Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
rewatching Lord of the Rings
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Willie the Duck" data-source="post: 9229298" data-attributes="member: 6799660"><p>I tend to re-watch it (the trilogy as a whole, possibly the extended cuts) any time when I have 9-12 hours in a row to kill in front of a screen, and don't want to have to (since I know it all practically by heart) pay attention all the time (the only semi-consistent instances of this are when I am home sick or the like).</p><p></p><p>The trilogy holds a special place in my heart with regards to cinema. The musical scoring is fantastic, perfectly capturing the epic feeling of the narrative. The visuals are overall amazing. It came out just when making <em>Jurassic Park</em>* level digital special effects became cheap enough to include in many-to-most shots, but still expensive enough that practical effects like forced perspective for the hobbit sizes was still considered preferable. For this reason, I think they got the usage of digital effects right, not deferring to their use when another method would work. Likewise, it came out at the tail end of when most western-culture-produced movies only included women/bipoc actors when it was plot-relevant, otherwise defaulting to white men. For that reason, I give it more of a pass than if I saw it in something made today. With that in mind, the casting is very solid. Mortensen, Lee, Serkis, and Weavings' Aragorn, Saruman, Gollum, and Elrond are definitive versions in my mind (Weaving being the standout surprise, as I expected to see bits of Agent Smith poke through, but I did not). I could see other actors of the right ages playing Frodo, Sam, Boromir, and Gandalf, but I think Wood, Astin, Bean, and McKellen's interpretations were very powerful and I doubt another matchup would have done strictly better. The rest of the cast did fine to exceptional work, often depending on whether they were given much room to act (for instance Orlando Bloom got to look unfazable and badass as Legolas, and not much else), and even my biggest complaint -- Rhys-Davies bloviating clown Gimli was in fact a very good rendition of what he was undoubtedly asked to portray.</p><p><span style="color: rgb(209, 213, 216)">*And, much like <em>Jurassic Park</em>, the effects still hold up today, which other movies of the time (like <em>The Phantom Menace</em>) often do not. </span></p><p></p><p><span style="color: #000000">To that point, there are places where I would do something different. Galadriel's 'if you gave me the ring' moment looks like someone loved their photonegative filter, Shelob's webbing looks like it was made out of rubber bands, the fortifications and battle strategies are strictly rule-of-cool, and such. Certainly there are places where the film deviates from the books, and I can understand if someone asks why there needed to be elves at Helm's Deep, why Faramir and Denethor received virtuousness downgrades, or why Gimli was made into comic relief. This later critique, however, I think requires acknowledging that some changes needed to be made to make the books viable as films* and also that the films were intended to be adaptations, not perfect mirrors of the novels*<em>. </em>Overall, there are certainly things<em> I would have done differently**</em>, but nothing I consider actively objectionable. </span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: rgb(209, 213, 216)">*certainly every 'how I would have done it' posting I've seen in the nerdosphere by someone angry with these decisions either would never have been a hit movie and/or makes other changes someone else would find equally objectionable.</span></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: rgb(209, 213, 216)">**and yes, we all have different ideas about how much should be changed when adapting someone else's work. Cue 50-page Starship Troopers-Watchmen-Don Quixote/Man of La Mancha tangent.</span></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: rgb(209, 213, 216)">***and that goes for the novels, too. They are masterpieces of their genre, but certainly not beyond reproach and critique. </span></span></p><p></p><p><span style="color: #000000">Overall, I think the </span><em><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0)">LotR </span></em><span style="color: #000000">films stand up and will continue to be seen as masterpieces. What will get lost, especially to people who started watching cinema after their release, will be how much a departure from the norm these films truly were, both in their execution and the simple fact of treating the fantasy genre as serious cinema and blockbuster material. I'll forever defend </span><em><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0)">Beastmaster </span></em><span style="color: #000000">and </span><em><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0)">Krull</span></em><span style="color: #000000"> and such as exceptional <em>for their era</em>, but LotR might be the first (<em>Excalibur</em> and <em>Clash of the Titans</em> maybe getting honorary mentions)</span> to be truly exceptional, full-stop.