|
Post by Afgncaap5 on Jan 5, 2004 14:59:51 GMT -5
Yeah. I'm happy with the way the movies turned out.
|
|
donmac
Moderator Emeritus
Beedee Beedee Beedee This Sucks!
Posts: 1,290
|
Post by donmac on Jan 5, 2004 23:58:16 GMT -5
I've felt a strong emotion at the end of each LOTR movies. In 'Fellowship', when Sam tells Frodo that he's going with him no matter what. In "Towers', when Sam gives his speech on good and evil (that one speech IMO is the best speech ever given by a character in any movie ever). And then at the end of "Return' when Sam and Frodo think it's the end, and they're sitting on that rock surrounded by lava. The LOTR movies are masterpieces, and all those that don't like them need to look through the slow stuff. And, the first time I saw 'Fellowship of the Ring', I thought it was a boring mess. But the next time I saw it, I payed attention to it harder, and I realized what a great movie it is. Also, to the fans of the book that think Peter Jackson destroyed the series, I mean, come on! These are movies, and you must cut them to reasonable lengths. If you wanted every single element from the book on the screen, it would end up being a crappy 60 hour mini-series staring Alec Baldwin. These movies do get better on repeat viewings. I don't know if it's due to watching these long movies in the comfort of home vs. in much less comfortable theaters, or being more familiar with the changes from Tolkien's book that make the first viewing so much more disappointing, or the improvements in the Extended Editions, or a little of all three - but they do get a lot better the second or third time. As for the disappointment of the adaptation, I think that a 100% faithful version of Tolkien's novel would be very talky and mostly slow-moving and would probably take 6 movies to adapt (one movie for each of the two books that are in each of the three volumes of the LOTR novel). So although I don't agree with a lot of the changes the filmmakers made to Tolkien's story and miss a lot that was lost in the translation to film, I still think the filmmakers did get more of it right than wrong and successfully captured enough of the spirit and message of Tolkien's story to be called a success (...and I don't think the same can be said for those dull animated versions from the late '70s/early '80s).
|
|
Torgo
Moderator Emeritus
-segment with Crow?
Posts: 15,420
|
Post by Torgo on Jan 7, 2004 14:53:58 GMT -5
I thought it was pretty good, but that ending just dragged on and on.
Even my dad left the theater about ten minutes before it was over, and he enjoys the movies waaaaaaaaaaaaaay more than I do.
Still not the best trilogy I've ever seen. I highly doubt any trilogy will touch Back to the Future.
|
|
|
Post by Tranq on Jan 7, 2004 15:08:03 GMT -5
I Still not the best trilogy I've ever seen. I highly doubt any trilogy will touch Back to the Future. I agree that Back to the Future is quite enjoyable,.....wait.....no I don't! The finest, well crafted trilogy to be put to film to date is definatley: (drum roll, pleasde?) Walking Tall - 1973 Walking Tall part II - 1975 Final Chapter: Walking Tall - 1977 However, Bo Svenson was a poor substitute for, he'hemm, Mr. Joe Don Baker. Especially since he filmed HIS version of Walking Tall part I in 1981.
|
|
|
Post by Phantom Engineer on Jan 7, 2004 20:50:21 GMT -5
Are you serious? You're kidding...right? I have to think so.
|
|
|
Post by Tranq on Jan 7, 2004 21:04:37 GMT -5
no I'm not kidding, I'm lying through my teeth!!!
|
|
|
Post by Phantom Engineer on Jan 7, 2004 21:07:25 GMT -5
Good for you Tranq, good for you.
|
|
Torgo
Moderator Emeritus
-segment with Crow?
Posts: 15,420
|
Post by Torgo on Jan 7, 2004 21:33:06 GMT -5
no I'm not kidding, I'm lying through my teeth!!! Thank god. You had us all worried there for a minute. We were just about to commit you.
|
|