Anti-LotR

[Brown Jenkin]

To: Villano and Welverin:

Can't you two apreciate a good movie like this or Citizen Kane or do you only like Steven Segal movies designed for people with short attention spans that need explosions every two minutes.



But really, I can understand the pacing issue, but that is the story as Tolkien wrote it. It moves slow, tking almost 3/4 of the book until Moria. This might be somewhat remidied in the special edition, but to change the pacing greatly would have ruined it for all the Tolkien fans. I nover realy noticed the music didn't at all.

Overall I was too hung up on the book the first time I watched it, but the second and third times were much more enjoyable as I was able to allow the movie to speak for itself.

Just currious however on how someone would give it a 3/10. That would put it down there with some real stinkers. Even if you don't think its great, I am currious how it would fall into the bottom of movies released this year?

 

[Welverin]

Nothing gets between me and a bad joke!

To: Villano and Welverin:

Can't you two apreciate a good movie like this or Citizen Kane or do you only like Steven Segal movies designed for people with short attention spans that need explosions every two minutes.

no fightin', no 'splosions, no bother.

Seriously: I like FotR, I've never seen Citizen Kane and would probably like it as long as it's not the biggest case of hype ever.

Oh and I can't think of a single part of LotR (the book) that I found boring.

 

[Michael Tree]

I just watched the extended DVD, and it improved on the theatrical release in many ways, most predominantly by developing the characters and relationships much more. In the theatre, Legolas and Gimli were somewhat cardboard, but with the addition of just a few lines here and there they become a lot more three dimensional.

Sadly, my two biggest criticisms of the film weren't fixed. They are:
- Galadriel still turns into a cheaply rotoscoped cgi-monster who speaks incomprehensibly. Jackson used subtle effects to tremendous effect with Gandalf and Bilbo, but went over the top here. The effects pulled me out of the immersive experience. I was no longer in Middle Earth, I was watching movie special effects. Galadriel's "all shall love me and despair" speech is one of my favorites in the book, but even after reading the book I couldn't make out what she was saying in the movie.

- The formulaic stairs action scene was completely unneccessary. It added nothing but cheap hollywood cliche, and weakened the pacing and dramatic tension of the Balrog chase.

 

[Replicant]

I just watched the extended DVD, and it improved on the theatrical release in many ways, most predominantly by developing the characters and relationships much more. In the theatre, Legolas and Gimli were somewhat cardboard, but with the addition of just a few lines here and there they become a lot more three dimensional.

Sadly, my two biggest criticisms of the film weren't fixed. They are:
- Galadriel still turns into a cheaply rotoscoped cgi-monster who speaks incomprehensibly. Jackson used subtle effects to tremendous effect with Gandalf and Bilbo, but went over the top here. The effects pulled me out of the immersive experience. I was no longer in Middle Earth, I was watching movie special effects. Galadriel's "all shall love me and despair" speech is one of my favorites in the book, but even after reading the book I couldn't make out what she was saying in the movie.

- The formulaic stairs action scene was completely unneccessary. It added nothing but cheap hollywood cliche, and weakened the pacing and dramatic tension of the Balrog chase.

Wow, we must share the same mind, Mr. Tree.

I absolutely loved LOTR, its my favorite fantasy film of all time and its definitely in my top 5 favorite movies of all time.

That said, two jarring bits I didn't like were the exact two mentioned above. Galadriel's transformation made me wince -- way too over the top. More subtlety (heck, ANY subtlety) would have dramatically improved this scene for me.

Two, the collapsing stairs miraculously falling into each other struck me as way too Indiana Jones-esque -- pulpy and out of place with the grim seriousness Jackson handled the rest of the combat/chase scenes.

However, the sheer brilliance of the rest of the film easily makes up for those pair of minor flaws.

 

[Michael Tree]

Wow, we must share the same mind, Mr. Tree.

Or you're a cleverly-designed artificial copy of me.

More subtlety (heck, ANY subtlety) would have dramatically improved this scene for me.

Exactly. Who did Peter Jackson think he was, George Lucas?

I made the mistake of watching the Episode II DVD shortly after watching FotR. Visually the two were a contrast between masterful subtle art and "throw some cgi at it, yeah, that'll make it good."

Two, the collapsing stairs miraculously falling into each other struck me as way too Indiana Jones-esque -- pulpy and out of place with the grim seriousness Jackson handled the rest of the combat/chase scenes.

What really irritated me was that that scene was left in, but the Galadriel gift-giving scene was cut. What were they thinking?

Now that the Galadriel scene has been put back, my biggest beef is that the bridge scene is in the middle of the DVD track, not a track of its own, so it's more difficult to skip.

 

[Storminator]

I made the mistake of watching the Episode II DVD shortly after watching FotR. Visually the two were a contrast between masterful subtle art and "throw some cgi at it, yeah, that'll make it good."

I'm sorry, maybe I should read this in the morning when I'm more awake. Which did you think was the good one?

PS

 

[Michael Tree]

I'm sorry, maybe I should read this in the morning when I'm more awake. Which did you think was the good one?

You have to ask? Fellowship of the Rings, of course.

 

[Vocenoctum]

I liked both versions of the movie, I'd give it 8/10, but that's probably the highest I'll ever give any movie

I didn't like Galadriel at all, regardless of the CGI she just didn't strike me as correct.

The other thing that dragged the movie for me was the sappy music and drawn out attempt at emotion after Frodo got stabbed and Frodo got smashed and Gandalf took a flying leap. It was just too over the top for me.

 

[WizarDru]

I liked both versions of the movie, I'd give it 8/10, but that's probably the highest I'll ever give any movie

I didn't like Galadriel at all, regardless of the CGI she just didn't strike me as correct.

The other thing that dragged the movie for me was the sappy music and drawn out attempt at emotion after Frodo got stabbed and Frodo got smashed and Gandalf took a flying leap. It was just too over the top for me.

Which show how tastes vary, as I thought exactly the opposite. C'est la vie.

I really like how the extended version adds so much to some characters. I thought Boromir was well-represented in the theatrical release, but he's much better developed in the extended version. Gimli lost a lot of ground in the theatrical release, as did Merry and Pippin, and Celeborn, for that matter.

So many good character moments. I can't wait for 'The Two Towers' at this point.

 

[Storm Raven]

Was the Cave Troll actually in the book? I don't remember but maybe it was an added bit.

There was a brief mention of a troll in the combat scene in Balin's Tomb, it thrusts its foot in the door and is stabbed by Frodo (with Sting).

But the "knocking Frodo out with a spear thrust" thing was done by an unusually large orc chieftain who knocked Aragorn and Boromir aside to attack Frodo.