View Full Version : LOTR. Was it that good?
I saw Lord Of The Rings for the first time on DvD the other day, and i thought i was a great film , but i feel people have made a too bigger deal outa it, it deserved the awards yes because it was a great film, but not "The Greatest Film" of all time as some people have said. I only saw it at home on me T.V, so i did not have the experience has many have watching it in the cinema. Maybe that makes a difference.
Wot do u think??
I thought it was shit but I havent read the book. There seems to be a divide between people that have read the book before and those that havent. The people that had read the book seemed to rate it higher than those that hadn't.
BlackRider
10-08-2002, 23:08
Great movie/book(s). It's where I got me name :)
I've never read the books but thought the film was OK but not one of my favourites. I'd put it alongside the Star Wars 1&2 for quality. Entertaining but nothing more.
ThePigF@rmer
11-08-2002, 00:05
I haven't read the book, cause I can't f*ckin read:bigcry:
Tried 2 watch the film but f*ckin fell asleep:(
Wheres me f*ckin Gameboy ffs:D
AxeWound
11-08-2002, 00:25
I read the books , which are feckin gr8, Saw the film and it was very true to the story although did have a few "hollywood" moments (I know it was made in New Zealand :rolleyes: )
TBH I actually prefer the 1978 Anime style (http://us.imdb.com/Title?0077869) version of LOTR for sheer style and atmosphere, even though it wasnt the full story :(
Gr8 effects, h8 the ending
I know there are more parts coming soon, but that's just NOT the way to end a movie :flame:
Its an amazing coincidence that i've JUST finished watching it, apart for the SFX I thought it was pretty dull.
Books were much better (as always).
Inst1ncT
11-08-2002, 01:23
I thought the film rocked, with a capital R :)
Never read the books, or saw the cartoon though !
They fight like TIGERS !!!!
something else in ze film which is a bit stupid is the way the keep like attempting to Kill...whats his name.....frodo or sumthing, but we know that he's still got another 2 films 2 go, so its quite obvious that he doesn't die, them 2 scenes take bout 30mins of the story, maybe we will have a changed opinion about them when weve seen them all.
ps. do they all die in the end of the last one?
EvilNeileeeee
11-08-2002, 03:40
LOTR are great books but I read them about 15 years ago so I canny remember half the story, I did enjoy the film but the ending was too abrupt for me.
I think that the whole trilogy would be good to watch for a lazy sunday some time when all 3 films are released.
I`ve never read the books (tried a couple of times but got too bored) but thought the movie was pretty good in the cinema... it was 2.5 hrs long or something but you didn`t notice the time while watching the movie... which is a sign of an entertaining movie. No way is it one of the best movie`s of all time though...
Don`t buy the dvd now btw.... a special edition of LOR on dvd is being released in November.... just before the 2nd movie is being shown in the cinema. That`s a con that`s for sure... releasing the dvd now when they know it will be released in a better dvd in a few months.
I wasn`t sure about the gay hobbit undertones in the movie though.... that stupid hobbit was practically drooling after Bilbo Baggins all the time... even prepared to drown for him.
The Black Riders were strange..... going all over the world looking for the ring. They can see where whoever wears it is, but the last half of the movie Bilbo was wearing it loads of times and not a black rider to be seen. YET those rejects from Planet Of The Apes managed to be born and run STRAIGHT to where bum-buddy Bilbo is.
Another thing that I thought was wrong is that the wizard get`s imprisoned and then escapes.... BUT without his staff which is still in the tower... AND then later on he has his staff again. EH????
Also the poor bastard could easily have been saved from that demon thing on the breaking bridge.... loads of time for some of the others to grab him.
Originally posted by storm
The Black Riders were strange..... going all over the world looking for the ring. They can see where whoever wears it is, but the last half of the movie Bilbo was wearing it loads of times and not a black rider to be seen. YET those rejects from Planet Of The Apes managed to be born and run STRAIGHT to where bum-buddy Bilbo is.
Another thing that I thought was wrong is that the wizard get`s imprisoned and then escapes.... BUT without his staff which is still in the tower... AND then later on he has his staff again. EH????
