diskobolus

Return of the King FILM Discusison

Recommended Posts

I saw Return of the King last night. The first viewing didn't really show a great deal of highly listenable music cut from OST, but has made what was released even more beautiful. The End of all Things is now the most gorgeous track.

As for the film itself, it is one of the best films of all time. I can count on one hand the number of film moments that have brought tears to my eyes - Yoda's death in ROTJ, the reunion in A.I., and Schindler's departure. Return of the King did it three times.

It takes over physically and emotionally and mentally. There just is no other way to describe it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hardly ever cry in films. I get a lump in my throat and prickly eyes, yes, but I don't think I've ever really cried. Not on Schindler's List, not on Bambi.

I'm looking forward to Return of the King very much, because I expect it to be a cinematic experience that will have profound impact. I'm going to be watching the three films back-to-back on the night of December 16 here in the local theatre, and if RotK is really going to be such an amazingly emotional film like everyone says it is, it'll be just an awesome experience.

- Marc, who can't wait.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[OT] Field of Dreams makes me cry every time.

Back on topic, I hope that ROTK is as everything everyone has made it out to be. It comes out on my birthday, so that would be a perfect present to myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awww man! Diskobolos is one lucky bastard! :baaa:

I gotta get myself in on one of these advanced screenings. They are having em in NY alot.

OH well .....

nice work buddy! Glad ya enjoyed it! :thumbup:

Last movie I saw that made me cry was Bicentennial Man

perhaps I shouldn't have said that

No ......... DEFINATELY SHOULD HAVE NOT SAID THAT! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[OT] Field of Dreams makes me cry every time.  

I saw that movie for the first time recently, I was surprised by how good it was.

QuestionMarkMan wrote:

Last movie I saw that made me cry was Bicentennial Man  

perhaps I shouldn't have said that

No ......... DEFINATELY SHOULD HAVE NOT SAID THAT!  

That was when it was out in the theaters, looooooong time ago, I went to it thinking it'd be more of a comedy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BTW disk how did you get to see it early? You never told us exactly how you scored a early viewing.

Oh, I write film reviews for my college paper.

I really hope everyone else gets to experience ROTK in the same way I did. As Peter Jackson put it, "it's an extremely affecting experience."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I havn't ever cried in a movie in my memory. Schindler's List came close, but i didn't drop a tear. I hope Return of the King can make me cry. I've heard people say that if you're a guy and you wanna keep your pride, you shouldn't go with your girlfriend because you might be embarrassed. I'm single at the moment so it doesn't matter for me, i wanna see if it can make me blubber into my popcorn. I am dying to see this movie.

Diskobolus, do you reckon that you post a none spoiler review of the film? I am trying so desperately to stay away from spoilers, but i would love to hear you elaborate on your opinions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you're a guy and you wanna keep your pride, you shouldn't go with your girlfriend because you might be embarrassed.

Aaaaw...She cant be that ugly surely?. :music:

Melange - Knows what you were saying, but just felt a bit comical tonight. :music:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is now designated the Official Discussion Thread for The Return of the King and other Lord of the Rings discussions. Thank you for your consideration in this matter.

Neil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BTW disk how did you get to see it early? You never told us exactly how you scored a early viewing.

Oh, I write film reviews for my college paper.

I really hope everyone else gets to experience ROTK in the same way I did. As Peter Jackson put it, "it's an extremely affecting experience."

Nice of them to let a College paper guy see the film. Uusually they only let major newspaper critics get advanced screenings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hey, I made a sticky about the Harry Potter Book so that the rest of you wouldn't be flooded with HP threads, this is a great idea, and I applaud Neil for doing so. Besides it gives all you LOTR fans your own little community, you can dress up, wear your ears, speak elvish, and just hang out the total Lotr geekyness in yourselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Googlisms. A search on Mr Frodo.

mr frodo is alright i would never forgive myself if he is hurt

mr frodo is not going anywhere without me

mr frodo is so brave

mr frodo is fine

mr frodo is there

mr frodo is pregnant

mr frodo is going to save it i'm just going to tag along and carry his bags for him

mr frodo is still alive and all that

mr frodo is finally on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wrote something really shitty up above before, and I erased it, because it can only be interpreted to be aimed at one individual, and that would be mean. Even though I hardly know the guy, I'd like to consider Neil a friend, even though we only talk online sporadically, he likes the other Pennsylvania NFL team (the one that can't make early golf reservations), and he doesn't like Lord of the Rings....hehe.......no one's perfect.

