Reader Comments
oyghoul
wow
Rating: 5
Thu June 15, 2000 10:24 AM PDT
aragorn17
WOW
Rating: 5
Thu November 16, 2000 11:43 PM PDT
aragorn17
WOW
Rating: 5
Thu November 16, 2000 11:43 PM PDT
ellen_rh
OK...here goes the third...WOW!!! :)
Totaly epic! What can I say more?!
Rating: 5
Fri July 13, 2001 8:15 PM PDT
ellen_rh
OK...here goes the third...WOW!!! :)
Totaly epic! What can I say more?!
Rating: 5
Fri July 13, 2001 8:15 PM PDT
Frodo14
One of(if not) the best Siege of Minas Tirith picture
Oh and... WOW!
Rating: 5
Fri July 26, 2002 4:00 PM PDT
Frodo14
One of(if not) the best Siege of Minas Tirith picture
Oh and... WOW!
Rating: 5
Fri July 26, 2002 4:00 PM PDT
BarlimanButterbur
Howe has always taken the description of the stone buttress like the prow of a ship wayyyyyy to far. I have seen mountains like Tolkein described and can imagine MT on them. This looks like the Nśmenorians actually warped the stone to make it totally smooth and unbelievable. I prefer a more naturalistic look.
Scale/perspective is also off.
Sorry. Howe is among the best. This does not cut it.
NOB! You slowcoach!
Rating: 3
Fri July 26, 2002 4:06 PM PDT
BarlimanButterbur
Howe has always taken the description of the stone buttress like the prow of a ship wayyyyyy to far. I have seen mountains like Tolkein described and can imagine MT on them. This looks like the Nśmenorians actually warped the stone to make it totally smooth and unbelievable. I prefer a more naturalistic look.
Scale/perspective is also off.
Sorry. Howe is among the best. This does not cut it.
NOB! You slowcoach!
Rating: 3
Fri July 26, 2002 4:06 PM PDT
The_Eavenstar
This picture depicts the siege very well. Good job!
Rating: 5
Fri July 26, 2002 4:45 PM PDT
The_Eavenstar
This picture depicts the siege very well. Good job!
Rating: 5
Fri July 26, 2002 4:45 PM PDT
*s*a*n*d*i*
Undeniably INCREDIBLE (edible egg) hahaha
it's completely rad, i'll paint like that, just you wait and see.... okay never mind i can't ask you to wait for my next life..
GOOD JOB!
Rating: 5
Fri July 26, 2002 5:46 PM PDT
*s*a*n*d*i*
Undeniably INCREDIBLE (edible egg) hahaha
it's completely rad, i'll paint like that, just you wait and see.... okay never mind i can't ask you to wait for my next life..
GOOD JOB!
Rating: 5
Fri July 26, 2002 5:46 PM PDT
Undomiel_Eowyn
Howe depicts the siege pretty well except I find it a bit too dark and the oranges too prominent.
Rating: 4
Fri July 26, 2002 7:35 PM PDT
Undomiel_Eowyn
Howe depicts the siege pretty well except I find it a bit too dark and the oranges too prominent.
Rating: 4
Fri July 26, 2002 7:35 PM PDT
fishy071
I think it should be titled "Battle of the Pelennor Fields" because Minas Tirith doesn't look right with the rocks or walls. It also looks far away.
The picture is realistic, almost like a photo. The artist did bring out the darkness and scariness of the seize, but I think it's too dark.
Rating: 4
Sat July 27, 2002 12:29 AM PDT
fishy071
I think it should be titled "Battle of the Pelennor Fields" because Minas Tirith doesn't look right with the rocks or walls. It also looks far away.
The picture is realistic, almost like a photo. The artist did bring out the darkness and scariness of the seize, but I think it's too dark.
Rating: 4
Sat July 27, 2002 12:29 AM PDT
Finarphir
The prow is way too big.
Rating: 3
Sat July 27, 2002 2:26 AM PDT
Finarphir
The prow is way too big.
Rating: 3
Sat July 27, 2002 2:26 AM PDT
gwilwering
I think it looks too cartoonish.
