Lord of the Rings (*WARNING: Spoilers*)

[xyle_one]

Anyone go see the Two Towers last night??? it was fucking cool. very happy  

[ December 19, 2002: Message edited by: psyjax: plain 'ol psyjax ]

[KernelPanic]

I saw it yesterday at twelve noon (yesterday was the first day over here) and yeah I liked it, I liked it alot.
They cut lots of the character building but it is a film and they have a cinema audience to cater for and it was good. They seemed to change more than in the first film, they put differing levels of emphasis on things than the book did but like I said it is a film.
'tis very good though , they did the book justice and I enjoyed all three hours of it.

[psyjax]

You can't complain about character building. Remember, you are not watching a sequel, you are watching the middle part of a very long movie. The characters were already well fleshed out from the first film, you know 'em already. The characters they introduced were very well rendered, especialy gollum, no pun intended  

As far as changing things around, I found it to be quite faithfull. They moved parts around, but all the parts were there. Shelob and the other bits at the end of the book, like Gandalf and the Rohan confronting Saruman who is being held by treebeard will appear at the beginning of The Return of the King.

Jackson himself said this. He made the choice, because the pace of the last book is decidedly slower than the other two. As a result he chose to move those parts around to spice things up. I'm happy with his decision.

The movie was excellent  

[pkd_lives]

ohh... twist a sore point.

As for what they did to Gimli - man that just wasn't fucking right - Jackson should be kicked fucking hard for that, especially as he also screwed up some rather significant stuff with Merry and Pipin (it will be interesting to see how he manages to ignore a few major plot holes now).

Now don't get me wrong, it was a very good film, and worth getting home at 1.30am for, but I went because of the story - I could give two fucks for a film makers interpretation.

I saw the first one three times (it takes wild horses to drag me to see any film - so this was unprecedented) but I will now wait until the third one comes out - I have absolutly no desire to see it ever again. Too many things were not done right this time, and too much of what I consider necessary story was left out, and too much directors' idea stuff was put in.

[DC]

quote:Originally posted by Linux Frank:
but I went because of the story - I could give two fucks for a film makers interpretation.

You're an idiot if you go to TTT for the story. Go for the special effects or an opportunity to see Middle Earth with your eyes instead of your fantasy.

If you want a STORY go read the damned book.

Anyway, I still need to go see TTT. I did see FotR. Nice movie, mostly true to the book, but hopelessly wrong on some parts.

I wonder if they'll ever movie-ize The Hobbit. Or the Silmarillion, that'll be something else  

[psyjax]

Ya, I can agree with the Gimli thing. He was too much comic relife, I mean in the book hes funny and stuff but you never doubt the fact that he is a badass, in the movie he plays the butt of the joke.

And call me a D&D whore, but when I think Dwarf Fighter with Battle Ax. I wanna see a Big fucking AX! What the hell has Gimli been wielding the last two films? It looks like a brocken hatchet fascioned from an old ArtDeco wrote Iron fence or somethin.

[ December 19, 2002: Message edited by: psyjax: plain 'ol psyjax ]

[Master of Reality]

I still think a good director should make a movie(s) for The trilogy of The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy

[psyjax]

quote:Originally posted by The Master of Reality / B0b:
I still think a good director should make a movie(s) for The trilogy of The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy

I second this.

Altho, I still think Pete Jackson has done an admirable job  

[KernelPanic]

There were a few little things that bothered me, like:

They did not show/tell that the tree's came behind the ents. That is significant!, well it is if you read the book.

Elrond is badly cast (that is one from the first one)

They missed Tom Bombadil (Jackson talked about that in one of the documentries after the first film I cant remember why he said he did it)

Galadriel is not pretty enough.

You get no sense of what the different peoples in the book are all about. But I suppose they don't have the time to tell us.

They are all very small niggles most of them not really specific to the two towers, I have other much more significant ones to add but I can't put them into words in a way that does justice to what I mean. But I do think they are two great films, can't wait until the DVD box set of all 3 is out        
These films will live like star wars, they are more than a cult classic, they are amazing!

