not tall enough. also, yes, as a ranger, he would be worn and a bit ragged, but i think from his personality, Aragorn would be scrupulously neat. the movie portrayed him with hair falling all over his face - in line with the movie-Aragorn, not the book-Aragorn.
|
The commentator Burrahobbit
posts on 2/5/2005 12:20:23 PM
The acting choice was ok, but it was funny that Aragorn's un-shaved whiskers were always at the exact same state of un-shavedness. Of course they couldn't have done it differently because then when they edited the movie it would be all mixed up, but it was still funny.
|
Thalassa
posts on 2/5/2005 11:31:56 AM
If you had been wandering in the Wild for such a long period can you imagine how would your appearence be?Having personal experience, I can assure you it would be worse than that...As for the actors I believe they were a very good choice.Don't forget that they seem old to us because most people die between 60-70 but Aragorn died too old, didn't he?So he mustn't have looked too old at his 50s...
|
Click here to post a message
|
|
