really sad.

Printable View

May 30th, 2002, 03:01 PM
souleman

really sad.

I just found this article, and thought it was pretty sad. I was trying to find out when "The two towers" Lord of the Ring movie was going to be released......

Quote:

An internet site has gained nearly 4000 signatures on a petition to change the name of the second instalment of The Lord of the Rings. The site has drawn angry responses from people on both sides of the debate.
"The name The Two Towers was around long before Mr Bin Laden was probably even a glint in the milkman's eyes. What happened on 9/11 is a tragedy yes, but life goes on and we can't afford to be such pussies as to be offended by the word `towers'," wrote one.
The petition reads: "Those of us who have seen The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring know what an amazing director Peter Jackson is . . . However Peter Jackson has decided to tastelessly name the sequel The Two Towers. The title is clearly meant to refer to the attacks on the World Trade Center. In this post-September 11 world, it is unforgivable that this should be allowed to happen. The idea is both offensive and morally repugnant."

http://www.stuff.co.nz/inl/index/0,1...2a2202,FF.html

btw, the date on the article is May 31st, which I thought was also pretty strange, until I realized in was a .nz site ;)
May 30th, 2002, 03:08 PM
qwerty_smith

my my. that is sad.

ignorance can be bliss sometimes...
May 30th, 2002, 03:09 PM
Vorlin

Man, for anyone to think that the directory is 'clearly refering to the attacks on the WTC', they need to just sit the ***** down and reread the entire trilogy because then they'd KNOW that the title has been around LONG BEFORE the towers were even thought to be built. This is yet another example of 'we don't want to get over what happened and any issue relating to it must be bad and we must condemn it'...dumbasses. We ALL lost something on 9/11 but a majority of us have gotten over it and moved on.
May 30th, 2002, 03:09 PM
tyger_claw

Err..... Souleman, are you sad that people are trying to petition off the title of the sequel, or are you sad that the name of the sequel is "The Two Towers"?

Personally speaking, isn't it time to move on and stop letting things like this control the flow of life? WWF (Oops, WWE) changed the name of their December pay-per-view last year from Armaggeddon to Vengence in respect of the whole 9/11, but this year, they're changing it back. Does this mean that everytime something has a title which could suggest something about 9/11, that it'll have to be changed?
May 30th, 2002, 03:25 PM
Guus

I know this is painful for many people, but this is ridiculous. Do those people petition to change the 911 emergency number too? Let's change the name of the month!

And even _if_ the name would be ment to refer to the NY-attacks - aren't there a bunch of movies about WWII that do exactly the same. Can I mention the Titanic movie? Given time, I'm sure that video's about last years attacks will be produced, and hey, if they'll be any good, I'll probably going to watch them too, just as I did with most WWII movies...
May 30th, 2002, 03:37 PM
DarkGuardian

What a bunch of ignorant morons. How can someone complain about 9/11 insensitivity on a title that was written in 1974, 27 years before. It's like David Copperfield suing over the book of the same name by Dickens.

Is Return of the King a reference to Hussein? Is it too close to Return of the Jedi, and hence that title will get nixed?

INFEDELS!!
May 30th, 2002, 03:47 PM
tyger_claw

Odd how Pearl Harbour is a thing of the past now and it was, IMHO, an ok movie....
9/11 will be the same...
May 30th, 2002, 03:54 PM
emrys

i agree that stinks,....i mean it is a classic why would change the name...nd no matter wot i dont think tolkiens son will change it no matter how many signatures come and go
May 30th, 2002, 03:58 PM
Specter6

And I supposed out of respect we should change the emergency phone number from 9-1-1 to like say 9-2-2. And reserve 9-1-1 and 9-11 for the journalists who are too lazy to actually say September 11th...
May 30th, 2002, 03:59 PM
NetSyn

i must agree... people just need to shut the hell up sometimes...

9/11 was a big deal to many of us but we CANNOT let it distrupt our way of life like it was meant to do...

Its a movie name.... if it honestly bothers u that much then dont watch the movie!
May 30th, 2002, 04:09 PM
souleman

tyger_claw> I am not sad at all. I think it is sad that people are that ignorant that they would write a petition like that though.

Anyone see spiderman? There was supposed to be a scene near the end where spidey was in a giant web between the twin towers. Originally they were going to delete it, then they decided to keep it in, then they decided to delete it, and about 2 weeks before the movie came out, they said the sceen was staying in the movie. Well, obviously the sceen isn't there now, so.....

