Lord of the Rings TV series synopsis

R_J_K75

Legend
That seems backwards to me, and not how I remember it at all.
Something with that high of a budget no matter what the movie was, it wasnt going to meet people expectations of what it should be for the price. When it didnt and critics panned it, audiences followed their lead. I remember it being quite the laughing stalk on late night shows for awhile.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Ryujin

Legend
Something with that high of a budget no matter what the movie was, it wasnt going to meet people expectations of what it should be for the price. When it didnt and critics panned it, audiences followed their lead. I remember it being quite the laughing stalk on late night shows for awhile.
I think that you hit the nail on the head; it wasn't going to meet expectations.

Even during filming there were a multitude of stories about it going wildly over budget, about the floating town set being wrecked in a hurricane, having to chase the boat with Costner tied to the mast because it got away from them in high winds...

I liked it fine, but to do so I had to divorce myself from all the hype prior to its opening. And from the negative press, that declared it to be a terrible, over budget fiasco before anyone had even had a screening of it.
 

R_J_K75

Legend
I think that you hit the nail on the head; it wasn't going to meet expectations.

Even during filming there were a multitude of stories about it going wildly over budget, about the floating town set being wrecked in a hurricane, having to chase the boat with Costner tied to the mast because it got away from them in high winds...

I liked it fine, but to do so I had to divorce myself from all the hype prior to its opening. And from the negative press, that declared it to be a terrible, over budget fiasco before anyone had even had a screening of it.
Yes that is exactly how I remember it. I'm curious to re-watch it soon to see if its better or worse than I remember.
 



I remember it as being Mad Max on water, reasonable enough action fare, but adding nothing new to the genre beyond the change of setting. But the hero boat was cool.
It had an environmental message that bopped you on the head when you see the bad guy's base being the exxon valdez, then once you realize that there really isn't enough water frozen to flood the earth like that it falls apart even more. The extended edition of the movie is much better than the original imo. It adds roughly one hour of world building and background information.
 



FitzTheRuke

Legend
Something with that high of a budget no matter what the movie was, it wasnt going to meet people expectations of what it should be for the price. When it didnt and critics panned it, audiences followed their lead. I remember it being quite the laughing stalk on late night shows for awhile.
Oh yeah, that's true for sure. It's definitely why the movie is still talked about as such an all-time travesty. It wasn't good, but I'll concede that it wasn't anywhere near the worst of all time, like it tends to be treated.
 

I remember every talkshow on tv making fun of Waterworld during their opening monologue for several days. They couldn't get enough of it. Critics all blasted it as the worst thing ever.

Then I watched it, and it was a fun action flick with a bit of a heavy handed message and simple plot. There wasn't anything in it that really bothered me. The world building was pretty good, the hero ship looked amazing, and it had a lot of good stunts. An okay action flick.

When I think of bad movies, I don't think of Waterworld. I think of Batman & Robin, The Starwars prequels, Kingdom of the Crystal Skull... or Wonder Woman '84, and yes, The Hobbit trilogy. Big disappointments and wastes of money, made by directors that have made good movies.

Heck, I'll even defend The Room; every armchair critic's favorite punching bag. Because atleast it wasn't a huge waste of money, or made by an experienced director.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top