Darren New wrote:
> Invisible wrote:
>> Halbert wrote:
>>> Dude... I thought nerds being obsessed with Lord of the Rings was just a
>>> stereotype. I didn't realise people actually *go to shows about* this 
>>> stuff! o_O
>>
>> Um... firstly, I wasn't aware this was actually a stereotype. 
> 
> You're working hard to get your nerd membership card revoked, aren't you?

You know, I'm beginning to think there's actually more than one kind of 
nerd...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

>>> I wonder if there are cheaper seats, those look to be box seats, but
>>> RAH has seats for mere mortals as well.
>> Yes, these are corporate hospitality seats. If you just want to see the
>> Two Towers, tickets start from a mere £18.50.
> 
> That's cool.  We may have to start looking for plane tickets. :-)

I should point out that £18.50 is for *the* cheapest seats in the house. 
The majority of the tickets are more like £30 per person or something. 
(At least, assuming this event doesn't have special pricing anyway...)

They also have tickets for next year's organ gala on sale now. ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 14 May 2009 18:58:28 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

>>>> I wonder if there are cheaper seats, those look to be box seats, but
>>>> RAH has seats for mere mortals as well.
>>> Yes, these are corporate hospitality seats. If you just want to see
>>> the Two Towers, tickets start from a mere £18.50.
>> 
>> That's cool.  We may have to start looking for plane tickets. :-)
> 
> I should point out that £18.50 is for *the* cheapest seats in the house.
> The majority of the tickets are more like £30 per person or something.
> (At least, assuming this event doesn't have special pricing anyway...)

Sure, but at the same time, RAH is a pretty good concert hall, so even 
the cheap seats will be able to hear things without too much trouble.

But of course, I'd probably look for main floor seats, which are likely 
to be a little more expensive, but not in the hundreds or thousands of 
pounds range, either.  :-)

The plane tickets will definitely be more expensive.

> They also have tickets for next year's organ gala on sale now. ;-)

That'd be fun as well.  We try to catch the Proms concert recordings, but 
that pales in comparison to actually being there (of course).

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 14 May 2009 14:11:58 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:

>Sure, but at the same time, RAH is a pretty good concert hall, so even 
>the cheap seats will be able to hear things without too much trouble.

Well it must be a different RAH that I know. I think that the acoustics are
pretty poor. Too many reflections, even with the mushrooms on the ceiling. :(
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 14 May 2009 19:30:08 +0100, Stephen wrote:

> On 14 May 2009 14:11:58 -0400, Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> 
>>Sure, but at the same time, RAH is a pretty good concert hall, so even
>>the cheap seats will be able to hear things without too much trouble.
> 
> Well it must be a different RAH that I know. I think that the acoustics
> are pretty poor. Too many reflections, even with the mushrooms on the
> ceiling. :(

Well, in fairness, I've never actually been there, but I've heard it 
described as good.

Maybe it takes a large crowd to get it sounding right?

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>> Sure, but at the same time, RAH is a pretty good concert hall, so even 
>> the cheap seats will be able to hear things without too much trouble.
> 
> Well it must be a different RAH that I know. I think that the acoustics are
> pretty poor. Too many reflections, even with the mushrooms on the ceiling. :(

Mmm, I didn't think it sounded too bad, personally...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> On Thu, 14 May 2009 10:26:12 -0400, Halbert wrote:
>
> > I haven't heard the score yet. (I am a musician too, 2 music majors in
> > college.) I will keep my ears out for it though.
>
> I've got the complete recordings set (all three films), and the music is
> incredible.  Shore demonstrates a wide variety of styles and did a
> surprisingly good job with it.

Yes, terrific score.  That's despite me being a Tolkien fan. :)

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 14 May 2009 15:32:06 -0400, nemesis wrote:

> Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
>> On Thu, 14 May 2009 10:26:12 -0400, Halbert wrote:
>>
>> > I haven't heard the score yet. (I am a musician too, 2 music majors
>> > in college.) I will keep my ears out for it though.
>>
>> I've got the complete recordings set (all three films), and the music
>> is incredible.  Shore demonstrates a wide variety of styles and did a
>> surprisingly good job with it.
> 
> Yes, terrific score.  That's despite me being a Tolkien fan. :)

LOL

I liked the films, and am a Tolkien fan (I was going to do a special 
study of Tolkien in high school, just never got all the books I needed 
together for the proposal), but I look at the films differently than most 
who consider themselves "hardcore" Tolkien fans.

Tolkien set out to create a mythology for England - most of the 
mythologies that existed up to that point were non-English; the Arthurian 
legend, for example, was largely adopted by the French in the early 
1200s.  So while Arthur himself was English, ideas like the Holy Grail 
and the addition of Lancelot are generally credited to French authors.

One of Tolkien's goals was to create something that was uniquely English 
in origin.

The thing about mythologies is, of course, that they go through a great 
many retellings, and often details get changed, parts are removed and 
shuffled around, and some parts are dropped.

So approaching the films from a mythological point of view, they hold up 
quite well.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

> I have no idea what a tomato "petal" is. I guess this is what you call 
> "posh nosh". LOL!

That's just when you cut out the pulpy core of the tomato, 
removing the seeds. Sounds fancy calling it "petals" though.

Post a reply to this message

Tim Attwood wrote:
>> I have no idea what a tomato "petal" is. I guess this is what you call 
>> "posh nosh". LOL!
> 
> That's just when you cut out the pulpy core of the tomato, removing the 
> seeds. Sounds fancy calling it "petals" though.

...so, posh nosh then? ;-)

Have you looked at the rest of the menu? It's pretty mental...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message