Rating: 4
Sat July 27, 2002 3:02 AM PDT
gwilwering
I think it looks too cartoonish.
Rating: 4
Sat July 27, 2002 3:02 AM PDT
tedsandyman
really dropped the ball on this one, sorry.
Rating: 1
Sat July 27, 2002 4:21 AM PDT
tedsandyman
really dropped the ball on this one, sorry.
Rating: 1
Sat July 27, 2002 4:21 AM PDT
HopeSpringsEternal
Where are all the beings that should be fighting? I love most of John Howe's pics but the pronounced 'prow' is not how I imagined the cliff formation to be like at Minas Tirith. Eh, can't win 'em all.
Rating: 4
Sat July 27, 2002 6:20 AM PDT
HopeSpringsEternal
Where are all the beings that should be fighting? I love most of John Howe's pics but the pronounced 'prow' is not how I imagined the cliff formation to be like at Minas Tirith. Eh, can't win 'em all.
Rating: 4
Sat July 27, 2002 6:20 AM PDT
Ysbryd-lochrann
Aren't they? They're all those little dots on the field, I thought.
As for the prow -- isn't that up to the artist?
Rating: 5
Sat July 27, 2002 9:40 AM PDT
Ysbryd-lochrann
Aren't they? They're all those little dots on the field, I thought.
As for the prow -- isn't that up to the artist?
Rating: 5
Sat July 27, 2002 9:40 AM PDT
cronos
i thought there was only one flying creature there and there was somebody riding on (the witchking)
Rating: 2
Sat July 27, 2002 11:40 AM PDT
cronos
i thought there was only one flying creature there and there was somebody riding on (the witchking)
Rating: 2
Sat July 27, 2002 11:40 AM PDT
Orlichick
agree with all of the said above (a bunch of you guys), the prow is much too big, it gives the painting almost a surreal kind of feel --not that that's a bad thing. the contrast of light and dark in the picture gives a nice effect. however, i must say that i honestly imagined this battle on a larger scale, more fierce and overwhelming... but the painting is still awesome...
Rating: 4
Sat July 27, 2002 12:54 PM PDT
Orlichick
agree with all of the said above (a bunch of you guys), the prow is much too big, it gives the painting almost a surreal kind of feel --not that that's a bad thing. the contrast of light and dark in the picture gives a nice effect. however, i must say that i honestly imagined this battle on a larger scale, more fierce and overwhelming... but the painting is still awesome...
Rating: 4
Sat July 27, 2002 12:54 PM PDT
thephantomcat
This is an amazing picture and to complain that it is too dark is crazy. What else would you call a battle where the heads of your fellow man were tossed back at you. He's obviously taking some freedom with the light vs. darkness theme and using it to make a contrasting image of the forces of the Dark Lord attacking the White City. It's symbolic. The prow is obviously meant to give the impression of light piercing darkness. It's a stunningly beautiful piece of art that doens't doesn't deserve such harsh criticism. Also, the "dragons" are the Nazgul on their winged beasts. All of the Nazgul flew on them, not just the Witch King.
Rating: 5
Sun July 28, 2002 3:25 AM PDT
thephantomcat
This is an amazing picture and to complain that it is too dark is crazy. What else would you call a battle where the heads of your fellow man were tossed back at you. He's obviously taking some freedom with the light vs. darkness theme and using it to make a contrasting image of the forces of the Dark Lord attacking the White City. It's symbolic. The prow is obviously meant to give the impression of light piercing darkness. It's a stunningly beautiful piece of art that doens't doesn't deserve such harsh criticism. Also, the "dragons" are the Nazgul on their winged beasts. All of the Nazgul flew on them, not just the Witch King.
Rating: 5
Sun July 28, 2002 3:25 AM PDT
eternity
It's an average pic. So it has got average rating.
Rating: 3
Sun July 28, 2002 8:23 AM PDT
eternity
It's an average pic. So it has got average rating.
Rating: 3
Sun July 28, 2002 8:23 AM PDT
TomOfTheForest
Rating: 4
Sun July 28, 2002 10:10 AM PDT
TomOfTheForest
Rating: 4
Sun July 28, 2002 10:10 AM PDT
HappyHobbit
There were no dragons. This is a good pic as far as the art goes, but it's not really depicting the siege as well as it could, and it's diffinatly not one of Howe's best work.
