SO... i finally saw LOTR

[marianozz]

yup, i know its pretty pathetic, but they released it yesterday here!!

so, it basically sucked!!

ok, not really, i really liked all the actors, except maybe Elrond... the thing is that its tooo short!!!! come one they left out more than they put in !!!!

i knew about Tom Bombadil and stuff, but i didnt expect the journey to Bree to last 2 days!! :eek: come on, they dont stop at Frodos new house, he doesnt sell Bag End...

I loved the production, i just hated it was too short... i feel like all the time spend with Gandalf and Saruman could have been put to better use and STICK MORE TO THE BOOK...

then there was the details, (i noticed a hell of a lot of them) but those that bother me are that u dont see (or know) that Gandalf makes the horses in the water, Legolas kills the troll, Pippin throws a body on a well, it doesnt seem like Sam "worked" for Frodo, they just seem friends... Gandalf bumping his head into everything at Bilbo´s (come on... he was there before...) Frodo sayin "i think somethings there" and Gandalf goin "huh? that? oh thats Gollum" WTF??!!, Sam not lookin into Galadriels mirror....

anyway, i feel they butchered the book, and it wouldnt bother me this much if not for the fact that ive been hearing for 3 years how "accurate" and how "respectful" they were supposed to be....

i dont think people who havent read the book would understand half of what was going on... i just hope the existance of the movies doesnt discourage them from readin the book...

anyway, awesome production :D, lame script :(, terrible adaptation :mad:...

[Ambience]

It was a good movie, if you don't like it..go back to your stoopit book. Blablerrablerhabbler

:D

[ItsNoot]

I agree with your frustrations, I had them myself. Thing is though, the more I sat back and thought about it, the more I came to accept it. You must accept the fact that the movie was not written soley for the long time fans pleasure. For it to be successful they had to cut some out, the frigging thing was already 3 hours long! :eek: Sure for you and me that's no problem, but for general movie goers it's already a stretch.

As for the changes, I think they were there for two main reasons. One, they had to give some background information as to what the hell is going on. Hence all the Saurumon scenes and his activities. Or adding Arwin into scenes and giving her some actual dialog. Not as necessary, but a definite love intrest is established where a reader only gets a hint at this point.

The second is explaining the past. Anyone who has not read the Hobbit is on a disadvantage IMO. Gandolf bumping his head was just illustrating the small nature of hobbit's. Gollum has no real meaning to these people, but he will later. Etc etc.

All in all, I really liked it. Hell, I'm gonna buy it for sure. When I first left the theater I was thinking a lot like you but since have changed my mind. At this point I'm not so sure I would change too much from the film as it sits.

[Cop]

I'm glad I never read the books... I liked the movie a lot without being distracted by details and comparing it to the book all the time...

I do fear for the Spiderman movie though, I think I'm too big a fan to still like it... I'm excited by the trailers, but details will bother me a lot in this one...

[marianozz]

I know what you mean, i would be perfectly happy with three 9 hour movies, but people wouldnt....

and for sure they should change stuff, it would be too complex.... but what really pissed me off was the "we are true to the book" mumbojumbo.... :mad: :(


and i saw the spidey trailer too, and man, im not a fan and it SUCKS bigtime for me, the CG sucks, Peter is tooo young, and i hate Dafoe.... :D:D

but this is my LOTR thread!! dont turn it into a spidey thread :yb: :D:D

[Ambience]

Originally posted by marianozz
I know what you mean, i would be perfectly happy with three 9 hour movies, but people wouldnt....

and for sure they should change stuff, it would be too complex.... but what really pissed me off was the "we are true to the book" mumbojumbo.... :mad: :(


and i saw the spidey trailer too, and man, im not a fan and it SUCKS bigtime for me, the CG sucks, Peter is tooo young, and i hate Dafoe.... :D:D

but this is my LOTR thread!! dont turn it into a spidey thread :yb: :D:D

I think his statement was that he was true to the spirit of the books, not the actual text of the book. Which I feel he captured well.

[MonotremeMed]

I've read the trilogy once a year since I was about 10. While all the details were not perfect, I though he stayed true to the spirit of the book. It was actually closer to the books than I would have guessed possible! A longer movie, while desirable to hardcore fanatics, just wouldn't have been economically feasible. Overall, I give Peter Jackson major props for his work.

[marianozz]

maybe book 1-6, like in the books... :(

it wasnt even frodos b-day :(

[EG]

That was one long movie dood...It stayed pretty true to the book as MM said. If they had put in those other parts people would have been busting kidneys.

[Cop]

Originally posted by marianozz
dont turn it into a spidey thread :yb: :D:D

Make a new one then, because I'm a big Spidey fan myself and I disagree with your statements here...

[Ambience]

Originally posted by EGhadsGhost
That was one long movie dood...It stayed pretty true to the book as MM said. If they had put in those other parts people would have been busting kidneys.

MM, much like I stated above said SPIRIT....just thought I'd point out your mistake.

[$hortyDaPimp]

"Frodo sayin 'i think somethings there' and Gandalf goin 'huh? that? oh thats Gollum'"

He said "there's something down there" and Gandalf said just "Gollum". What was wrong with that part anyway?

I think that they stayed as close to the book as they could in making the movie. People I went with who had never read or fogotten the book understood it fine, I lent out my books because they wanted to read them again. I would've liked to see the Old Forest and the Barrow-Downs, but Tom Bombadill was the dumbest part of the book IMO, I was kinda happy they took him out. The Arwen/Glorfindel switch kinda puzzled me though.

[marianozz]

Originally posted by $hortyDaPimp
"Frodo sayin 'i think somethings there' and Gandalf goin 'huh? that? oh thats Gollum'"

He said "there's something down there" and Gandalf said just "Gollum". What was wrong with that part anyway?

I think that they stayed as close to the book as they could in making the movie. People I went with who had never read or fogotten the book understood it fine, I lent out my books because they wanted to read them again. I would've liked to see the Old Forest and the Barrow-Downs, but Tom Bombadill was the dumbest part of the book IMO, I was kinda happy they took him out. The Arwen/Glorfindel switch kinda puzzled me though.

ok, Bombadil is well taken out, i agree, i said i knew about it and i didnt mind...

i forgot to add the ... in the gollum sentence, sorry
and whats wrong is that its a definite story changing bit, if people who hadnt read dont know about gollum, well im sorry, do a better intro, but as much as anyone knows thats gollum when readin the book its not openly said to add suspence....

and why does arwen puzzle you? they have to sell the female character somehow right? :rolleyes:....

[TsR-RareAir23]

EGhad's Ghost: "That was one long movie dood...It stayed pretty true to the book as MM said. If they had put in those other parts people would have been busting kidneys."

EGhad's Ghost: don't worry about the scenes they cut out. Those will be included in the Director's Cut DVD if they decide to make a Director's Cut or Special Edition DVD. There's my observation. Out!

[marianozz]

that would be the greatest thing ever, like in 20 years, LOTR Special Edition.... reminds me of some other movies... ;)

[$hortyDaPimp]

It was a question, dont be testy.

Originally posted by marianozz
and why does arwen puzzle you? they have to sell the female character somehow right? :rolleyes:....

No, they don't. There's no reason to, there was Galadriel and that's fine enough. THAT's a big story change, the Gollum part is just to simplify things.

[marianozz]

didnt get testy man :)

just all the changes bothered me more than the arwen one...