The spiderman thing is understandable (yet still stupid), but messing with something from over 20 years ago is just rediciulus. I think we should take all new $20 bills out of circulation now that someone has found a way to fold the bill and you can see the towers and pentagon burning. Anyone who agrees with me can just mail me all there new $20 bills, and I will make sure that they are properly taken care of ;)
May 30th, 2002, 04:11 PM
emrys

true speak the word bro
May 30th, 2002, 04:40 PM
huntx7

Everything today is related to 9/11. Ingorance....it gets most, and when it does, it grows.
May 30th, 2002, 04:47 PM
Faqt

I have to agree...that is sad. To respond so emotionally to words is in human nature...unfortunately.
People will always find something to be upset/offended by (ie-when I was in High School one of our yearbooks had a midevil theme...the teacher who had advised the yearbook staff that year had to deal with a group of parents that decided it was satanic.)
Sorry bout the tangent, it's just one more example of people having to little of importance in their lives and trying to make an issue out of something that isn't in order to feel self-riotous.
May 30th, 2002, 05:04 PM
souleman

Faqt> I agree completely. Why else would i have started this thread in the first place ;)
May 30th, 2002, 05:15 PM
uraloony

Heh thats not only sad, thats lame. I know many people have been hurt, but why should we petition them to change the name? If you hate the name so much, boycott the movie, but a petition? Get real... Better yet, get a life.
May 30th, 2002, 05:51 PM
Mostasteless666

I agree

I agree with you, souleman, as well as with many other posters. if these people are so angry over the movie title, why not be angry over the book title as well? why not be angry about all the made-for-tv movies about 9/11 coming out?
May 30th, 2002, 05:59 PM
Rewandythal

Wtf?
They can't change the name of the film, thats what the goddam books called!
F***ing hell, when will these people *Move* *On* ??
May 30th, 2002, 06:15 PM
debwalin

Quote:

F***ing hell, when will these people *Move* *On* ??

I think this may be asking a bit much of people. It would be very hard to just "move on" if something like this had cost you your spouse/parent/child. From a psychological standpoint, this event was more traumatic than anything a lot of us will ever have to deal with in our lives.

However, there does come a point when it's pushed too far. I think expecting the title of a book written 27 years before an event occurs is pushing it way too far. I haven't read the Lord of the Rings (please don't hate me...lol) or seen the movie, but from my understanding, it doesn't even deal with NYC, does it? It's just like anything else, you have people who are going to protest ANYTHING that comes along, and then you have the ones who jump on the bandwagon behind them.

I also think that some of the TV networks may be pushing their luck with the made-for-TV movies. It's too early for that crap. It hasn't even been a year, and I think they may face a backlash they aren't expecting.

Deb :D
May 30th, 2002, 07:00 PM
KorpDeath

Hey ya'll. Might want to sharpen your pencils.

The Hobbit: or There and Back Again. George Allen and Unwin, London, 1937. (There was a second edition in 1951, and a third in 1966. Reprinted many times.) The Annotated Hobbit, Introduction and Notes by Douglas A. Anderson, Houghton Mifflin, Boston and HarperCollins, London, 1988.

The Fellowship of the Ring: being the first part of The Lord of the Rings. George Allen and Unwin, London, 1954.

The Two Towers: being the second part of The Lord of the Rings. George Allen and Unwin, London, 1954.

This makes them look even more ludicrous.

"This is what happens when you take a fool and add a bleeding heart." -KorpDeath

source: http://www.tolkiensociety.org/tolkien/index.html
May 30th, 2002, 07:06 PM
souleman

KorpDeath> Gee, what happend to the third book? Since the hobbit wasn't in the Lord of the
Rings trilogy.

debwalin> Never read the Lord of the Rings? Your kidding right? Your current citizenship in w00t is being debated.....
May 30th, 2002, 09:09 PM
KorpDeath

Sheesh! I didn't want to copy the whole page that's why I put the source. ;)
Isn't the subject the Twin towers? hehehe
May 30th, 2002, 09:12 PM
debwalin

NOOOO! You can't deny my citizenship to the land of w00t!!

/me hurries off to the library.....

Deb :D
May 30th, 2002, 09:31 PM
FatalError

Most disturbing. I realize that some ppl suffer from recto-cranial inversion, but honestly, this is one of the stupidest arguments EVER.
May 31st, 2002, 03:59 PM
Specter6

And now there are rumblings about the release of "The Sum of all Fears" because it is about the US response to terrorists detonating a nuke on American Soil.

I was watching CBS this morning before I came to work, and of course they make a big deal out of it. Hell, Tom Clancy published that book in 1996! I think most of this anti-hype is all generated and then perpetuated by the media.