Eh, if we have to limit all our TLOTR talk to one or two "official" threads, then that's ok, I guess. It's not like we have to stop talking about it altogether. I mean, a John Williams MB ("emm bee") that can talk about John Williams AND ONLY John Williams (and his related stuff, of course) would be pretty dull and depressing....at the same token, a MB that talks about everything and anything on a whim loses direction and coherence, and thus loses a sense of community strength. Someone tried to make an MB that could talk about anything and everything, even the dreaded politics and religion, and, well, I haven't been there in months, and I don't think it's got any more posts now than it did then.

If it's to be, it's to be. I mean, last year, all the Harry Potter posts were limited to one sticky, and this was good. I don't like Harry Potter, I can't stand it, I have no desire to read any of the books, or see any of the movies, or listen to any of the scores. I don't care if it's Williams; I don't make an effort to listen to or like every single Williams score simply for the sake of listening and liking every Williams score, thus explaining why I will never watch or listen to AI or any Harry Potter movie, and really don't want to sit throught Schindler's List; I'm a picky Williams listener, there's a lot of Horner, Goldsmith, and, ahem, SHORE, that I'd rather listen to before a lot of JW's. I don't care how well done Harry Potter is, I don't care how many great British actors are in it. I think it's a cheap knock-off of The Lord of the Rings, and it makes my stomach turn to think about Harry Potter. Hell, the name "Harry Potter" came from some Goblin movie back in 1986. Instead of JK Rowling suing some knockoff Russian book, she should be sued by that forgotten moviemaker.

But this isn't a HP bashing thread, it's a TLOTR thread. I'm just relating my dislike of HP to the dislike of TLOTR by everyone who dislikes it. And if we can all get along, and have our stickies up above to keep everyone happy (I swear, back in the summer, it would've been convenient to have some Matrix or Hulk stickies; they're on my to watch list, the second and third Matrixes, they are, but I'm in no hurry; I feel like I've watched them from all the stuff I've read here :mrgreen: ), then that's what this site is all about. So yay for Neil for conglomeratizing (is that a word? *shrug*) all the Tolkienophytes together to make everybody happy.

yay Neil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So now I can talk about TLOTR all I want here, and no one can complain.

Cool.

Well, diskobulus, you're one lucky stiff for seeing ROTK ahead of everyone else. My sister's in a concert on Wednesday, so I can't see it then, and if it's not Friday, it'll probably be NEXT weekend, after Christmas. Oh well, that'll give me time to finish The Silmarillion so I can tear back into the trilogy. I know that some people are uncomfortable about the word "trilogy" when talking about The Lord of the Rings, since it's not really a trilogy by design, but hey, anything that's cut into three parts can be defined as a trilogy. Back to the Future makes one coherent, complete movie, and no one barfs when it's called a trilogy, so we'll call TLOTR a trilogy. If ten hours were shown to you en masse in the theatre, I know your butt and bladder would be hoping that it's a trilogy, so you can get up and walk around, rather than be stuck in your chair for ten hours.

Ahem.

Diskobulus, I have a wish list, about what I want to see in this movie. And if my wish list isn't at least 75% satisified, this movie's really gonna tick me off. Because I really expect The Return of the King to disappoint. I don't know if I'll be crying tears of joy, or tears of bitter disappointment. It was only after watching the Extended Edition of The Two Towers that I felt that justice was served to that film, and even then it's got sketchy parts, like how the Ents finally go to war and, for crying out loud, OSGILIATH!!

But at any rate, (and if you haven't read the books, don't read beyond; GO READ THE BOOK!)

