TomServo69
Moderator Emeritus
Gone but not Forgotten
Nothing ever changes........
Posts: 5,467
|
Post by TomServo69 on Dec 22, 2003 0:07:06 GMT -5
It was OK, except for the gratuitous amount of ROCK CLIMBING!!!!! AHHHHHHHH!!!!
Servo
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Dec 22, 2003 1:50:41 GMT -5
I saw it for the third time this afternoon.
There's something so noble about the whole thing. So many timeless and powerful themes: courage in a hopeless struggle, sacrificing yourself for your friends, the power of loyalty, etc.
I can understand some gripes about the length or the changes from the books. However, anyone who denies that these films touch a level of pathos and what makes us human must not be paying attention. Or else they simply haven't watched them, in which case their opinion doesn't count.
Of course, right about now we can prepare for the cultural backlash. After all the hype and praise these films have received, it's about time for it to be cool and subversive to rip on them.
|
|
|
Post by hookemhorns on Dec 22, 2003 13:10:19 GMT -5
Saw it yesterday and loved it. I wish I could go see it again today.
|
|
|
Post by Gorphax on Dec 23, 2003 13:56:26 GMT -5
Yeah, it might be just hearsay, but I believe I have heard that Saruman and Grima Wormtongue actually have a death scene in the extended edition. Should be pretty cool if it's true.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Dec 23, 2003 15:15:44 GMT -5
It's not just hearsay. Peter Jackson has confirmed it multiple times. Also, there's a nice report on theonering.net that says the extended edition DVD will be longer than the other two. (Some reports say over 5 hours!! )
|
|
|
Post by Mirkwood_Lodge on Dec 23, 2003 17:14:28 GMT -5
I haven't decided whether or not to watch it yet. The first two have both left out some of my favorite characters, and what's up with the "shortest character with Aragorn is the comic relief" crap? I'll probably watch the frickin' thing sooner or later, but I'll hate myself for it. By the way, has everyone actually read the (best) books (of all time)?
|
|
|
Post by Tranq on Dec 23, 2003 17:18:41 GMT -5
I haven't decided whether or not to watch it yet. The first two have both left out some of my favorite characters, and what's up with the "shortest character with Aragorn is the comic relief" crap? I'll probably watch the frickin' thing sooner or later, but I'll hate myself for it. By the way, has everyone actually read the (best) books (of all time)? You, my friend, are right. Apparently Peter didn't read them. Or he fell asleep while his mommy read them to him. I still think he should be sent to the electric chair for the crimes that are Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Dec 23, 2003 17:44:14 GMT -5
Well, I fell asleep when my daddy read them to me. But then I went back and reread them multiple times. And for all of his changes, I must respectfully disagree with my colleague Tranq. Most everything (except Lothlorien and the Grey Havens) looked exactly as I had always imagined it. The multiple layers of conflict and characterization are all there (except for Gimli- I agree with the comic relief anger). Overall, I thought Jackson handled the book with tremendous respect and attention to detail. Sure he left people and scenes from the book out, but for crying out loud, he made a movie with 125+ speaking parts that non-book fans can reasonably follow and even be emotionally moved by. Even with 9+ hours, that's amazingly hard to do. And to do it within the spirit of the themes of the books? As a big Tolkien geek, I'm impressed.
|
|
TomServo69
Moderator Emeritus
Gone but not Forgotten
Nothing ever changes........
Posts: 5,467
|
Post by TomServo69 on Dec 23, 2003 17:49:40 GMT -5
I've read the books, more than once. I immensely enjoyed the first two films but, the last one, it just didn't impress me as much as the first two. I mean, am I the only person who wanted to know why the last 30 minutes or so were even there? Or why an hour or so of the film was ROCK CLIMBING? Or why the end of the second book wasn't presented until the MIDDLE of the last movie? I don't know, they were great movies but, there were some errors that I can't overlook that prevent them from being the "classics" that everyone is making them out to be. Just my opinion, Servo
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Dec 23, 2003 18:02:28 GMT -5
In the book, the ring is destroyed a full 100 pages before the end. Then there are 100+ pages of appendices. Jackson actually sped through the ending. The last 30 minutes are there because 1) it's in the book, and 2) it's not supposed to be a happy ending. Everything costs something. It's very much in line with Tolkien's experience in WW1. Even though victory was achieved, he had changed to the point that home was no longer home. If PJ had ended the movie on Mt. Doom or Minas Tirith, it would have missed Tolkien's point completely. The rock climbing is true. But, admit it, you only thought of that because of mst3k. Not that that's a bad thing .
|
|
TomServo69
Moderator Emeritus
Gone but not Forgotten
Nothing ever changes........