Also the poor bastard could easily have been saved from that demon thing on the breaking bridge.... loads of time for some of the others to grab him.
the black riders can only sense the ring when it's being worn by someone - they can't actually see him - everytime the ring bearer puts it on you see clips of the black riders stopping their horses and heading in a different direction (suggests that they can sense where the ring is)
Gandalf's escape isn't explained very well in the film - they don't say where the eagle suddenly comes from (it's actually some mate of his, can't remember its name though) - good point on the staff though - didn't notice that
Plus if they had hauled Gandalf away from the bridge to "save" him, I would imagine the big firey evil demon "Ballrog" probably would have chased them down and slaughtered them - point is, Gandalf had to take out the demon.
PS sorry for nitpicking, but he's called Frodo Baggins - Bilbo was his old man :thumbs:
it was nice but not great.. it was too much of the same:
-walk
-fight
-walk
-fight
-walk
-fight
-end (yes.. too abrupt)
tho the fights were pretty spectacular
loved the fx tho (Diablo :cool:)
its a very beatiful movie, not as deep as the books but thats because its a movie, i like it and it is pretty close to what i saw when reading visually, have watched it a few times and its been better every time, maybe not the greatest movie of all time but definately best thing that has come out from hollywood for maybe 20 or so years. Very psychedelic i would say
BlackRider
12-08-2002, 01:45
This is the most my name has been mentioned in a thread :D
(oh shit I didn't even realize..... I have over 1000 posts...)
Havent got round to watching the film, the book is good though he wrote it with the intention of a definative Epic, and bloody hell does it go on and on and on and... TBH i prefer the Hobbit, the prequel which is much shorter and has less chapters of pure boredom, though it's orientated even more for kids.
SpAcE_DoUbT
12-08-2002, 01:54
The LOTR book was i believe intended for children when it was first published...
I read it as a child and have recently purchased the 3 Books again. The film ends like the book which i feel is quite refreshing as i found the whole thing very inkeeping with the style and tone of the book..(.(manys the time ive watched a supposed good film adaptation only to find its been ruined in the transfer..Interview with a Vampire is a good example)
Hell yeah LOTR was a good film probably deserved most of the accolades it recieved...I sit in eager anticipation of the next two.
AxeWound
12-08-2002, 01:55
Originally posted by DaveGOD
the prequel which is much shorter and has less chapters of pure boredom, though it's orientated even more for kids.
Isnt that the "Sillmarillion" ??
If so wasnt that compiled after Tolkien's death from short stories from papers his family found ?? :confused:
BlackRider
12-08-2002, 01:56
in the movie THEY SKIPPED OUT THE WHOLE FOREST FFS. That was huge.
AxeWound
12-08-2002, 02:01
The forest section is in the 2nd book.. When Pippin and (is it ??) Meredith escape the orcs and flee to the woods and get picked up by a giant tree ??
SpAcE_DoUbT
12-08-2002, 02:05
yeah they cut scenes probably or intentionally left some scenes out, but the film would have been soo much longer if they had not.
Anyone who's read the books and seen the film has to admit that they got the style and casting down to a tee. (cue the opposite views)
And i believe DG is right the hobbit is the prequel to LOTR ...tis a good read also ..a little lighter than LOTR too.
BlackRider
12-08-2002, 02:05
There's also a forest in the first book. They meet some guy (tom badillo?) and he sings... and they go through the whole forest... yes they do get attacked by the tree but I remember after they pass through thte forest the go to the inn and stay the night. And that's where I... I mean The Black Rider's attack.
Blackrider: that's Tom Bombadil, and I believe he was entirely cut from the movie for being a big chubby alcoholic fag :D .
Herman; glad someone else prefers the Bakshi version (Ralph Bakshi also made "Coonskin", an animated film that had everyone walking out of New York's museum of modern art (?) in disgust when it was first screened, and also the abysmal "Cool World"). I do too, but I obviously have a 'soft spot' as it was part of me childhood. But Gimli and Legolas have bags more character in it (not difficult, as they have absolutely none in the new version), and although Sean Bean is good in the new one the original Boromir looks much better (like some kind of huge Norse god).
I thought it was OK, but basically a standard Hollywood movie as opposed to what I would call a proper 'grown-up' movie, a la the Cohen bros, Kubrick or whatever.