I'd make it white, but it's a quick reply, and I'm lazy.....eh, I made it white anyways

PRE-SPOILERS:

1 Saruman and Pippin at Isengard, Pippin looking into the palantir....he HAS TO, because even though Frodo showed the Ring to a Nazgul at Osgiliath (tsk tsk tsk), Pippin has to look into the palantir to make Sauron think the Ring is at Isengard, and not on his doorstep, since he knows it's carried by a hobbit, from the words of Saruman and Gollum, but he doesn't know there are four hobbits on the playing field, not one, and thus not go looking for it until too late; if PJ skips this, he's dumb, and the story falls apart, and I'll leave right then and there.....and the final expulsion of Saruman and Grima; it's really not key to the story that Saruman in the movie be known as Saruman of Many Colors, but it would be nice to see him at least on the way to the Shire, even if the Scouring is not to be filmed, and just plain ignored, or skipped ahead over; finally, will we see you know who kill you know who

2 from the trailer, I know that Eowyn and Merry go to battle, but please tell me that it's they that do the killing of the big thing, and not, say, giving Arwen's character more stuff to do

3 in the EE of TTT, we see, first of all, Denethor, plus how he knows that Elrond has called a meeting, and he suspects the Ring has been found...did Elrond send runners, or are we going to see that Denethor does in fact also have a palantir, which is what's driving him mad?

4 let me just say this, the Ring is destroyed; you don't build up a three film, ten hour project, to destroy a tiny Ring, AND NOT DESTROY IT!!!...that's like touting Rocky II as the rematch, and having Rocky lose again...but right before it is cast into Sammrath Maur, will we see Sauron go frikking nuts? this was a part of the book that brought tears of joy to my eyes, when Frodo puts it on and Sauron realizes that the Ring is NOT at Isengard, but at Oroduin (Mt Doom), and Sauron realizes he's screwed.....it'd be nice, by then, to see Sauron in physical form, with one finger missing, as he should really be, instead of a flaming eyeball.....how scary.

5 do Eowyn and Faramir actually meet and fall in love, like they should? and how much help will Merry and Pippin be in their respective countries of Rohan and Gondor? or is this just another Bloom/Mortensen/Tyler/Wood movie?

6 maybe, if they haven't already, they'll mention the Kingdom of Arnor as well, instead of just assuming the throne of Gondor?

I do cry in a lot of movies, both at happy and sad times. I'm not ashamed to admit it. I cried the first time I saw The Empire Strikes Back, a year after I saw The Phantom Menace, when Vader said I am your Father. It finally hit home, that little innocent wooden Jake Lloyd was this dark menacing Vader. I cry every time Spock dies, and Data, too. My eyes well up when Geordi la Forge and Ensign Ro Laren "come back to life" in TNG's "The Next Phase." I'd cry if you made me watch Harry Potter....I hope that Return of the King makes me cry, and for all the right reasons....I don't want to wait a bloody year for The Extended Edition to fix mistakes again. It's bad enough having to wait for the score's box set and companion book.

K, I'm done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if this site was ever pointed to, or how well-known it is, but I found it handy the other day:

The Encyclopedia of Arda

http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/

It's still a work in progress as far as updating is concerned, but it attempts to be a complete encylopedia of Tolkien's world. Every character, race, event, location, with some maps, and just a lot of very interesting information about TLOTR, The Hobbit, The Silmarillion, and everything else and in between. It's helped clear up some cloudy issues in TS, and it was interesting to see that Six of the Seven Rings to the Dwarves and Nine to Men were given by Sauron. Tolkien really wrote such a complete and comprehensive history to his world, of which Middle-Earth is but one part of Arda, that The Lord of the Rings isn't mere fantasy fiction, it's history. It's a complete historical account of a world changing event; the fact that it's a made up history is beside the point. And this online encyclopedia has it all.

