#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal

Without Chris Reeve Superman 5 can not succesfully excist. They should either start from scratch, or just abandon the idea of a Superman film all together. Let's face it, the Supermasn franchise has not been served to well on film. 1 great film, the other ranging from OK, to Stefancos- wondering if Donner was asked at all.

Those AICN forums are really packed with idiots. Shore's FOTR is NOT identical to Horner's Titanic. Stefancos- :roll: banghead

Geez....i'm surrounded by ignorants here. OFF COURSE The Longest Day in a B&W film. But it was one of those films that fel victim to that colorization fad in the late 80's, early 90's (if i'm not mistaken) Ted Turner has a lot to anwser for. Stefancos- who finds colorization....distracting.

Ocelot probably saw them on his old B&w TV. Stefancos- who's sure Psycho is in color to.

Kinda agree wirh Mr. Leader here. The scene isn't to bad, but compared to the Cantina scene in SW it's not very interesting. In 1977 Lucas created a slice of his Universe in that small Cantina. In AOTC the bar is just a place were a lot of people are standing around talking or drinking. Stefancos-

The Longest Day....oh wait, that's not B&W. Stefancos-

Miguel Andrade is from Portugal, so he's probably getting the R2 version. Stefancos-

You know, the maestro Williams himself said he thought Psycho wasn't a good score. When did he say that?? Stefancos- :wow:

Behold.....my punishment!!!! Suffer Figo....SUFFER!!!!! Stefancos-

The only way i will ever stop using ppictures on this MB is if ricard forces me to remove them. All the rest of you can sod off. Stefancos- who will punish Figo for this.

The film is called Full Cast and Crew for None But the Brave , and IMDB lists sinatra as director, and as actor. (Chief Pharmacist Mate, so probably as supporting role) Stefancos- fountain of knowledge.

I thought it was already mentioned. Stefancos- trying not to be repetitive.

Rambo: First Blood part II Independance Day Tomorrow Never Dies The World Is Not Enough Stefancos- who can't think of more right now.

Name away, if my name's included it wont bother me a bit. I can easily look back at my post records and I dare say my content is often more than mere filler. So can I. Stefancos-

Dammit, those breasts were real!!! Stefancos-

That's the only thing in which i'm not above you. Stefancos- who does not fear the wrath of Figsy...

Friedkin, such a nice and easy to work with diector. What became of him? Stefancos-

Australia is not a little island, it's huge. Isn't it bigger then your country? Stefancos-

I'm sorry, but is this going anywere? Stefancos- ?

Perhaps live ain't that easy....you fool. Stefancos- :roll:

Forever indeed. LOL But seriously, what have I ever done to you? Stefancos-

Do I even have this score, i'm just not sure... Stefancos- who won't bother looking.