Peter Jackson has done an amazing job, I love the films. They do justice to the book which is a terrific achievment especially since he has to cater for everyones different ideas that they formed in their head whilst readin the book.

The two films get a rating in the 95-100% range from me.

The reason I rate it so high is because the book is just so great, there are many small things that bother me as I am pedantic but I have to keep remining myself that it is a film and then I realise that they are very good.

[ December 19, 2002: Message edited by: Tux ]

[xyle_one]

they did leave some things out, and changed alot. but overall, it is a great series (TFotR, and TTT). I dotn think it would have been possible to follow the book in its entirety, there is just so much in the books. unless of course we wanted to sit through 6 hours of movie. (could you imaging, all three movies ini a row  :eek:  ). The animation of golom was
so good its disgusting. i am now going to go shoot myslef in the head for even thinking i could be an animator, let alone ever doing something like this movie. this movie triumphed where starWars failed (jar jar anyone??) all of the effects were beautiful, and worked so that you dont really focus on them. (i did, because i wanted to be an 3d animator/effects guy). anyways, i thought is was a good show. regardless of how well it follows the book

[pkd_lives]

Don't read if you haven't seen the movie : I don't want to prejudice you about what is actually a very good movie.

 

quote: If you want a STORY go read the damned book

I have - many times. I was dragged (well persuaded against my better judgement) to see the first movie. I was impressed with how they dealt with the story. The effects were good, and it could not have been done a few years ago (I saw the original LofR movie - so I know whereov I speak on bad LotR movies). I liked it, but what got me was how much the film got it right. How much the story was there and how much they held true to the ideas in the book. And the visuals were very good - they tended to get it the same way Tolkien described it. And they never overtly added everything - my only complaint was with the stuff they left out.

In TTT this did not happen. No way were those pieces of bad animation ENTS - they even messed up the scale. The whole White Tower bit was a fuck up, what they put there in place was pathetic to say the least. Like Tux I am most annoyed about the whole trees and entwives and all that missing section.

The reviews said more of the same (essentially the story continues). That is the main reason I went, and as such was sorely dissappointed. Now I accept that it is going to be hard for him to pull off.

I understand in the first one leaving out Tom Bombadil, the relevence of the barrows stuff was not important to the actual story. The adjustments subsequently made were subtle enough not to actually ruin anything. Again in TTT this did not happen. They failed on the Rohan - there was so much I wanted to see from that and Gondor, and they skimmed it and made it into a Henry V remake.

And there is no way you will convince me they were WraithWrogs, that was a bear on all fours.

But what really really annoyed me was that they made Gandalphs' return a religious experience - Something Tolkien denied it was. They put more into Gollum than was there. They made the whole Gollum thing sound like something from a Disney studio. There was no allegory in the book, therefore there should be no allegory in the film (excepting the language of course).

Now it could be that I read too much into the film, but you must understand that I am a Bibliomanic, for me the book and the story is all, everything else is just wannabes shouting to be heard. So when I go to see a film there has to be a good story, the story has to be 'intelligent', I went to see TTT on the basis that the first film was very very good, the second film made too many changes and added it's own stuff, which did not work in and of itself (let alone as part of the Lord of the Rings) which is probably why it annoyed me so much.

The battle though - that was very well done (although they messed up the passing of time a bit), the elves seemed to exhibit more elf like behaviour (Legolas mounting the horse in battle). The Rohan was very well shown, Fangorn looked very good, the atmosphere was wonderful and convayed the feel I get from the books, the ORCs actually look scary, saruman is wonderfully acted, the cast was very well chosen (contrary to many thoughts I think Elrond is what he should be and is well cast). The film overall suceeds, the portrayal of Gollum was great (even with the errors), and the marsh was exactly how I pictured it.

There I've said it. I got it off my chest. Apart from pedantic pickings on my part the film is very very good (although I will never see a first night performance again). And when they offer the marathon all three films option at the local art theatres - I'm gonna be there.

[psyjax]

While I can see your complaints, I think you may be nitpicking. I mean, I'm an incredible fan of the book, and shit I remember some folk trashing the first movie cuz they didn't get the Uruk-Hai Chainmail correct! I mean WTF?    