The project I was working on pertains to a computer game, Sid Meier's Civilization III. I downloaded a forty-megabyte modpack from Apolyton's Civilization III message board site, http://www.apolyton.net/ (it's somewhere in there), and though it's good, it's basically a work in progress. And it comes with a blank ocean map, which means that each game has to generate its own random map. I wanted to play in Middle Earth, so I imported someone else's ME map and tweaked it a little, and put each civilization in its own accurate starting location, like the Sindar, Noldor, Beornings, Corsairs, Dorwinrim, Mordor, Hobbits, Dwarves, Dunedain, Rohirrim, Woses, Silvan, Haradrim, Easterlings, Dunlendings...I think that's all of them. I don't know if they technically want stuff like that edited, but it's for my own personal purposes as far as gaming is concerned. The technical tree needs tweaked, since Hobbits shouldn't be able to build railroads, and even having the Hobbits be so expansionist and warlike is WRONG, and the Barbarians should be a mix of men and orcs, not just men. But it is fun, even though it's REALLY crowded around the Gap of Rohan, with so many civs vying for Gondor and Mordor and the land to the sea. Just wanted to pass that along, and I suppose that I should stop now, since my posts occupy a lot of screen space. I tried playing the Civ2 scenario of The War of the Ring, but it was really hard; I just want to be able to build and play in a blank ME. If anyone does download that, let me know, and maybe I can send what I tweaked to you. And if you're the originator of the TLOTR mod, and want me to stop editing it or making it known, I can stop. No one's in this for money, just fun, and being as true to Tolkien's work as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It rocked.

But still, the one thing that bothered me was that there was so much missing. No voice of Saruman, no Houses of Healing, no Mouth of Sauron. No explanation is given for Denethor's madness (caused by a Palantír, as readers of the book know), Éowyn and Faramir's relation doesn't even come into the movie, you just see them together at Aragorn's coronation, looking very happy.

Pity that so much was cut out. I can't remember where I read it, but one reviewer said that RotK was much like a three-and-a-half hour trailer for the Extended Edition. Very true. But you cannot deny that what is actually there is awesome, and a great conclusion for what is undeniable a pillar in motion picture history, and an undertaking that will hold lonely heights on all fronts for many years.

- Marc, who came back from the local LotR marathon just over 3.5 hours ago, and will leave for school in a few.

:mrgreen: Howard Shore - The White Tree from The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (OST)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Grr. The lack of Eowyn and Faramir's romance, and Denethor's palantir, pains me greatly.

Methinks, however, that what started out as a great idea may have turned into a crutch: the Extended Edition. With TFOTR, the cinematic version was spectacular, and left very little important information from the books out...once you get past Tom Bombadil and other parts that would've made getting from the Shire to Rivendell take two hours, then getting to Amon Hen seem like a breeze, when it's actually a much, much greater distance. The Extended Edition of that film merely put more icing on a very hefty slice of cake, it just made an already great movie that much greater with more character sequences, elaborations, prolouge, and Galadriel's gift, not to mention the Ash nazg durbatuluk part at the Council.

However, with TTT, we got a cinematic version that left first-time-initiates to the story totally dazzled, but veterans of the books moderately to severely disturbed at how much of the second volume (third and fourth books) was changed, or totally ignored, or transformed from one brief mention to a blown-out sequence (Osgiliath, Theoden's exorcism, and warg riders). The Battle of the Hornbug was left totally without a proper conclusion, the Ents serve practically no purpose other than to bash Isengard (to what end remains to be seen), and Faramir's made into the same temptable man as his late brother (which, however, was explained to my great 95% satisfaction in the Extended Edition). BUT, with said Extended Edition of TTT, we see much that doesn't simply add character sequences to the film, it actually fills in some rather large holes.....we now see what happens to the remaining orcs at Helm's Deep. The Erkenbrand-turned-Eomer&Gandalf cavalry rescue doesn't clean them up, the Ents of Fangorn (Huorns, I take it) do...we see that Aragorn isn't the 30-something man he appears to be, he really is a Dunedain, and that means he's really old, 87 of the 210 or so he'll live to be. Yes, TTT EE does add the same veins of humor and fluff that TFOTR EE did....Saruman's storeroom in TTT as compared to Aragorn's song of Beren and Luthien in TFOTR, but what stands out is how it fixes a flawed movie and saves it.

