The film Willow had a race of small-statured people, I believe they were called Daitini. Humans would refer to them as ‘pecks’. Anyway I suddenly realized they are kind of similar to hobbits. Coincedence?
Obviously they’re halflings and Wizards of the Coast should sue.
A quote from a random teenager, from when I went to see LotR: Fellowship of the Ring in the theater:
“Man, this s–t was just a rip-off of Willow, yo!”
It was the taller humans who were called Daikini. Willow’s people were called the Nelwyn.
Loved that movie! Such a shame that Warwick Davis will be limited in the roles he plays. He did a splendid job as Willow Ufgood. Not that he can’t have a long career, after all, look at Billy Barty(The High Aldwyn) who was in the same movie. But Davis will probably never be able to break out of the alien/leprechaun/fantasy creature mold. Sucks, really.
Well, in his next film he plays a Robot, so that’s that.
The concept of a “little people” is found in many mythologies. Tolkien developed the concept, and Willow stol-- um, borrowed the idea.
He has a minor role in Ray, does that count as breaking out of the fantasy mold?
I agree, there are too many similar associations in willow and LOTR. They both had trolls, dragons, wizards, half-lings, crazy wolves, etc…etc…
I do love when Burglecut gets shat on - Twice - by the doves.
They were also both filmed in NZ - well, a large part of Willow was, and Ron Howard got pissed off and swore he’d never work here again when the extras “souvenired” half the props. We know how to treat talentless plagiaristst hacks down here.
Willow was almost 100% derivative of other movies. Let’s see, we have the young, pastoral clod with undeveloped mystical powers longing for adventure, the charming scoundrel who is reluctantly recruited to help rescue a princess, a wise old advisor who’s been in retirement for years, and a villain in an impenetrable fortress. What’s * that * remind you of?
Not to mention the paint-by-numbers generic fantasy script – evil stepmother, stolen baby, and, (lamest of all conventions), the ancient prophecy.
Now lack of originality doesn’t necessarily a bad movie make, and Willow had a certain amount of charm, but it could have been a much better flick.
That said, the little people in Willow were NOT hobbits. They did not live in holes in the ground, did not live in Middle Earth, and, to my recollection, did not have the large hairy hobbit feet.
Joseph Campbell’s The Hero With a Thousand Faces.
Not surprised at the parallels, since George Lucas wrote the story.
(Ah, I remember reading the novelization of this in 6th grade. I had the hugest crush on Madmortigan. :D)
Did you read the rest of the books? I loved those…
to the op: Daikini are humans, ‘pecks’ are Nelwyn’s. Okay they were more than likely ripped off, but I still love the movie (and books)
I believe originally they were not going to be so humanoid, and be a little more fantastical, and if so would not have been so hobbit-like. But in the end it was cheaper and easier to just go with simple bare human faces.
Having said that, there is no originality left in this world, and really as the story and actual characters were fairly distinctive, I don’t think you can compare it too closely to LOTR really.
You’d better not be dissin’ Ron Howard. :mad:
Hobbits and Pecks (Nelwyn) are not the same. Hobbits are supposed to resemble human children. In other words they are perfectly proportionate small humans. Pecks are dwarves, they are not proportionate and do not have the same physique as a human.
You are infested with brownies.
What was funny is that when the Willow DVD came out it advertised “before there were hobbits, before there were wizards (referring to Harry Potter) there was Willow”
Which of course made LOTR fans go – Um, excuse me, but LOTR has been around for almost 50 years. And even if you are refering only to movies, we can cite Bashki (if only on an emergency basis).