Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Morrus" data-source="post: 1290544" data-attributes="member: 1">Just to reiterate what PC has said - this is a fascinating thread, with some great debate and discussion in it.  There's also some unpleasant snippiness and pedantry.  Let's try and be nice to each other, eh?  After all, nearly all of us agree that RotK is a friggin' great movie! On the ending - I agree that it was too long.  I don't feel that it made for good cinema (I had no problem with it in the books), and actually felt a bit bored for the last 10 minutes or so.  I agree that it could have been shortened (even re-written, since the Scouring was omitted) and that Saruman could have been added back in, along with some other bits and pieces.  That said, I still think that it is fantastic film. Thinking back, the bits which struck me most were: 1) The charge of the Rohirrim. I actually felt a shiver go down my spine at that moment. 2) Shelob.  Now that was just incredible. 3) Pretty much the whole of the battle.  Looked and felt incredible! Some things I thought were less strong: 1) I felt that there were some moments which were just too cheesy.  The bit where they all join Frodo in his bedroom made me cringe. 2) Sam going into the tower to rescue Frodo.  Yeah, I know that happened in the book, but actually seeing it realised on screen made it seem a bit silly to me. 3) Elrond showing up etc.  4) The army of the dead.  They arrive, there's a long shot of a green "glow" swarming over the bad guys for about 5 seconds, and the battle is over.  Very anti-climatic for me, as battle-endings go. 5) Nazgul.  I didn't get this impression from the books, but, again, seeing it onscreen made some things more "apparent" to me.  The Nazgul don't really seem much of a threat - Aragorn drives them off easily in the first film, one of the fellbeasts is hit by a single arrow and flees in TTT, and the Witch King confrontation is too darn easy.  His fell beast, in particular, was about as much threat as a tabby cat.  I'd like (blasphemy!) PJ to have rewritten the Nazgul to make them much more formidable than they actually were. 6) Gimli still too much of a comedy figure, something which has bothered me through all three movies.  Also, in TTT when he had a score of 2 and Legolas had 19 - how on earth did he catch up?  Did Legolas just slow down to give him a chance, deciding that his 19 orcs/10 seconds hit rate was too fast to make for fair competition?  Or should the two have been prtrayed as more equal all the way through, as in the books? I like what they did with Denethor, although I feel it should have been explained a little better.  I also feel that, despite my reservations with Faramir's portrayal in TTT, the whole arc with him works perfectly, despite being different from the books. I've only seen the movie once (I'm going back tomorrow), but I feel that PJ improved on the books in some places, and did most of it the justice it deserved.  Only occasionally did he fall short in my opinion, and in some of those cases I felt he should have actually rewritten stuff to improve it, as it wasn't written with the cinema in mind.  In other cases, of course, I felt that he'd rewritten stuff for no reason (Aragorn falling off the cliff and then coming back again in TTT.  Wait, didn't that same thing happen to Gandalf, what, 20 minutes agoi?  Disn't work at all for me).</blockquote>

Verification