Based on my own early fears, which won't be tested one way or the other until FRIDAY when I see TROTK, and the word of Mr. Breathmask (btw, thanks for the idea of modifying the avatar for the season!), I believe that TROTK (yes, for some strange reason, I'm including the "The" in that abbreviation; if we have FOTR and ROTK, we have to have TT instead of TTT, and TT could be Tiny Tim, for cryin out loud)......is simply going to be another flawed version of a Tolkien book. PJ feels content to release a movie that wraps up about 75% of the story in the theatres, and he's saving the 110% version for the EE DVD a year from now. If this version is indeed "a 3.5 hour trailer for the EE," then that's just the way it is. Besides, I read an interview from Christopher Lee saying that he had a really huge scene for this movie that would only be in the Extended Edition; whether that's his expulsion from Isengard scene, or his end at Grima's hand scene, only those who have seen it and know what's missing can say. On the other hand, since those who haven't seen the EE of TTT have not yet met Denethor in Faramir's double flashback, that could explain the lack of his palantir as seen in this cut of the film.

But the bottom line is, PJ is relying on the EE to cover his hide with the missing pieces of the puzzle. Those who haven't read the books will be completely fooled, and they'll be happy when the credits roll, but those who have will still be missing some important sequences. Furthermore, there's a whole audience who will never watch the EE versions of the film, because they'll gobble up the first VHS/DVD and not see the point for more. Grr. I ramble way too much about little fears like this, but it irks me. I CAN'T WAIT A YEAR FOR THE EE OF TROTK!!!

~

And yet, I shouldn't complain. At least PJ is giving us a quality work, unlike another director who is trying to give us a different trilogy, and finding that the shoes he created 20 years ago are way too big for him to even attempt to fill now. :mrgreen:

PJ's to do list:

2003, TROTK

2004,5?, King Kong and TROTK EE

2006-7?....The Hobbit??

:P :cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No voice of Saruman, no Houses of Healing, no Mouth of Sauron. No explanation is given for Denethor's madness (caused by a Palantír, as readers of the book know), Éowyn and Faramir's relation doesn't even come into the movie, you just see them together at Aragorn's coronation, looking very happy.

From what I've heard, Saruman, Mouth and the Houses of Healing were all filmed, so I hope they'll be in the EE.

And I do hope there will be more Denethor stuff, including the Palantir as well. I really didn't like how they reduced him from a madly desparate stewart into a pure idiot.

As I've said elsewhere, I think the EE will improve the movie about as much as that of TTT did...perhaps even more.

Marian - who can't wait for it. ;)

:mrgreen: ROTK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad I did Trilogy Tuesday, not just because I love the films, but because ROTK seems like a straight continuation of TTT, far more than TTT was to FOTR. If you haven't seen it yet, I STRONGLY recommend viewing the TTT:EE directly before hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know all of that was filmed, that's why it bothered me so much. The way it was cut out just left a lot of gaps in the story.

Do you realise how much stick Jackson would get for lengthening that film any longer?

I must admit though, it was well worth the sore-arse factor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw the movie yesterday. And, much like its predecessors, I didn't like it. Well, not that I don't like it - I just don't connect with it. I just couldn't care less about Aragorn's reign, Faramir's "death", Eowyn's attraction to pretty much any man on horses, or Merry's sickness after killing that Nazgul (was that a Nazgul?)

(There's a conclusion at the end of this review, in case you want to skip the long, whining parragraphs).

I haven't read the books, nor do I plan to. I just don't like the LOTR story. Well, not the story (since I like Star Wars and it's basically the same concept), but the setting. I don't like fantasy, medieval books with all those weird names and people calculating distances in days, weeks, depending on what their horse will do. I just don't.

So when I see the three movies, I'm just seeing the movies. Not comparing them to a book or anything. The movies per se, on their own, as they are. And while the first two had some little, personal elements that I like, all these elements are cut off in the third movie. There's just no more character development, no more dialogue (other than characters shouting out loud to their troops). It's just hurrying one scene to another (the first hour is unbearable) to get big shots of huge armies crossing the Middle Earth, while the music goes all bombastic and loud.