Rating: 4
Sun July 28, 2002 12:57 PM PDT
HappyHobbit
There were no dragons. This is a good pic as far as the art goes, but it's not really depicting the siege as well as it could, and it's diffinatly not one of Howe's best work.
Rating: 4
Sun July 28, 2002 12:57 PM PDT
AmyTheGreat!
Everyone's entitled to their opinion. Some of you hate it, some like it, and some love it. It's a very good painting and John Howe has earned my respect. So, my opinion is that it's great, as are all his paintings. He pictured the Siege of Gondor as such, and I know some of you pictured it differently. That's just the way it is. I however, love it. That's that.
Rating: 5
Sun July 28, 2002 11:26 PM PDT
AmyTheGreat!
Everyone's entitled to their opinion. Some of you hate it, some like it, and some love it. It's a very good painting and John Howe has earned my respect. So, my opinion is that it's great, as are all his paintings. He pictured the Siege of Gondor as such, and I know some of you pictured it differently. That's just the way it is. I however, love it. That's that.
Rating: 5
Sun July 28, 2002 11:26 PM PDT
thephantomcat
If you read something besides the titles, you would see that I already answered that question. Those "dragons" are the Nazgul on their winged beasts. Since most of the flying creatures are too far away, you cannot see them, but the 'largest' one is obviously wearing a harness of sorts with his rider hiden behind his wing.
Mon July 29, 2002 4:40 AM PDT
thephantomcat
If you read something besides the titles, you would see that I already answered that question. Those "dragons" are the Nazgul on their winged beasts. Since most of the flying creatures are too far away, you cannot see them, but the 'largest' one is obviously wearing a harness of sorts with his rider hiden behind his wing.
Mon July 29, 2002 4:40 AM PDT
nerdanel14
I love John Howe's work, and this is one of the best I've seen. I love the way he shows the flames rising up and the darkness that seems to consume the city. It looks so hopeless.
I think you guys are too harsh. I think the prow is fine, it's the artisit's decision how he paints it. I love this picutre! It's awesome! On of the best I've ever seen on this site!!
Rating: 5
Mon July 29, 2002 9:04 AM PDT
nerdanel14
I love John Howe's work, and this is one of the best I've seen. I love the way he shows the flames rising up and the darkness that seems to consume the city. It looks so hopeless.
I think you guys are too harsh. I think the prow is fine, it's the artisit's decision how he paints it. I love this picutre! It's awesome! On of the best I've ever seen on this site!!
Rating: 5
Mon July 29, 2002 9:04 AM PDT
Middle-earth
...isn't exactly how I imagined it.
Rating: 4
Mon July 29, 2002 3:16 PM PDT
Middle-earth
...isn't exactly how I imagined it.
Rating: 4
Mon July 29, 2002 3:16 PM PDT
Aragorn803
That was not the way a i imagined it and the last dragon to exist was smaug (The Hobbit).
But it is real good.
I just hope they dont put dragons in the film
Rating: 4
Mon July 29, 2002 5:20 PM PDT
Aragorn803
That was not the way a i imagined it and the last dragon to exist was smaug (The Hobbit).
But it is real good.
I just hope they dont put dragons in the film
Rating: 4
Mon July 29, 2002 5:20 PM PDT
Aragorn803
Yeah i think your right, it is his painting and it is good the way he put the darkness taking over
Mon July 29, 2002 5:22 PM PDT
Aragorn803
Yeah i think your right, it is his painting and it is good the way he put the darkness taking over
Mon July 29, 2002 5:22 PM PDT
thephantomcat
Since no one seems to read anything beyond the titles....
Mon July 29, 2002 6:06 PM PDT
thephantomcat
Since no one seems to read anything beyond the titles....
Mon July 29, 2002 6:06 PM PDT
eco231
the prow just ruined it. it doesn't fit with the rest
i happen to like the dark look, and seeing as the fight was heavily described as dark, it's only fitting
the cover of the return of the king was VERY nice though, i must have spent and hour staring at the detail and shading... you can even see pippin with Gandalf!
