Posts by Paul Rowe
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I'm guessing no chance.
Logically the intermediate film would advance the story of the ring of power: less hobbits, more wizards and elves. More Gollum. Perhaps intertwined (Godfather Pt 2-like) with the story of Aragorn.
More than enough for a film, difficult to keep coherent though.
-
Hobbit will be film 1. Film 2 will be entirely between the end of the hobbit and beginning of fellowship. How they're going to hollywood that sufficiently, I don't know, but the new director has been in talks with Jackson and Wilde about it and all three are in agreement there's a good movie there.
How many years are there between the two stories? If Bilbo is 111 at the beginning of LOTR and he's relatively young in the Hobbit (if coming of age is 33 then maybe he's in his 40s?), that leaves a substantial amount of ground to cover - travels of Gollum, rise of Sauron, evilisation of Saruman, mirkwood etc. Difficult to make something coherent there I would have thought?
-
CCMAU will give you a good overview of Crown companies, SOEs etc, including a summary of their performance.
www.ccmau.govt.nz
-
I believe Ansell has appropriated it for Act:
This is Helen, she wants to mollycoddle the electorate. Harden the Fuck Up, Helen.
This is Rodney, he wants a tax cut. You're fucking Spot On, Rodney.
-
this is how Helen should have responded to Key's whimpering thusly
doh. you get my drift.
-
I think that's the point of the word. It means 'stop being a baby'.
I think the point is that if you want to be the adult in the room, sneering baby talk just makes you look... well, in need of a feed and a clean nappy. As Russell said, its rather nice to see a presidential candidate who talks in complete, complex sentences that assume they're being heard by grown-ups.
Quite right. I suggest that this is how Helen should have responded to Key's whimpering thusly:
-
Four and a half minutes of previews and reviews, not including promos during the ads out of about 34 minutes of news and sports. Soon we'll be interupting the previews with with news, then reviewing the preview, followed by a summation of the review. Thanks god we no longer pay a licence fee.
-
And your last comments about Hillary are begiining to sound a lot like the Kiwiblog mafia
I object to this. The mafia are organised criminals, murderers and extortionists. You'd never call the Kiwi Blog Right "organised".
-
The Fairfax media backed Howard in Australia and they back the Nats here. It would be nice to have some diversity of opinion along with all the "free speech".
At least in the UK, when Murdoch backed new Labour there was this diversity of opinion - it wasn't all one way. Anothe price we pay for our small size I guess.
AS, I don't disagree when you put it like that. My point is that it was probably already in touch until the Herald managed to tip it back into the field of play, necessitating HC's cover defence.
(I'm finished with the sports metaphor. Apologies to all concerned)
-
Perhaps so, but it still appears as if his part in this situation has been exagerated somewhat.
Back to your original question, Paul. It's not a big deal, except for the fact that the Herald wants it to be a big deal. Williams made a comment that was dumb in retrospect in a semi-private workshop. Young took that comment, misleadingly stated its source and context, and made it into more than it was.