Not that I think your gripping is this petty. But as far as Gollum, I don't think they made it too Disney at all. I think they actually made him more belivable and pathetic than he was in the book. I allways hated him in the book and never understood why the hell Frodo would risk letting him tag along, but here they really made the whole pity thing belivable. There is nothing alegorical about Gollum in the movie, he is tragic, that's the way Tolkein felt about him as well.

As for Gandalf being a religious thing, I didn't see it as religious as much as it was Archetipical. Like it or not the entire Mythos of LOTR as well as judeo Christian mythos play into universal human archetypes. One large one being the hero's jurney to hell and triumphant return. Odessyus did it, Aeanias did it, Jesus did it, and indeed so did Gandalf. Many of the Norse myths whcih inspired tolkein have many of those same themes.

Ahhh... I love being a bitching fanboy    

EDIT: Oh ya, while cool, Worgs were big sentient wolves. Not dumb bestial hyena creatures. I don't knock it though, that sceen was incredibly cool.

[ December 19, 2002: Message edited by: psyjax: plain 'ol psyjax ]

[Crunchy(Cracked)Butter]

Bottom Line... I want to get the Special Extended Edition on DVD, on ONE DVD, or will it be BlueRay by the time its out?

I can see where they rushed bits for pacing reasons and on the whole i wouldn't rate it higher or lower than FOTR. Its the same movie just broken up in bits so i'll give me opinion on it when its all done next year.

The film has been done well, it is i suppose very hard, so i am pleased and can see the effort. I am not dissing this film btw, i wouldn't change it, i've read the book so i know what happens.


Hopefully, the DVD technology will allow it to be on ONE disc later in my life with something like 10.5 hours making up its total running time!

This is not because i love the film its because i want all of it on film. Granted some places couldn't be touched by the camera because it'd be pointless, like Tom and such. But some bits i want to see on film because i felt they left chunks out, it would be been interesting.

Golem was really good, they put alot of effort into him, what spoiled it for me was when people were laughing at him, kinda ruined the moment. But his linesss were righhht and the wayyy theysss were ssspoken!

Faramir, hmmm, i have to read the book again, i cannot remember him totally, i thought he left them where he found them not take them all the way to Gondor. Does he really do this? Also was the wraith actually at the white city as well in the book?

I felt the Ents were rushed as well, quite a little was missing, i felt they needed a little bit more of a character buildup.

Other than these (diehard hardcore fan nitpicks) i am happy with it.

Where was Gandalf for half the film?

Elves seem so easy to kill, i thought they were highly trained warriors and could take on 10 orcs each?

Did any Elves actually survive Helmsdeep, enough left for the battle of the white city?

How many orcs could Aragorn take on all by himself?

When they rode out of Helm's Deep on horseback i highly doubt they would of got as far as they did and survived!

The Ents were sadly missing alot.  I mean they missed ALOT, the Ent Beer, the talking about Ents and all.  They were nearly lame come to think of it.  Also Merry and Pippin should of had a bigger part.

When Gimli shouted his tally on killing orcs i felt it didn't work, it seemed comedic at the wrong time. In the book, sure it worked, in the film no it didn't.  Also Gimli was TOO funny.

The White City wasn't really White was it?

[ December 19, 2002: Message edited by: Crunchy(Cracked)Butter ]

[Pissed_Macman]

The local theater here breaks the law and shows a sneak preview before it's supposed to open. So technically I saw it after it opened... eastern time of course        

As for the movie...

THAT FUCKING ROCKED!!! ONE OF THE BEST MOVIES EVER MADE!!! I WAS STILL IN A DAZE SIX HOURS AFTER I SAW IT!!! WOW!!!

Macman's Rating:


[ December 19, 2002: Message edited by: Macman: Mac Trooper / BoB ]

[Fett101]

quote:Originally posted by The Master of Reality / B0b:
I still think a good director should make a movie(s) for The trilogy of The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy

5 books ain't a trilogy. And Adams was working on a screenplay before he died. Havn't heard a word about it since.