Tue July 30, 2002 8:41 AM PDT
eco231
the prow just ruined it. it doesn't fit with the rest
i happen to like the dark look, and seeing as the fight was heavily described as dark, it's only fitting
the cover of the return of the king was VERY nice though, i must have spent and hour staring at the detail and shading... you can even see pippin with Gandalf!
Tue July 30, 2002 8:41 AM PDT
eco231
HOW CAN ANYONE WHO HAS CLAIMED TO HAVE READ THE BOOKS THINK THOSE WERE DRAGONS???
but i dont remember so many - i thought it was just the witchking
Tue July 30, 2002 8:43 AM PDT
eco231
HOW CAN ANYONE WHO HAS CLAIMED TO HAVE READ THE BOOKS THINK THOSE WERE DRAGONS???
but i dont remember so many - i thought it was just the witchking
Tue July 30, 2002 8:43 AM PDT
thephantomcat
Tolkien doesn't make it a big deal to describe every single Nazgul and his stead, but he does mention them. And with a piercing cry out of the dim sky fell the winged shadows, the Nazgul stooping to the kill....The Nazgul screeched and swept away, for their Captain was not yet come to challenge the white fire of his foe....At his summons, wheeling from a rending cry, in a last desperate race there flew, faster than the winds, the Nazgul, the Ringwraiths, and with a storm of wings they hurtled southwards towards Mount Doom. Hope that's enough to finally put this stupid dragon fiasco to rest.
Tue July 30, 2002 12:42 PM PDT
thephantomcat
Tolkien doesn't make it a big deal to describe every single Nazgul and his stead, but he does mention them. And with a piercing cry out of the dim sky fell the winged shadows, the Nazgul stooping to the kill....The Nazgul screeched and swept away, for their Captain was not yet come to challenge the white fire of his foe....At his summons, wheeling from a rending cry, in a last desperate race there flew, faster than the winds, the Nazgul, the Ringwraiths, and with a storm of wings they hurtled southwards towards Mount Doom. Hope that's enough to finally put this stupid dragon fiasco to rest.
Tue July 30, 2002 12:42 PM PDT
Orlichick
*asks thephantomcat good-naturedly*
tell me, how many times have you read the book?? did you know all of that by heart?? i'm impressed! i haven't found the chance to sit down with them for some time... ::sigh::
Tue July 30, 2002 7:01 PM PDT
Orlichick
*asks thephantomcat good-naturedly*
tell me, how many times have you read the book?? did you know all of that by heart?? i'm impressed! i haven't found the chance to sit down with them for some time... ::sigh::
Tue July 30, 2002 7:01 PM PDT
HappyHobbit
and I also read your earlier comment, phantomcat, I just didn't think that that was what Howe was trying to portray. I only thought that the witch king would be low enough to be seen during the battle. If you'll recall, Tolkien suggested that the other Nazgūl could be felt, but not seen. If this sounds rude, I'm sorry! I don't mean to start an argument, don't get mad at me! I was just expressing my difference of opinion and interpretation of the art.
Tue July 30, 2002 9:16 PM PDT
HappyHobbit
and I also read your earlier comment, phantomcat, I just didn't think that that was what Howe was trying to portray. I only thought that the witch king would be low enough to be seen during the battle. If you'll recall, Tolkien suggested that the other Nazgūl could be felt, but not seen. If this sounds rude, I'm sorry! I don't mean to start an argument, don't get mad at me! I was just expressing my difference of opinion and interpretation of the art.
Tue July 30, 2002 9:16 PM PDT
thephantomcat
No, I do not know these quotes by heart. But I remember what I read and always know where to look when I need something. HappyHobbit, so you thought Howe was just putting dragons for the fun of it? There are times when the Nazgul remain unseen in order to weaken the hearts of men, but they are sighted quite frequently as well. Howe would be hardpressed to draw the Nazgul without actually showing them. Perhaps its been awhile since you've read the books, but next time reread the chapter.
