Wowee-wow-wow. Peter Jackson sure knows how to do a cliffhanger. I want Return Of The King now, FX or no. I was a bit bothered by the many deviations from the book, but once the action kicked in I stopped caring. Finally a film that can be definitively called "epic".
Can't wait to see this on Saturday. I thought these movies were going to be a disaster, but I have to admit, the first one was extremely well done. I don't worry about departures from the book as long as they make the story flow better on film. Obviously you can't expect a perfect duplication from book to movie form. I'm going to stay away from this thread until I see it.
J.R. wrote:
>
> Wowee-wow-wow. Peter Jackson sure knows how to do a
> cliffhanger. I want Return Of The King now, FX or no. I was a
> bit bothered by the many deviations from the book, but once
> the action kicked in I stopped caring. Finally a film that
> can be definitively called "epic".
>
>
The battles were good, and I thought the movie flowed well (especially considering the source material), but I HATED the way some of the characters were changed. I didn't mind the the additions though, just when they changed the character's personalities.
An old issue, but still flabbergasting in its stupidity. (http://www.pvponline.com/archive.php3?archive=20021217)
Oh God, PLEASE don't try this "at home." (http://www.pvponline.com/archive.php3?archive=20021218)
I went to a midnight showing Tuesday night. Surprise, it was mostly college kids. I waited in line two hours because I wanted good seats. Turns out it was unnecessary, but I know people who had been there since 6:00, so I'm not completely crazy.
There were three people dressed up as elves. The costumes were good, I guess, nevermind the level of geekiness. But aren't elves supposed to be the most beautiful and ethereal of all races? These cosplayers just don't cut the mustard.
I thought the movie was excellent, but that's a longer post. I disliked how they turned Gimli into the comic relief.
Mofo Rising wrote:
> I thought the movie was excellent, but that's a longer post.
> I disliked how they turned Gimli into the comic relief.
Thank you! While I was glad Gimli got more screen time, I HATED that almost every time he was in the scene he had to be comic. My friend loved it though, but I think he's a moron anyway though ;)
I did notice several departures from the book, but in the end they didn't bother me a bit. It was the best time I've had at a theater in years. Great movie!
Yee, hee hee! PVP strikes agine! Good one, Squish.
Hope i'm not the only one why thought the Hobbits clothes looked like they were bucking for the new Dr. Who. Are Hobbits from Gallifry?
I did notice several departures from the book, but in the end they didn't bother me a bit.
Well, Peter Jackson said that they reduced the story mostly to be about Frodo's qwest to destroy the ring, and that was the main determination in deciding what to change or omit. I haven't seen "The Two Towers" yet but I'm curious how that will play on in some of Argorn's story, to say nothing of later in the story when Samwise takes center stage for a time
Dying to see it. I'll say something after the weekend.
Grrr... I was supposed to see that last night, but my date got sick... grrr....
This weekend, definitely!
Funk, E. said: "Grrr... I was supposed to see that last night, but my date got sick... grrr...."
Then get another date, she'll understand... :-D
Saw it yesterday. Got off work early enough to go to a matinee, so it wasn't uncomfortably crowded.
I found that it took an awful long time for this movie to pick up steam, but once it got going, it was fantastic. Hard to say which I liked better, the battle for Helm's Deep or the tree attack.
I agree that Gimli's comic treatment was a bit heavy handed. I was hoping that he would at least get a chance to kick some ass, so he wouldn't look like a total clown, but he had few opportunities. He was funny though.
Gollum was very well done, for being entirely computer generated. They did a good job of making him repulsive, but kind of cute at the same time. The split personality was very effectively done. Gollum comes off as dangerous and detestable, but also tragic and pitiable, even likeable at times.
Good, but I agree that Gimli being made into a comic buffoon troubled me. He could easily be amusing, just not a buffoon.
Example: The horse goes wild and tosses him. When he gets up, or as he is lying in the dirt, he yells something about, "That damn stupid animal!" Funny to everyone else, he is honestly annoyed, and no buffoon. Him complaining about the tall battlements and then the "tossing" requirement were about the right tone for my tastes. Gimli is old, he is experienced, and he has dogged determination, just not the right physical equipment at times. He is, however, just who you want swinging an axe when the orcs close in.