Then the battle begins. Well, that's what I waited and hour and a half for. But it turns out that the only chracters I care about, the Fellowship of the Ring (Frodo, Sam, Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli - I don't count Merry and Pippin, or Gandalf, as he is a new character now that he is White) remain offscreen for a big portion of the story. And when get all that Faramir's-supposed-death-resurrecting-in-the-last-minute (everything in this movie happens in the last minute), all that Theoden-dying. . .And the real characters are nowhere to be seen. So for a big hour things get deadly dull (except when we cut to the Frodo/Sam/Gollum scenes, which are all character development in themselves), until Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli kick back into action with all those ghosts. But alas, just then the battle is over. Three minutes of more, quick dialogue, and back we are to another battle - the Mordor one. Which to me just feels like a rushed scene to get the Hollywood ending going.

One thing I also noticed, at the beginning and then at the end, was... the cheesiness. Some early scenes are so cheesy, like the final beat when Gandalf interrogates Pippin about what he told Saruman with the ball. There's a big music build-up, a long beat and then we cut to next scene, where Gandalf says: "The hobbit didn't say anything". Why then build up the suspense?! In that same scene Gandalf says something like: "I'll go to Minas Tirith. But I will not go alone." End of scene. I guess this works better on the books, but on the movie it just feels, well, cheesy. The lighting of the torchese to warn Rohan that Gondor is into war, was also excessive.

There's another BIG cheesy scene which actually made me blush. The going-back-home part, when Frodo wakes up and sees Gandalf laughing his butt off. Well, no wonder, just listen to Frodo: "GAAAN-DALF". What, did the adventure make him a retard? The rest of the scene is a sepia, slo-mo hugging of Frodo as characters walk into Frodo's bedroom. Who, on their senses, would agree to shoot something like that? I guess the same people who agreed to needlessly shoot Sam's wedding. Or the really last scene when Sam walks into his house, shuts the door and we fade out. The ship going into the west was a GREAT ending, but nooo. We had to see Sam shutting his door. It was key to the story, you see.

There's more. Peter Jackson's directing has seemed to have changed in this movie - or maybe I changed since I saw TTT last year. This time his camera angles annoyed me, with all those quick-cutting shots to just show a character say a line. And then his CGI-ed camera moves from a characters' face to a general shot of a battle. One thing remains admirable, though, and that's the use of special effects. Not overused. Not underused. Just used.

The music started good, and was a real aid for me to follow the story. I know the themes, but not the names. So when a theme would kick in, I'd know what they are talking about, and it was a true help. Pity it just got theme-less an hour into the movie. I still liked the chorus Fellowship rendition.

Oh, the acting remains superb. No arguing that.

Conclusion? This movie is going to appeal to a lot of people. It doesn't have something the other movies have, which in my case made me dislike it. But I suppose it was something true LOTR fans didn't like, and so they love this movie. It simply was too epic for me, I much preferred the story when it was small and just about a hobbit carrying a piece of jewelry through a forest. Silly me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I saw the movie yesterday. And, much like its predecessors, I didn't like it. Well, not that I don't like it - I just don't connect with it. I just couldn't care less about Aragorn's reign, Faramir's "death", Eowyn's attraction to pretty much any man on horses, or Merry's sickness after killing that Nazgul (was that a Nazgul?)

(There's a conclusion at the end of this review, in case you want to skip the long, whining parragraphs).

I haven't read the books, nor do I plan to. I just don't like the LOTR story. Well, not the story (since I like Star Wars and it's basically the same concept), but the setting. I don't like fantasy, medieval books with all those weird names and people calculating distances in days, weeks, depending on what their horse will do. I just don't.

Ender, I read a lot of reviews of Return of the King yesterday (because I couldn't wait to go see it for meself). You seem to be saying what a lot of other reviews are saying, directly or indirectly, and that is "I already decided that I wasn't going to like it before I even saw it." I don't mean to say that your opinion isn't valid but some of the complaints you make are things that are unavoidable to Jackson (or anyone) adapting these Tolkien books.

