LOTR Extended Blu-ray
- Thread starter Guernica
- Start date
danielrbischoff
Rookie
used44 said:
.
Bretimus_v2
So tired.
The books are not mind-obliterating fantastic, most people I know who read them skip large portions due to boring lists and Tolkien getting too in to the minutia of the marvelous world he built. I'm not knocking the books though. They're great. I've read them 4 times in my life and pushed through the Silmarillion once. Tolkien, however, is not a great writer (although it should be said that he probably writes better than you [plural]). He is a great linguist/world-maker. Tolkien also has been known to throw a great game of darts.
The movies were and are amazing, but I always feel like I have to invest more than just time to rewatch them. I enjoyed Fellowship of the Ring the most, even though I was pissed where they decided to end it.
The movies were and are amazing, but I always feel like I have to invest more than just time to rewatch them. I enjoyed Fellowship of the Ring the most, even though I was pissed where they decided to end it.
NickKmet
Regular
I've read all the books several times, and seen all 3 movies in both extended and theatrical (in theaters and at home) several times.
Out of the 3, i think that the Fellowship of the Ring was the best movie. It had the best cast out of the 3, and the compactness of the story really helped the movie. I'd say that I'm most invested in the story when watching Fellowship.
I probably get the most enjoyment out of the the Two Towers though. And honestly, that's mostly due to the battle at Helm's Deep. I mean, come on, is that not one of the best fantasy battles in the history of Hollywood, or what? I think it's the most fun to watch. Also, I'm a music person, and I really enjoyed Howard Shore's score for the second one the most (though number 3 comes in a close second).
Usually when I watch the movies, I do them in order over a short period of time (2-3 days). So, by the time I make it to Return of the King, I'm usually in a "come on, let's get this the fuck overwith" kind of mood. That being said though, I really do feel like Return of the King is bloated. I mean, shit, you've got epic battle number one at Minas Tirith. And then they have to go to the fucking gate. And you've got Shelob and then Gollum at Mt. Doom. I mean, seriously, there's just way too much shit going on for that movie to do in a good way. By the end, it's hard to not be left yelling at the screen "FUCKING CROWN HIM ALREADY!!!!!" Do I think Return of the King is a fitting ending to the series? Yes. It's hard to not end a story as epic as the Lord of the Rings without getting a bit bloated. And if you've read the books, you really understand that. So yeah, it's my least favorite of the 3.
As for the bloating, I thought Peter Jackson did the best he could have done with how he divided up the books and removed certain aspects of the books for the film. As great of a writer as Tolkien was, he did not know how the end The Lord of the Rings. From what I understand, and this could be waaaaaayyyyy wrong, but this was originally a story for his children, and he just kept tacking on shit to the end because they didn't want it to end. (If I'm wrong on that, let me know, i'm just too lazy to look it up). But really, the part where the Hobbits go to the shire and have to kick ass is completely unnecessary, and I'm glad it was left out. If you take the time to read the books, then you might have a little more appreciation for the way Peter Jackson handled things.
and back to my job.
Out of the 3, i think that the Fellowship of the Ring was the best movie. It had the best cast out of the 3, and the compactness of the story really helped the movie. I'd say that I'm most invested in the story when watching Fellowship.
I probably get the most enjoyment out of the the Two Towers though. And honestly, that's mostly due to the battle at Helm's Deep. I mean, come on, is that not one of the best fantasy battles in the history of Hollywood, or what? I think it's the most fun to watch. Also, I'm a music person, and I really enjoyed Howard Shore's score for the second one the most (though number 3 comes in a close second).
Usually when I watch the movies, I do them in order over a short period of time (2-3 days). So, by the time I make it to Return of the King, I'm usually in a "come on, let's get this the fuck overwith" kind of mood. That being said though, I really do feel like Return of the King is bloated. I mean, shit, you've got epic battle number one at Minas Tirith. And then they have to go to the fucking gate. And you've got Shelob and then Gollum at Mt. Doom. I mean, seriously, there's just way too much shit going on for that movie to do in a good way. By the end, it's hard to not be left yelling at the screen "FUCKING CROWN HIM ALREADY!!!!!" Do I think Return of the King is a fitting ending to the series? Yes. It's hard to not end a story as epic as the Lord of the Rings without getting a bit bloated. And if you've read the books, you really understand that. So yeah, it's my least favorite of the 3.
As for the bloating, I thought Peter Jackson did the best he could have done with how he divided up the books and removed certain aspects of the books for the film. As great of a writer as Tolkien was, he did not know how the end The Lord of the Rings. From what I understand, and this could be waaaaaayyyyy wrong, but this was originally a story for his children, and he just kept tacking on shit to the end because they didn't want it to end. (If I'm wrong on that, let me know, i'm just too lazy to look it up). But really, the part where the Hobbits go to the shire and have to kick ass is completely unnecessary, and I'm glad it was left out. If you take the time to read the books, then you might have a little more appreciation for the way Peter Jackson handled things.
and back to my job.
WickedLiquid
Regular
Tolkien isn't the best writer, but he's still better than George Lucas, amirite?
“Anakin! You're breaking my heart!" :roll:
shhhh Bret, i'm trying to start a flame war.
As for The Hobbit I don't know what to believe, there have been more rumors regarding this movie since Sin City 2 (2009 my ass). At first the director was the dude who made Pan's Labyrinth and it was to be released 2010. Now from what I hear, Peter Jackson is doing it and it'll be released in 2 parts in 2012 and 2013.
“Anakin! You're breaking my heart!" :roll:
shhhh Bret, i'm trying to start a flame war.
As for The Hobbit I don't know what to believe, there have been more rumors regarding this movie since Sin City 2 (2009 my ass). At first the director was the dude who made Pan's Labyrinth and it was to be released 2010. Now from what I hear, Peter Jackson is doing it and it'll be released in 2 parts in 2012 and 2013.
Bretimus_v2
So tired.
Remind are they unnecessarily breaking this into two movies for the cash grab?
NickKmet
Regular
Bretimus_v2 said:
That's probably part of it. But knowing Jackson, he isn't going to turn out some piece of trash just for the money. He's known to be a legitimate fan of the books and I think wants to do a good treatment of them. So I guess they're splitting it into two to get a more complete version of the story in? I'm sure the studio sees dollar signs as well, but I don't see why fans can't be happy with getting a more filled out, faithful adaption made at the same time.
Frodo ain't got shit on HP
danielrbischoff
Rookie
Yeah, as much as I hate those kids and all of the people who sit outside the theaters at midnight dressed like fucking stupid wizards, the Harry Potter movies have been SO MUCH more enjoyable than the Lord of the Rings movies.Green_Lantern said:
kingg5 said:
Yeah, he gets pretty violent in the last few books.
I was mainly talking about the books, but most of the movies are pretty good too
Harry Potter is like Lord of the Rings for children and girls instead of nerds.
Similar threads