Tue July 30, 2002 11:03 PM PDT
thephantomcat
No, I do not know these quotes by heart. But I remember what I read and always know where to look when I need something. HappyHobbit, so you thought Howe was just putting dragons for the fun of it? There are times when the Nazgul remain unseen in order to weaken the hearts of men, but they are sighted quite frequently as well. Howe would be hardpressed to draw the Nazgul without actually showing them. Perhaps its been awhile since you've read the books, but next time reread the chapter.
Tue July 30, 2002 11:03 PM PDT
HappyHobbit
I was expressing my difference of opinion and interpretation of the art! I don't want to get into an argument with you, phantomcat, but I also don't kneed you being rude to me in your comments! I've read the chapter quite recently, and my mental picture of the Nazgūls' steads look more gryffin like than dragon like, so since the flying beasts in Howe's painting had a dragon-like look to them, I saw them as dragons. That's my own opinion and I'm sorry if it's different from yours but that is why it's called MY opinion. Please don't read this the wrong way; I'm not trying to sound rude to you, but I would like it very much if you would stop with your personal attacks on me.
Wed July 31, 2002 3:42 PM PDT
HappyHobbit
I was expressing my difference of opinion and interpretation of the art! I don't want to get into an argument with you, phantomcat, but I also don't kneed you being rude to me in your comments! I've read the chapter quite recently, and my mental picture of the Nazgūls' steads look more gryffin like than dragon like, so since the flying beasts in Howe's painting had a dragon-like look to them, I saw them as dragons. That's my own opinion and I'm sorry if it's different from yours but that is why it's called MY opinion. Please don't read this the wrong way; I'm not trying to sound rude to you, but I would like it very much if you would stop with your personal attacks on me.
Wed July 31, 2002 3:42 PM PDT
thephantomcat
This has nothing to do with opinions and interpretations. There are no dragons in Tolkien's Middle-earth. To imply that Howe just put dragons in for any old reason is insulting to the artist. Either you knew very well that Tolkien described the Nine as ridind flying steads and chose to ignore this, or you did not and made an honest mistake. If it was the latter, just say so. There is no room for "it's just my opinion" when the facts are laid out in front of us. Tolkien described Nazgul on flying steads, Howe drew flying creatures. There is no way Howe intended those beasts to be dragons. Not opinion; cold, hard fact.
Thu August 1, 2002 12:39 PM PDT
thephantomcat
This has nothing to do with opinions and interpretations. There are no dragons in Tolkien's Middle-earth. To imply that Howe just put dragons in for any old reason is insulting to the artist. Either you knew very well that Tolkien described the Nine as ridind flying steads and chose to ignore this, or you did not and made an honest mistake. If it was the latter, just say so. There is no room for "it's just my opinion" when the facts are laid out in front of us. Tolkien described Nazgul on flying steads, Howe drew flying creatures. There is no way Howe intended those beasts to be dragons. Not opinion; cold, hard fact.
Thu August 1, 2002 12:39 PM PDT
HappyHobbit
I get what you're saying, phantomcat. I can see that you hold Howe in the utmost respect, but please realise that I do too. He's my favorite Tolkien artist, and in my opinion the best one out there. I guess in my first post I'd forgotten about the flying steads of the Nazgūl, or maybe I hadn't, I don't know. I did know that the Nazgūl rode the steads, I guess I just didn't connect that fact together with the painting. I in no way intended to insult Howe's work; I worship the man as a genius in his work. I do know now that the steads was what he was portraying, and not dragons. It's obvious we're both admirors of his work, so can we just put this behind us? I guess I wasn't thinking but I know that I'm not enjoying arguing with you. Truce?
Thu August 1, 2002 1:06 PM PDT
HappyHobbit
I get what you're saying, phantomcat. I can see that you hold Howe in the utmost respect, but please realise that I do too. He's my favorite Tolkien artist, and in my opinion the best one out there. I guess in my first post I'd forgotten about the flying steads of the Nazgūl, or maybe I hadn't, I don't know. I did know that the Nazgūl rode the steads, I guess I just didn't connect that fact together with the painting. I in no way intended to insult Howe's work; I worship the man as a genius in his work. I do know now that the steads was what he was portraying, and not dragons. It's obvious we're both admirors of his work, so can we just put this behind us? I guess I wasn't thinking but I know that I'm not enjoying arguing with you. Truce?