It seems Jackson is criticized whether he stays true to the books or not. You are complaining that Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas are absent for much of the action. Chalk that one up to Tolkien. In the book, Aragorn and company are not heard from at all once they enter the cave. Jackson actually added the scene where they convince the ghost army to join them.

I don't think the extendeds are a crutch at all. Everything in the plot of the film made sense as it unfolded. Why shouldn't Denethor go mad, Aragorn is coming to claim HIS throne, his city is being invaded, hope is lost and both of his sons are dead. Thats reason enough for me...

I also don't understand your argument about the cheesiness. It bothers me that audiences today are SO cynical and that any portrayal of emotion is viewed with sarcasm and generates laughter. Frodo wakes up and sees everyone he that either (a) he thought would never see again or (B) thought were dead. How is this cheesy that everyone in that room would be react the way they did? Let your guard down a little and you might be moved by moments like these.

I have read the books, and I don't think any two filmmakers could possibly interpret them the same way and make the same set of films. No matter how hard it is to adapt these books and no matter what minor complaints I have about this or that characters scene getting cut or this or that scene being changed from the book, this is a trilogy that I am glad made it from book to screen and I don't think anyone could have made it better than Jackson.

If you don't like fantasy and you don't like wizards, halflings, guys on horses giving speeches and fighting goblins then why did you buy your ticket, why did you waste three hours? It seems to me you already knew you weren't going to like it.

Jeff - who does have some minor complaints, most notably the changes in Shelob's Lair, but loves it just the same and will see it 5 or so more times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know all of that was filmed, that's why it bothered me so much. The way it was cut out just left a lot of gaps in the story.

Do you realise how much stick Jackson would get for lengthening that film any longer?

I must admit though, it was well worth the sore-arse factor.

Yes I do. I know this was cut for time reasons, and the film is plenty long as it is, but I still think it's a shame we didn't get to see it (yet).

As for that last scene, I like that Jackson put it in there, because it's really true to the end of the book, but he could have used that screentime for something else I think. Plus, and this is just a personal nitpick of me, I would have had it as it is literally in the book, inside with Sam sitting down heaving his kids onto his lap, because to me that's really an iconic moment, even though it doesn't really have anything to do with the story. It's just a scene like, "okay, here we go. What next?" And then it's finished. I liked that in the book. But that's just a small thing, and maybe just nagging from my part.

I also think this film is definitely the cheesiest of the three, especially because of that scene Ender already mentioned. It just drags. That shot in FotR where Merry and Pippin meet up with Frodo in Rivendell and Frodo sees Bilbo was borderline, because it wasn't that long, but this one is overdone.

- Marc, who still loves this film anyhow. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, as I said, I haven't read the books. I just see the movies, so I don't know who to direct my complaints to - Tolkien or Jackson. I don't frankly care, I just point them out.

About my deciding whether I'll like the movie or not before I saw it, I tried to have an open mind. I had a closed one when I saw TTT and I wound up liking it more than I thought (not too much, though), so I truly didn't know what to expect from this one. I couldn't have decided even if I wanted to.

About the cheesiness, I just wanted to add that, as I said, I don't feel connected to the characters. I see the movie fron a distant point of view, so I couldn't get through the emotional scenes.

Just some minor details. Anything beyond that, is a plain difference of opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maestro: The book does have the "convincing of the dead" bit, though there it's not in the Dwimmoberg but at the Stone of Erech.

The ship going into the west was a GREAT ending, but nooo. We had to see Sam shutting his door. It was key to the story, you see.

Well...yes, it was the key.

Marian - :P

:) ROTK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well... well...

I saw the movie yesterday and:

Nice movie, the score even seemed to have better chorus i liked the company theme with it (neverthe lees i think that anyone who hears the complete score of the trilogy one after another, has to end crazy. Few themes fro three movies and hardly any orchestrations :P ). I liked Gollum's improvement (i thought his face had changed seeing the posters) but he still did not interact well enough. I liked The Flying Nazgul.

There were two scenes that let me down though ;) I had chills when i saw Gandlaf in Shadofax lighting his staff but the darn scene just lasted seconds! Same happened with the arrival of the Great eagles (i love raptors :) ) another short and rushed scene. The end was too scene.scene.scene...and Poor Chistopher Lee does not appear in the movie!

