• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Lucy Lawless as Goldmoon in animated DL

Ranger REG said:
Are you telling me I have to choose the lesser of two evils, because there is no ideal third option that Narnia
You have to stop right there, because there was nothing "ideal" about The Lion, The Witch, And The Wardrobe as a live-action film.

If that's the best they can do, roll on the animated version - and I don't even like animated films, as a rule.

No, especially not Pixar flicks. :P
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Mh,

Well maybe but some of the wording in the KJ Bible version is a little...off from the original texts.

I do agree the film wasn't anything to write home about, but it was hardly a miss as that whole Earthsea mini-series was. :p Or King Arthur.

Klaus,

It depends on which books you read. :p :)
 

Nightfall said:
What I'm telling you Ranger is that fact is Hollywood doesn't shove money under a movie unless they're reasonable sure it will do well.
Dude, reason and Hollywood almost always never mix. If it did, we wouldn't have The Incredible Hulk and Daredevil made.

Just so you know, United Artists didn't want to foot the bills toward LOTR production but allowed PJ to shop for another company to invest. For UA, it was safe for them if the film had failed, but for New Line they would have lost big. New Line gambled, against all reasons.

:p :p :p :p
 



JRRNeiklot said:
I agree wholeheartedly. LotR THE MOVIE sucked arse.
Meh. You cannot please EVERYONE. Not even 'dem dang snobbish up-nosed Tolkien Purists who adhere to the belief that LOTR is quite simply unfilmable.

*smirks* :]

Certainly I'm not pleased with the D&D sequel even though there are those that would disagree with me.

Sighs.
 

Ranger REG said:
Meh. You cannot please EVERYONE. Not even 'dem dang snobbish up-nosed Tolkien Purists who adhere to the belief that LOTR is quite simply unfilmable.
Well, hey. It's unreadable, so . . . :p

Nightfall said:
Well maybe but some of the wording in the KJ Bible version is a little...off from the original texts.
Like Yojimbo is a bad movie because the Japanese setting is "a little off" from the town of Personville in Red Harvest?

Since I'm not a Christian, the accuracy of the King James Bible only bothers me as it affects its usefulness for academic inquiry - and it's plenty useful for finding out what Jacobian-era people believed!

As a text per se, though, it's quite beautiful in places.
 



Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top