1. The character of Aragorn was stripped of his exceptional qualities. Instead of quietly brooding for Arwyn, he is made into a simpering pussy. He never washes his hair, and yet for all the time he spends in the wilderness, his girlfriend is still able to sneak up on him (not in the book). Some master woodsman! I disagree, i think he embodies the role very well, i have always found him to be an interesting actor. Looking forward to seeing him become less the Ranger and more the King. 2. The increased presence of Arwyn, who is not all that interesting a character to begin with. Her part was obviously fleshed out to give little boys someone to slobber over and to give the little girls someone to identify with. She steals one of Gandalf's best scenes, when the filmmakers have Arwyn, not Mithrandir, wash away the wraiths in the river "stampede." The character of Arwen is totally uninteresting in the books, hardly any mention is made of her beyond the Apendixes, but since they probably could not illiminate the character from the film they decoded to expand on it, which is IMO a wise decision 3. The Orcs were nothing like Tolkien envisioned. Instead of bastardizations of the elvish race, they were mud-golems stamped out by Saruman in his Hieronymus Bosch post-digital foundry. They were far grosser than they need have been. Indeed everything in the film was overdone. Orcs crawling down the walls was just the tip of the iceberg. Jackson is never content to let a scene build naturally, as paced in the book, he has to push hard, and add all sorts of gratuitous details, like Aragorn riding a wobbly stone walkway in Moria. Well, that is your personal opinion, i'll respect it, although i disagree. 4. The entire Moria sequence was fumbled badly. It's one of the best sequences in the entire trilogy and, one would think, foolproof, it builds so naturally in the book. But Jackson still managed to screw it up. The battle with the Troll was drawn out to excruciating lengths. The Moria sequence is the best part of the film, i think, especially the Bal Rog scenes. The troll was cool to, i love Howards Shore's restrained scoring of those scenes. 5. Merry and Pippin are now slapstick characters -- but, unfortunately, their antics are not very funny. Partial agreement, in the book they take an active part in planning Frodo's journey, in the film they bump into him and Sam by accident, and kinda tag along. Hopefully Two Towers will give them more to do (the book certainly has good material for them) 6. Any scene with Christopher Lee, once again, goes way over the top. And it's not the actor's fault! Jackson can't resist dizzying computer effects whenever we visit Isengard. The battle of the wizards is just plain ridiculous -- NOWHERE IN THE BOOK, and most damaging to our perception of Gandalf, who may be imprisoned, but could never get his ass kicked. I happen to enjoy these changes, also the computer effects were dazzling and very well done. I guess you just prefer a more "down to earth" type of film making. Since the film is basedc on a famous book the director should not attemt to bring any kind of style to it. Personally i hate those bloodless, by the numbers book adaptations (Les Miserables, Ethan Frome) 7. We don't get to know the supporting cast. Legolas is fairly elusive anyway, but there are a number of memorable bits in the book which would have differentiated the characters. Gimli is lost in the shuffle, and Boromir could have been Aragorn, so compromised were the heroic qualities of the latter. Again, partial agreement, buth neither Legolas or Gimli were very well developed in the first book anyway, also, the 3,5 hour version of the film will probably include Gimli's infactuation with Galadriel, something that was definatly lacking . 8. They completely skimped on Bree. The ringwraiths are refugees from the old Night Stalker television series. They should have been riding around on motorcycles, lopping people's heads off. That would be cool. LOL 9. For a film that runs close on three hours, there is no real sense of vast distances being covered. Bree is but a hop, skip and a jump from the Shire. I understand dropping Bombadil, but come on, guys. The chase to Rivendell, next to the Bakshi version, is like a perfume commercial. I felt absolutely no suspense at Frodo's plight. And it is better in the book, when Friodo makes the break for himself. I think there is a reason Tolkien made these decisions, don't you? I again partly agree, the distances in the film hardly seem as vast as those in the book, were you can almost feel the endless days of traveling and fatigue. Also, tyhe events of Fellowship take place in a spoan of over 10 years if i am correct, the film shows nothing of that. For instance, after Gandalf gives the ring to frodo he heads of to find some info about it, in the book they do not meet again untill years later, in the film it looks more like a couple of weeks at most. In the book the journey from The Shire to Amon Hen takes many months, in the film no exact time is given, but it does not feel like it's that long. Still, for me those a minor quibles. And 10. Most damagingly, the tone is COMPLETELY off. This is open to argument, of course but, as I've said, I've known these books for decades, and there is an epic gravitas in Tolkien that is completely lacking in Jackson. I didn't sense any of the history, saw absolutely no trace of the nobility of character, nor felt any of the living detail that made the reading experience so memorable. Again, that is your opinion, and i can only disagree with it, I will not wast your or my time trying to explain why i disagree with you. The two things I thought perfect: the casting of Sir Ian McKellan as Gandalf, and the New Zealand landscape, which would have been shown to better effect if the characters had been allowed to linger once in a while instead of wasting valuable screen time fighting fake CGI trolls. McKellen should have gotten his Oscar....he was robbed of it, i think. (who the hell won anywa?) Stefancos- who should be sleeping.

You are in the same league as me?.....You??... are in the same league as ME??? Stefancos- about to be defeated by a girl :oops:

Ah, do you speak german?! Then you can read my text over your posting! ( German ) So schwer ist das ja nicht! :-) Andreas ( Admin ) It's not that difficult??? But it is, trust me. Stefancos- very handy with a Dutch/German online dictionary.