Well now lets get with CGI :sigh:

The oliphaunts were improved, but i wonder if PJ has seen elephants running. They do not make big strides and anyway giant elephants would not go that fast.

I think Shelob is the only 'animal' they got the movement totally well, but i dont remember if it had a sting, but i think she should not have two pairs of quelifers (mandibles) where is where spiders have its venom.

If anyone thinks that the inclusion of the videogame 'Legolas vs Oliphaunt' is amazing regarding CGI (the scene is cool), well dont say AOC is a cartoon movie, please.

I thing the undead are a little obsolete for 2003-4. They could have been like in Pirattes of the caribean (there are not many close ups anyway and mainly from the chief) And i thought they were going to be a match for Pirattes...

The armies were also better, and the horses are very good when you see them far off. The close ups are very ugly (as it was in TTT)

I still think that the overuse of the hue filters makes the special effect look worse that it really is.

As an adaptation... it is not worse that TTT... I think the better adaptation is FOTR since they just left out scenes. in TTT and ROTK they changed the story while erasing things.

I have a question, Gandalf just takes the steward role. Isnt that some kind of guide/advice? I think he got his hands too much to have his excuse of not using magic... I think he could have used just a little as he does in the videogame.

Luke, puzzled by ROTK being the only movie (as far as im concerned) to have the ben burt's trademark sound twice...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maestro: The book does have the "convincing of the dead" bit, though there it's not in the Dwimmoberg but at the Stone of Erech.

D'OH! Really? I could have sworn that wasn't in the book... I only read it once, right after I saw TTT about a year ago. I love the ending with Sam and family going in their hobbit hole and closing the door. Sam is the real hero of ROTK! I just wish they had mentioned that Sam names his son Frodo.

Most of the reviews I read said that the ending(s) were too long. I didn't think so, when Sam shut his door I was expecting more endings. I'm hoping there will be more endings on the extended DVD. I'd like to see an ending where Faramir and Eowyn hook up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Luke, puzzled by ROTK being the only movie (as far as im concerned) to have the ben burt's trademark sound twice...

Temple of Doom has it trice.

1) One of the band members in Club Obi-Wan when Indy is thrown into them.

2) One of Lao's henchmen getting shot in the car chase.

3) One of the Kali dudes dropping into the gorge from the hanging bridge.

I didn't feel like picking apart the CGI. Gollum has improved though. I really like his movements and his skin, but I thought the Gollum/invisible Frodo fight looked a bit silly. I also thought Gollum sinking into the lava looked weird, because it looked like he was sinking into water. He should have gone up in flames the moment he hit the surface.

- Marc, who just watched Raiders of the Lost Ark in glorious widescreen. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well... well...

If anyone thinks that the inclusion of the videogame 'Legolas vs Oliphaunt' is amazing regarding CGI (the scene is cool), well dont say AOC is a cartoon movie, please.

I was just amazed they found a way for Legolas to be even more of a bad*ss than in the first two.

Two things that puzzle me now are:

1) Eowyn versus the witchking. Why was Gandalf so worried about him if all it look was stabbing him in the face?

2) At the end TTT, Faramir's lieutenant warns that his "life will be forfeit" if he lets Frodo and Sam go. Is there a deleted scene explaining this? Or did they figure most people wouldn't remember that line?

Are there some Tolkien experts out there who can explain those to me?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the book, it is law that anyone who passes the borders of Ithilien must be shot and killed. Faramir allows the Walkers to continue into Mordor, ignoring the law of Minas Tirith. In the book, he never takes Sam, Gollum and Frodo to Osgiliath, but decides himself that he should let Frodo and the others go when he learns that they are carrying the Ring, because he wants to hold his promise he made earlier, where he said that he would not pick up the evil thing that drove his brother to madness if it was lying by the wayside. He then says that by letting them go he "declares his doom".

It's probably that Denethor will find it treason if Faramir does not carry out the law that every one that passes into Ithilien is killed. Therefor, Faramir's life is forfeit.

- Marc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now