Posts: 5,467
|
Post by TomServo69 on Dec 23, 2003 18:16:25 GMT -5
Well, yes, I admit about the rock climbing thing but, even without MST3K, that kinda added an element of unneeded boredom to it that probably would've been noted either way. And yes, I grasped the point of the end, but, as you said, it was sped through so quickly, no one else got the point. Everyone I saw it with was asking me what the point was, and, due to the lack of material he presented, I had a hard time doing it. Don't get me wrong, the movies are great. Just not these epic classics along the lines of 2001 or Ben-Hur that everyones making them out to be.
That's just me,
Servo
|
|
|
Post by Skyroniter on Dec 26, 2003 22:05:32 GMT -5
Saw Return of... today. Enjoyed it so much that I sat glued to my seat for the full 3 1/2 hours or so. Learned a very important lesson: 3 1/2 hour movies + no bathroom breaks + large drink = intense pain at the end of the movie. And as someone who now riffs everything from funerals on up, I never felt the urge to do so during this movie. So it musta been good!
|
|
|
Post by Afgncaap5 on Dec 27, 2003 14:15:47 GMT -5
I watched what shall be referred to as "It" (for brevity's sake, not out of disrespect or anything) on Christmas.
There're a bunch of comments that've been made by both parties that I'd like to respond to, but I'm too sleepy from having stayed up all night playing video games. Pardon me if I unintentionally offend of suddenly cease to be coherent.
As for the CGI monsters....eh. I don't really care. If they'd used a Harry Haussen technique on Shelob, then they'd have even more people complaining about them not trying. Without really thinking about the work involved in filming a monster in that style, the masses would say, "Man, that's awful! With all these dollars in the budget, they couldn't afford to at least make a CGI spider?" Film can be art, but artists need to make money. Appealing to the masses is just one way that an artist can make sure that his or her work will receive an audience large enough to find people who would actually appreciate the real parts to it.
In the case of movies, the stuff that counts is the writing and the acting. I thought the acting was pretty good (I mean, look! We've got actors who are showing emotions!), and I've always been a fan of the writing. I naturally won't know how close the movie is to the writing until I see the alleged extended edition, but I was okay with what was cut from this one.
Such as the ending (SPOILERS AHEAD). I was okay with them including all of that stuff, but they presented about four or five different endings, only one of which was the real end. I can't imagine them trying to include the entire end of the book (not counting appendices) where the hobbits go back to the Shire to find a certain evil wizard and his servant terrorizing the populace. They left out a good hunk of the book there, and that's not even counting the appendices.
All in all, I was impressed with "It", and am considering going back to see it again. I don't think that I quite rate this as highly as other movies, though this is certainly one of the greatest recent movies. "A Beautiful Mind", for instance, is right up there.
Now then, I can't remember a bit of what I've typed just now except that I compared the movie to A Beautiful Mind in terms of general goodness. I'd re-read, but I'm just so tired. I'll edit it later if there are huge glaring typos are accidental expletives or offensive remarks or something.
|
|
|
Post by Ator on Jan 1, 2004 16:42:03 GMT -5
I saw it last night, and I must say that it's one of the best that i've seen in a while. Of course, I don't go to see many movies, but still. The last movie that nearly made me cry was Gladiator, and ROTK almost did it four times (I held it back so as to not be embarrased for crying in a theater). The emotions that I felt almost had me floating out of my seat. Very odd sensation, and I only feel it in the best of movies.
|
|
|
Post by Afgncaap5 on Jan 2, 2004 15:13:10 GMT -5
I'm trying to decide when I should go to see this one again. Maybe tomorrow evening....
|
|