Thu August 1, 2002 1:06 PM PDT
thephantomcat
I'm sorry if I upset you. *Accepts truce*
Thu August 1, 2002 3:03 PM PDT
thephantomcat
I'm sorry if I upset you. *Accepts truce*
Thu August 1, 2002 3:03 PM PDT
HappyHobbit
Sorry if I upset you too. Just glad this is resolved! ^_^ *shakes hand*
Thu August 1, 2002 8:29 PM PDT
HappyHobbit
Sorry if I upset you too. Just glad this is resolved! ^_^ *shakes hand*
Thu August 1, 2002 8:29 PM PDT
mithril
But then it's not 100%, to my opinion. It's a very great painting but the winged beasts wasn't what I imagined them to be. I remember reading about them, that they were actually featherless birds, not dragonlike beasts. Is that right? I hope I am because I'd feel like a village idiot if I wasn't.
Ha ha anyway another thing I am critical about the painting is that the lights look weird. I mean, there's that bright white light ( nice rhyme :D ) in the back and bloody darkness around. It makes the scene appear like there's a great black ceiling above. It's rather weird.
Anyway, all in all it's an excellent picture. I like it very much generally.
Rating: 4
Fri August 2, 2002 12:39 AM PDT
mithril
But then it's not 100%, to my opinion. It's a very great painting but the winged beasts wasn't what I imagined them to be. I remember reading about them, that they were actually featherless birds, not dragonlike beasts. Is that right? I hope I am because I'd feel like a village idiot if I wasn't.
Ha ha anyway another thing I am critical about the painting is that the lights look weird. I mean, there's that bright white light ( nice rhyme :D ) in the back and bloody darkness around. It makes the scene appear like there's a great black ceiling above. It's rather weird.
Anyway, all in all it's an excellent picture. I like it very much generally.
Rating: 4
Fri August 2, 2002 12:39 AM PDT
fornadan
Must belong to a combined sequel of Lion King and Titanic then. I wonder if that would beat LotR movies at box office?
Rating: 1
Fri August 2, 2002 5:31 AM PDT
fornadan
Must belong to a combined sequel of Lion King and Titanic then. I wonder if that would beat LotR movies at box office?
Rating: 1
Fri August 2, 2002 5:31 AM PDT
Wyverex_Pagan
Sorry but the painting has not portraited naything in this attack...... there were no dragons on the attack and if they were supposed to represent nazguls only one was attacking minis tirith read the books man geezzzz! This drawing is absolutely brilliant though well done!
Rating: 4
Tue November 12, 2002 10:04 AM PDT
Wyverex_Pagan
Sorry but the painting has not portraited naything in this attack...... there were no dragons on the attack and if they were supposed to represent nazguls only one was attacking minis tirith read the books man geezzzz! This drawing is absolutely brilliant though well done!
Rating: 4
Tue November 12, 2002 10:04 AM PDT
~Imrahil~
Puta esta imagen si que es buena cacha los olifantes....., la cagį misma
cahca también mionas tirith lo mejor....!!!!!!!!!
Rating: 5
Wed April 16, 2003 10:03 AM PDT
~Imrahil~
Puta esta imagen si que es buena cacha los olifantes....., la cagį misma
cahca también mionas tirith lo mejor....!!!!!!!!!
Rating: 5
Wed April 16, 2003 10:03 AM PDT
Boromir209
Not realistic and I couldnt tell that the men were men I thought them to be the background
Boromir209
Rating: 3
Thu October 9, 2003 9:32 PM PDT
Witch-King-of-Angmar
what do you mean too dark!!!!!!!!?????????? It s called a "dawnless" day. not a "Hey! let's bring out the sunshine and blue sky day. Mordor's here! Yaaay!' day
Rating: 5
Sat June 26, 2004 10:10 PM PDT
Witch-King-of-Angmar
There not dragons. theyre nazgul you stupid idiots!!
oyghoul
wow
Rating: 5
Thu June 15, 2000 10:24 AM PDT