Lailuva is glad she can reassure poor Atta that Úbil the Snatcher is no more.
seen from T1

seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom

seen from China

seen from United States
seen from China
seen from United Kingdom
seen from China

seen from Malaysia
seen from China
seen from China

seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from China

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Netherlands

seen from Malaysia
seen from Russia
Lailuva is glad she can reassure poor Atta that Úbil the Snatcher is no more.
Corporate would like you to find the differences between these two photos
If you agree with ANY of the bullshit Andy Serkis said about his new movie and think it applies to the lord of the rings franchise don’t interact with my blog. I think you’re scum of the earth, media illiterate, racist, and a pathetic excuse of “fan”.
IMHO two things can be true at once.
"Brown" doesn't mean brown people in LOTR-ese the way we use it to refer to non-black POC, it means tan—like, if the Chinese, a reputedly pale ethnicity, can call a light medium skin tone black while still referring to fellow indigenous Chinese, English authors from the 40s can surely call light medium skin tones brown without referring to nonwhite Brits.
But also there's no good reason for somebody to flap his gums about "politically correct" blah blah blah. That's absolutely a dog whistle. He shouldn't have thought that way and he definitely shouldn't have said it.
Another thing entangled in all this is there's a way to do normalize diversity with casting without falling into the tokenizing trap that corporations have developed a taste for, and without pretending that all logic goes out the window in any world where dragons exist. The Shire hobbits are very set in their ways and suspicious if polite to foreigners so it's implausible on many levels for them to be multiracial, but hobbits of color in bustling Bree is quite another story. Meanwhile a certain author recast a certain character as black in what might be inferred as a desperate attempt to reclaim her social justice credentials only for it to backfire by injecting new, problematic subtexts to the relationship dynamics of the characters. We do need to be more progressive in casting but we need to do so thoughtfully.
jrr tolkien is EVIL for writing this man. CANCEL HIS ASS gollum should have said "im sorry" and then been frodos roommate
Thoughts About Hunt For Gollum
People seem to be skeptical that Serkis can direct this film. I don't think people realize that he was second unit director for the first Hobbit film, which in my opinion is the best of the Hobbit films. He directed the Riddles in the Dark scene, which is my favorite scene in the entire movie. He really shines when it comes to Sméagol/Gollum. I have a lot of faith in him for this movie specifically.
And if you've read his autobiography about his journey playing Gollum, you can see how much thought and passion he put into the character. Like he's considered things most people wouldn't, Andy psychoanalyzes beyond most people's capabilities, he is extremely dedicated to how the character is portrayed and making it MAKE SENSE.
And all the originals are on board, Phillipa and Fran and Peter, and Weta, they're all involved. This is the original team coming back together, they've all worked on Gollum, working together to establish and write the character. It's going to be a good movie for those of us who enjoy Serkis's Sméagollum.
A lot of people that I see complaining are complaining because it's about Gollum, and I honestly think that's a stupid reason to complain. He's an incredibly complex and fascinating individual. He's one of the best characters in fictional history, in my opinion. To NOT dedicate a movie to him would be a waste of an opportunity.
And there's a lot from the first book that they didnt tap into in the films. Like Sméagol returning to his home after killing Déagol -- I want to see that. I want to see where he lived, who he lived with, how he dealt with the murdering of Déagol, of being accused.
In the synopsis leak, it said that they're going to show more of Sméagol's life from BEFORE he got the ring, which would not only be absolutely delightful, but important for the character -- to show more of who he was beforehand. Because the character that WE are most familiar with is already warped by the ring, it's important to understand who he used to be, who he was born as. It'll help audiences empathize with him more. I think a lot of people by the end of Return of the King were thinking he's a bad and evil guy who deserved to suffer and to die and I'd like to see this film challenge those particular viewers.
I also think they're going to show him getting tortured at Barad-Dur for that same purpose. Sméagol is a victim of the most evil object created in Middle-Earth. He's just doing his best to survive, I don't think he should be blamed for that.
one of these nakama is not like the others, my preciousss
How it legitimately feels to be a LOTR fan in 2026:
Rant below! Sorry in advance! Light CW for racism and the political and economic state of the world right now.