I believe he cut the forest scene from the first book because the forest with all the ents would be quite similar to that in looks, and that way it will be a better experience to watch the whole nine hours in 2004 :thumbs:. oh and when i said its the best thing to come out of hollywood for a long time i forgot about the cohen brothers but i really dont consider them movies to have come out of hollywood
Oh, how convenient :D
Well Cohen bros films are made in Hollywood, but I take your point. When I said 'Hollywood' I guess I meant that it's an action movie; a special effects movie; a 'blockbuster'; essentially, a movie for kids and overgrown kids (which I happily admit to being). But that's as opposed to an 'adult' movie (no, not that kind of 'adult movie') - a serious, story-driven drama - which LOTR really wasn't IMO.
Rocko, you should have watched it in the cinema m8. The sound Fx of Sauron being overthrown totally blew me off my seat. TBH, that was the most intersting part of the film for me.
The second book was good, the third was dire, and the first was just boring, and the film mirrored this pretty acurately. Yawn.
As for Legolas and Gimli - they fuckin sucked balrog cock in the movie. Gimli was a total disappointment with the weakest scots accent, and legolas was a prancing non-mysterious fairy boy.
And Sauron looked like a big drag queen. I woulda eaten the big poof for breakfast - then i woulda shat him out my ring.
And the most annoying thing of the whole film, is that they showed the pre-events of the ring right at the start, when you only find that out when Gandalf returns from his expedition to uncover the rings identity. Had they kept the sequence of events intact here, it woulda made the middle a bit more interesting.
Then again, i went to see it twice, so it cant have been that bad.
P.S. Dont buy any DVDs until theyve all been released, theyll just keep re-releasing them with new and improved bits until they finally release the mega-super-all-three-in-one-glittery-packaging one.
i wish i did to m8 (money), but...........when i did watch it on me Dvd PLayer i did have me 26inch t.v, surrond sound, mega boom speakers,, plus some popcorn and sum haribo, real crawley style cinmea right in me home town of horsham.
Fragfest
13-01-2003, 13:19
Fellowship was a great movie, very entertaining indeed. I got the 4 disk set (which is about 3.5 hours of film plus goodies). I have not read the books, but the film has inspired me to read them, i am trying to read them now, but they are heavy going.
Saw The Two towers the other day and that film is action packed. They did a great job on Gollum. I loved the scenes with the ringwraiths on those black dragon things - how cool.
I wouldn't say lord of the rings was the best film ever, but it is such an epic trilogy and so entertaining that it rates quite highly on my all time best.
yeah rings rules. i saw the first one 3 times in the first week of release :o
the second one is equally as entertaining although i've only seen it once so far.
i got the 4 disk set for xmas too and if you haven't bought it yet then you MUST buy the special edition as there's 30 minutes of extra stuff that Jackson was forced to cut from the final edit in order to stay within cinema time restrictions. the extra stuff makes the film a lot more like the book and makes for a better movie if you can handle a sore arse for 3.5 hours :eek:
Fragfest
13-01-2003, 14:50
Originally posted by SnAcKeR
yeah rings rules. i saw the first one 3 times in the first week of release :o
the second one is equally as entertaining although i've only seen it once so far.
i got the 4 disk set for xmas too and if you haven't bought it yet then you MUST buy the special edition as there's 30 minutes of extra stuff that Jackson was forced to cut from the final edit in order to stay within cinema time restrictions. the extra stuff makes the film a lot more like the book and makes for a better movie if you can handle a sore arse for 3.5 hours :eek:
The extended cut includes lots of stuff that helps the next episode, like the giving of the gifts and longer prologue.
Plus there is 3 or more different commentaries on the extended edition - sweet.
SMELLULATER
13-01-2003, 16:17
It the Dogs bollocks, and the Two towers (seen it twice) also owns. Lets not talk bad about it ever again.;)
Fragfest
13-01-2003, 16:25
Originally posted by SMELLULATER
It the Dogs bollocks, and the Two towers (seen it twice) also owns. Lets not talk bad about it ever again.;)
- Nice to know me and Snacker aren't alone on this one.
:thumbs:
Powered by vBulletin™ Version 4.0.1 Copyright © 2010 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.