Gandalf leading the cavalry was awesome, but I really loved the Ents. One of my first statements when I heard they were making this was, "I hope the Ents are done well." and they were. Treebeard making the comment about them all going to war was a good, true touch. I think that may have been right out of the book - if memory serves.
Much like Fellowship, TTT overcomes its changes to the text by capturing the overall tone of the book. The scene where Treebeard sees the devestation of Isengard and decides to fight is so touching and evocative of what Tolkien was saying with the books. The whole movie had a sadness to it, with everyone realizing the full weight of the situation and their desperation over going to war.
I can't wait for the extended DVD. There is definitely some stuff missing. Saruman, Gandalf, Treebeard, Merry and Pippin all get the shaft when it comes to screen time. And hopefully some non-comic relief, badass stuff from Gimli is coming.
Just seen this one yesterday at the 4:15 show with a light crowd. First I'd like to mention that I have never read the LORD OF THE RINGS books. Second I remember liking the first film a bit, but it was hard because I couldn't get into the characters let alone the names of the characters. After the movie was over I could barely remember what happened. My main thoughts were that the director Peter Jackson also did DEAD ALIVE and that that was Christopher Lee of Dracula fame with the white beard in the tower. I liked the archer and didn't like Frodo and his furry footed friends. Overall it was ok, but couldn't say much more.
Anyway, about the TWO TOWERS it was slow getting started and wasn't keeping my interest till the siege of the castle then the characters came to life for me. I loved the appearance of the elven archers to help battle that mass of 10,000 orcs and the appearance of the of wizard with the fresh troops. The castle scene makes up for the down time before it and it helps you appreciate the castle battle more in a couple ways. The battle scene also carries this film above the other fantasy film HARRY POTTER.
I still can only remember the names of two of the characters Frodo and Argon. The movie is about 3 hours long.
I loved this, alot of the camera shots and scenery just reminded me of old school Peter Jackson, mainly Frightners and Dead Alive type of stuff. Also, we pulled off the ultimate prank,
We went with a group of 25 people, we all sat scattered about the theater, right, there was a preview for Priates of the Caribeean (we knew this was going to be shown) so 1 person in our group yelled "I wonder what that's rated" we all yelled back "RRRRRRRRRRRRRRR". The whole audience laughed, we were very satisfied with it.
<
>
Is your name actually Leonard and do you go around with a Polaroid camera hanging from your shoulder?
Hey J.R. that was a scene from Memento. I think.
Just seen it. It is a pretty good film, but I can't really judge it, because of the three books this one is the one I like the least. Palace intrigues and war operations are interesting enough, but I just wanted to know what happenned to Frodo and Sam, and the story just went in other directions. I don't blame Tolkien or Jackson, it is just the way things are.
Despite this, I have really enjoyed the movie. Peter Jackson has made a good work and I liked how he illustrated things like Gollum's split personality or the Ent attack, easily my favourite scene. Just laughed when I saw Saruman's face when realising what was coming. Dying to see him in the last chapter.
I saw it Saturday at the Union Square Plaza in Manhattan -- ignore the nitpickers and the naysayers. If "Godfather" recreated the epic film for the 1970s, LOTR will be it for the 00s.
Shakespearean, even Greek classic in its scope -- I daresay by the end, this trilogy will have it all -- tragedy, comedy, nobility, treachery, love, hate, good, evil, the whole schmear (as we say here in NYC). A very big fan of the books (I reread them every few years), I was not bothered at all by Jackson's deviation from the books -- a movie is a movie, not a filmed book, of course there's going to be differences. But the core, the spirit is there.
I've thought my whole life, THIS is the one truly unfilmable project (I thought, maybe, as animation....). How glorious to be proven wrong.
Gimli was the "jar jar" binks of LOTR. "meesa yousa, massa". If they were such an advanced civilization they should have invented some prozac