Author Topic: Return of the King (Read 2950 times)

Maniac · « **Reply #45 on:** December 20, 2003, 06:48:57 PM »

Going too see it tomorrow, have only read the first two books so i dont know how it ends

After this one theres no good movies to look forward for... The new starwars trilogy is prulely crapola.... so what do you look forward to now movie wise????

Any word on The Hitch hikers guide to the galaxy making the big screen?

Maniac · « **Reply #46 on:** December 21, 2003, 05:24:53 PM »

It was very good, the ending was 20 mins too long tough...

mold · « **Reply #47 on:** December 21, 2003, 07:34:03 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Maniac
Any word on The Hitch hikers guide to the galaxy making the big screen?

LOL. Don't wish for too much. There are certain things whose beauty is in their written form.

I have a feeling that a HHG movie would kinda be a disaster.

RightF00T · « **Reply #48 on:** December 21, 2003, 09:44:15 PM »

Add 1980-esque aura, bad acting, and horrible special effects and you have the HHG movie.

SLO · « **Reply #49 on:** December 22, 2003, 08:04:12 AM »

the Witch King vs. Gandalf shoulda happened just like in the book.....then the Horns of Rohan sound on Pelennor Field.

in the movie they make Gandalf look like he's scared of the Witch King....far from it in the Book.

when the battering ram (wolf's head...sauron was also known to take shape as a wolf) busts the doors....its not Trolls we suppose to see....But the Witch King vs. Gandalf....that would of been much better.

beacon fires....waste of time

Merry hits the Witch King with an old Elvish blade found in Tom Bombadils Territory....we haven't seen that in the movie....He hits
the Witch right behind the knee...thats why he falters.....but merry is hurting at the same time...its the fact that his blade is Elvish that saves him.....NO MAN MAY KILL THE KING OF THE NAZGUL....doesn't say anywhere a women can't.

I think jackson fugged up royally when it comes to the character interaction....but he did well for the battle scenes.

thats why the book is good....it had both.

Maniac · « **Reply #50 on:** December 22, 2003, 08:16:54 AM »

Second and third movies aint bad but the first one was superb...

The travel thru Moria had the Exact feel to it as in the book... 2nd and third lost a bit of "feel" dunno if that is the right word hehe

And the ending of part 3 was about 15 - 20 mins too long, was itching in my seat hoping it would end like 4 times...

SLO · « **Reply #51 on:** December 22, 2003, 08:40:49 AM »

agree that the 1st movie was the closes to the book.....

what pissed me off about the 1st is they left Tom Bombadil out of it.....would of been funny seein Ol' Tom put on the ring and nothing happens.....he just laughs:D

but it still was the best....

2nd an 3rd where action flicks...nothing to do with the book.

and I understand perfectly when you say FEEL....cause I didn't FEEL it was anywhere close to what J.R.R Tolkien wanted people to feel....it took him over 10 years to write that book...and the character interactions are pivatol to the story

Sandman · « **Reply #52 on:** December 22, 2003, 12:48:08 PM »

The Oliphants were incredible.

The army of the dead was better than I could have imagined.

Enjoyed the movie... was a little disappointed about Minas Tirith. It looked good, but it had no life to it. The book spent quite a bit of time explaining what it was like to be a citizen of Gondor. The movie treated them all like cannon fodder.

I was surprised to see Saruman simply cast aside. Compared to the book, in the first two editions, his role was elevated.

Arwen? Sorry Pete, I like Liv Tyler as much as the next guy, but this was a bit much.

Cirith Ungol? Jackson could have spent less time on the beacon lighting and made this more than an afterthought.

Shelob? Visually stunning, but absolutely no sense at all that she was sentient.

Last, I knew that Sharkey wasn't going to make it to the movie... still, that's always been one of my favorite parts of the book.

slimm50 · « **Reply #53 on:** December 22, 2003, 12:54:24 PM »

Sandyman, I wasn't nearly as critical as you abou tthe movie: I thought it was about as good as anyone else could have done, and better than most. But I would love to have seen the ending where the Hobbits returned to the Shire and kicked ass, as they did in the book. That would have been worth about 30 minutes all by itself.

Sandman · « **Reply #54 on:** December 22, 2003, 12:58:57 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by slimm50
Sandyman, I wasn't nearly as critical as you abou tthe movie: I thought it was about as good as anyone else could have done, and better than most. But I would love to have seen the ending where the Hobbits returned to the Shire and kicked ass, as they did in the book. That would have been worth about 30 minutes all by itself.

Don't get me wrong... when the super-special-all-inclusive-limited-edition-everything-you-ever-wanted-to-know-about-LOTR DVD box set comes out, I'm buying it.

midnight Target · « **Reply #55 on:** December 22, 2003, 01:00:53 PM »

I'm betting the "scouring of the Shire" will be on the extended version. Remember the vision Frodo had in the mirror of Galadriel? That was the Shire burning... which means it was filmed.

slimm50 · « **Reply #56 on:** December 22, 2003, 01:17:51 PM »

Ooooooohhhhh....aaaahhhhh.... .good point. The extended version, acording to my 16 yr old son, who knows all and can't be told anything, will be 5-5.5 hrs long.

I'm gettin it when it comes out.

Mini D · « **Reply #57 on:** December 22, 2003, 01:22:53 PM »

I think the director got a little carried away with ROTK. Way too many slow motion linger on people scenes. Too much panning in and out from the spectacular views and simply too much overdramatization when it wasn't necessary.

A good flick... but about 30 minutes longer than it needed to be. I'll look forward to the extended version, but really wish they'd shrink the original first.

MiniD

narsus · « **Reply #58 on:** December 22, 2003, 02:16:29 PM »

felt like a 5 minute movie to me never noticed the time go by, even at a midnight showing.

It was well done, not perfect, but as someone else said better than many would have done. Sauramon (sp?) will be on the DVD next year so I am not concerned.

As far as the Liv Tyler character, shouldn't have been in the movies...but the air time involving her is only about 20min split up between 9 hours of movies so I can deal with it.

Ping · « **Reply #59 on:** December 22, 2003, 03:31:07 PM »

Slo:
Have to agree with you whole heartedly on your comments.