[TerriblySorry]

Saw the film today (never read the books). It has the most believable cgi I've ever seen. That cave troll work was just seamless. AOTC is never going to match this. So convincing was the cgi, that it wasn't until the blond elf fired his third arrow (you know the scene? - he fires 3 arrows one after the other in just 1 take) that I realised his arrows were cgi.

The between-battles stuff was mostly dull - I mean, what's so interesting in getting from one place to another? It's hot, it's cold, it rained, it snowed - yeah, so?

The comic relief just wasn't funny, and Bilbo turning into a pointy-toothed whatever-it-was just seemed so totally out of kilter with not only the rest of the movie, but what I suppose to be Tolkien lore.

I suppose we had to have those other 2 hobbits along for the ride, but they were pointless in movie terms, just making up Tolkien's "nine".

But I'll say this in closing: Tolkien had more imagination than I'd given him credit for.

 

[raymondlin]

Terriblysorry - If you think there enough walking in the film, then you'll hate the book. Half the time is spending walking in the first book and there's singing and poems in it (thank god they left that out, it would have looked weird). And I think the walkign part is quite important, because it's how they get to Mount doom. And it actually takes a lot longer then the movie suggest, the time factor was a bit off in the film. There's a 27 years gap between Bilbo left the Shire to Frodo leaves, and about 12 days from where frodo get stab to Rivendell. In the film they just get there in a eye blink, which annoyed a friend of mine greatly.

Merry and Pippin isn't as annoying in the book and isn't there solely for the comic relief, in fact they play quite an important role in the begining and later in the trilogy.

An there isn't that much battle in the first book, even the last battle in the film is actually only discribe in the Second book even though it happen inthe first book. Ask any LOTR readers, they'll tell you the first book is the slowest one and the least exciting of the 3. And if you want more battle, the 3rd book will blow your socks off, 80% of it is just fighting. It might sound good but from a movie point of biew, I am quite worried as it'll become very boring watching arrows flying and sword swinging constantly for 3 hours non-stop.

 

[pigmode]

Well, if you really think about it, there is much, much more going on in the third part (remember, it's all one book) than battle. From what I understand, Arwen shows up at Helm's Deep.

The more I think about the mourning scene in the mines of Moria, the more I think less of Jackson as a director. There were no really powerful scenes in the entire movie, imo.

 

[TerriblySorry]

Quote:

Originally posted by pigmode Well, if you really think about it, there is much, much more going on in the third part (remember, it's all one book) than battle. From what I understand, Arwen shows up at Helm's Deep. The more I think about the mourning scene in the mines of Moria, the more I think less of Jackson as a director. There were no really powerful scenes in the entire movie, imo.

Not even the brief flashes we see of the eye? Those were really, really powerful, imo. Maybe you've just never gazed into the abyss?

 

[Mumrik]

Quote:

Originally posted by dhwilkin (...) and let the audience have a ten-minute intermission in the middle, at some logical stopping point.

You don't have a break in the middle of the film?
Here in Denmark there's always a 10-15 minute break in the middle of long films, in LOTR it was a bit after we first saw Elrond..

 

[dhwilkin]

Quote:

mumrik said... Here in Denmark there's always a 10-15 minute break in the middle of long films, in LOTR it was a bit after we first saw Elrond.

You do, seriously? No such thing over here... only time I've ever had an intermission watching films was in a 4-hour film class.

 

[Masz]

Well I've watched LOTR. Never read the book but I like the film. Strange as it may seem, I like the first part of the film where the tempo was slower and the director took his time to tell the story. The middle part was a bit confusing and felt a bit rushed. The action sequences was OK. Nothing to match the Matrix or Phantom Menace. The best action sequence for me was the Cave Troll scene and the escape from Balrog. The Uruk-Hai wasn't exactly impressive or menacing. Easily killed too.

Very nice film overall. Can't wait for the second and third instalments.

EDIT: Oh yeah. Even if it was 3 hours long, it was the shortest 3 hours of my life! I can't believe it ended so soon. One thing that I had to give the film and director credit is that the film was engrossing and kept me wanting more till the very end. (And more after that what with this being only the first book)

 

[Mumrik]

Quote:

Originally posted by dhwilkin You do, seriously? No such thing over here... only time I've ever had an intermission watching films was in a 4-hour film class.

I think films longer than 2.5 hours or so have an intermission here...

Of the top of my head, films like Apocalypse Now: Redux, Heat, and naturally LOTR...

I don't think it's a bad idea...


Quote:

Originally posted by Masz The Uruk-Hai wasn't exactly impressive or menacing. Easily killed too.

I was a bit disappointed in the Uruk-Hai too, just didn't seem all that dangerous. He may have been quickly killed, but that has got to be one of the most intense sword fights I've ever seen.

 

[kpxgq]

hmmm...

i never read the trilogy... i only read the hobbit as a high school student and was fairly unsatisfied with it....

i watched LOTR, and was totally blown away... i bought a boxed set of the trilogy the next day and i am about to finish LOTR now...

but for me, watching the movie first and reading the book next made it better.... the movie was very flashy and a very good action movie and got nme into the whole subject... then reading the book... i fform images from the movie in my mind at certain scenes and the book helps fill in all the details that i missed... if i read the book first, i am pretty sure that i would prbably be picking out little things in the movie that i didnt like.... therefore i will not read the two towers until after i watch it.

 

[johnmark]

Well, I'm glad I read the books first. I can't imagine having Elijah Wood come to mind every time I picture Frodo. Granted he did a decent job, but add 10-20 pounds at LEAST and then you have the ideal Hobbit heroin.

 

[pigmode]

Yeah, I thought Elijah Wood was too effeminate to play Frodo. The casting for all of the Hobbits is pretty much of a joke.
It makes sense that the ones who have not read the book are the most impressed, since he he threw enough hooks in to supplment the story. Still, there's some great footage and great visualizations.

I'll have time to see it again next week.

 

[Mumrik]

Quote:

Originally posted by johnmark Well, I'm glad I read the books first. I can't imagine having Elijah Wood come to mind every time I picture Frodo. Granted he did a decent job, but add 10-20 pounds at LEAST and then you have the ideal Hobbit heroin.

At least they got the feet pretty right

 

[nick danger]

The feet? I get to follow the feet?
I am glad that I read the book first and have the real vision of what a hobbit looks like in my head. That said - the feet aren't bad and probably the best representation of a hobbit.
To the director's credit I gave up my ideas of what everyone should look like straight away and enjoyed the movie immensely. I even vowed to myself to stay alive a couple more years to see all three.

And spiderman too!

 

[Ctn]

I reckon Arwen should have joined the fellowship

She was only had like 5 mins screen time

*curses*

 

[fjhuerta]

Call me an infidel, but I'm not watching LOTR.

Why?

Well, many people have just ruined it for me. For example, a co-worker of mine who loves D&D, role playing and the like can't stop talking about how good it was. He watched it on December 1st or so, and hasn't stopped talking about it. He has become incredibly tiresome, and I have permanently associated LOTR with geekyness (not that you guys are geeky, but he is).

My mother walked out of the theatre after 1 hour, and said it was the most boring movie she could remember watching. My best friend fell asleep during the movie and didn't even care about the ending (when we both learned how it ended, he decided his time had been better spent sleeping).

That, and the fact that it shot to 1st place on the IMDB in less than 4 days makes me think the movie might be a bit (???) overrated.

So I'll wait until all the noise about the movie dies down, I'll maybe buy it in DVD in a year or two, and watch it with a clear mind and a different attitude towards it. And hopefully, I'll have read the book in between.