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Willie the Duck, post: 9229298, member: 6799660"] I tend to re-watch it (the trilogy as a whole, possibly the extended cuts) any time when I have 9-12 hours in a row to kill in front of a screen, and don't want to have to (since I know it all practically by heart) pay attention all the time (the only semi-consistent instances of this are when I am home sick or the like). The trilogy holds a special place in my heart with regards to cinema. The musical scoring is fantastic, perfectly capturing the epic feeling of the narrative. The visuals are overall amazing. It came out just when making [I]Jurassic Park[/I]* level digital special effects became cheap enough to include in many-to-most shots, but still expensive enough that practical effects like forced perspective for the hobbit sizes was still considered preferable. For this reason, I think they got the usage of digital effects right, not deferring to their use when another method would work. Likewise, it came out at the tail end of when most western-culture-produced movies only included women/bipoc actors when it was plot-relevant, otherwise defaulting to white men. For that reason, I give it more of a pass than if I saw it in something made today. With that in mind, the casting is very solid. Mortensen, Lee, Serkis, and Weavings' Aragorn, Saruman, Gollum, and Elrond are definitive versions in my mind (Weaving being the standout surprise, as I expected to see bits of Agent Smith poke through, but I did not). I could see other actors of the right ages playing Frodo, Sam, Boromir, and Gandalf, but I think Wood, Astin, Bean, and McKellen's interpretations were very powerful and I doubt another matchup would have done strictly better. The rest of the cast did fine to exceptional work, often depending on whether they were given much room to act (for instance Orlando Bloom got to look unfazable and badass as Legolas, and not much else), and even my biggest complaint -- Rhys-Davies bloviating clown Gimli was in fact a very good rendition of what he was undoubtedly asked to portray. [COLOR=rgb(209, 213, 216)]*And, much like [I]Jurassic Park[/I], the effects still hold up today, which other movies of the time (like [I]The Phantom Menace[/I]) often do not. [/COLOR] [COLOR=#000000]To that point, there are places where I would do something different. Galadriel's 'if you gave me the ring' moment looks like someone loved their photonegative filter, Shelob's webbing looks like it was made out of rubber bands, the fortifications and battle strategies are strictly rule-of-cool, and such. Certainly there are places where the film deviates from the books, and I can understand if someone asks why there needed to be elves at Helm's Deep, why Faramir and Denethor received virtuousness downgrades, or why Gimli was made into comic relief. This later critique, however, I think requires acknowledging that some changes needed to be made to make the books viable as films* and also that the films were intended to be adaptations, not perfect mirrors of the novels*[I]. [/I]Overall, there are certainly things[I] I would have done differently**[/I], but nothing I consider actively objectionable. [COLOR=rgb(209, 213, 216)]*certainly every 'how I would have done it' posting I've seen in the nerdosphere by someone angry with these decisions either would never have been a hit movie and/or makes other changes someone else would find equally objectionable.[/COLOR][/COLOR] [COLOR=#000000][COLOR=rgb(209, 213, 216)]**and yes, we all have different ideas about how much should be changed when adapting someone else's work. Cue 50-page Starship Troopers-Watchmen-Don Quixote/Man of La Mancha tangent.[/COLOR][/COLOR] [COLOR=#000000][COLOR=rgb(209, 213, 216)]***and that goes for the novels, too. They are masterpieces of their genre, but certainly not beyond reproach and critique. [/COLOR][/COLOR] [COLOR=#000000]Overall, I think the [/COLOR][I][COLOR=rgb(0, 0, 0)]LotR [/COLOR][/I][COLOR=#000000]films stand up and will continue to be seen as masterpieces. What will get lost, especially to people who started watching cinema after their release, will be how much a departure from the norm these films truly were, both in their execution and the simple fact of treating the fantasy genre as serious cinema and blockbuster material. I'll forever defend [/COLOR][I][COLOR=rgb(0, 0, 0)]Beastmaster [/COLOR][/I][COLOR=#000000]and [/COLOR][I][COLOR=rgb(0, 0, 0)]Krull[/COLOR][/I][COLOR=#000000] and such as exceptional [I]for their era[/I], but LotR might be the first ([I]Excalibur[/I] and [I]Clash of the Titans[/I] maybe getting honorary mentions)[/COLOR] to be truly exceptional, full-stop. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
rewatching Lord of the Rings
Top