 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
Or should it be, "Bored of the Rings"? I have to say that I read the book (or tried to) a long time ago, couldn't finish the book because it was just damn boring. The movie is equally as bad. I watched it for an hour and couldn't tell you what the hell was going on or what the plot might have been. Couldn't stand it any longer & went out into my workshop to clean up some tools, far more interesting than this wretched movie. Frodo Baggins my ass.
I had no idea...I'm not much for movie reviews.I didn't think it was bad by any means, just a conglomeration of stuff I've seen in other action movies, certainly nothing the least bit original. I had the *unfortunate* situation of just previously comparing Shrek on my new vs older DVDP. The section I had very unfortunately viewed a few times in Shrek was the part where they are escaping with the princess from the castle. Did they copy this almost exactly in LOTR or what. OK, there's not a lot of originality in many action movies, but this seemed blatant when viewed in close proximity. And Shrek and HP had some humor in them, LOTR had none at all, except possibly the dragon firework thing, barely counts.
A nice-looking movie, with no new content I thought. This could be a 2-1/2 hour movie, God forbid the director's cut needs to be longer. Unless it was cut for rating, but even then 1/2 hour could easily be removed for that "better" new 1/2 hour. You can't tell, but I did like the movie, just didn't find it the slightest bit inspiring.
Besides, it's only the first third of Tolkein's epic. Try to keep in mind that nothing one is likely to see on the screen is ever going to be entirely "original" and the material that this epic trilogy is based upon is nearly 70 years old! That doesn't make LoTR less original, it just make other contemporary storylines a bit more derivative. Besides, there are always certain patterns to epic story telling, whether fantasy, SF, mythical heroic fiction, etc.BTW, the "Director's cut" IS the version currently available according to Peter Jackson! The longer version might well be described as the "Tolkein version" because it's supposedly going to flesh out the characters closer to the pacing of the original novels; that's fine for living-room watching at one's leisure, but would've been more difficult to watch at one sitting in a theater unless an intermission were employed. FTR, those who find LoTR inspiring tend to enjoy broad sweeping epics on the order of Lawrence of Arabia, Dr. Zhivago, Gone With The Wind, etc., or movies involving quests with alagorical content (i.e., think Lucas's Star Wars concept, but with sophistication on the order of 100 fold greater in magnitude).
Oh, I'm glad you liked it, even if you didn't find it particularly inspiring.
AuPh
The way the movie ends is completely different than in the book. I found that very annoying, and unnecessary.
There are one or two scenes in the picture that I felt could've been dispensed with, but overall it was a stunning success both artistically and from the standpoint of respecting Tolkein's original vision. Keep in mind that this is an epic that most folk's had given up on ever being filmed properly.AuPh
And how about that terrible portrayal of Elrond. Of course, I don't know what an elf would behave like, but somehow, I doubt it would be like a an Agent from the Matrix. Was practically the same (stiff, wooden) performance.
The actor's portrayals in those two films were entirely different, IMHO; if my wife hadn't pointed out to me who he was I wouldn't have made the actor's connection with both movies. Of course some may see this differently, but I found the actor's performance in LoTR was restrined, aristocratic and circumspect, reflective of the Elfin character's wisdom & long life (i.e., immortality).AuPh
I know what you mean...but, I guess I've watched too many similar plot movies lately. The movie was well-done, looked and sounded great, but I think I found it kinda derivative, as a movie that is. The story may actually be the original, but too many other movies have taken from it, they got there first. Gotta admit, I never liked the books much as far as that goes, fantasy is not my preferred SF genre. Let's just say your opinion of a movie can be directly affected by movies you watched just before it, so I gotta space the genres out better.About the director's cut, guess I got which is which mixed up...usually it's the version that doesn't get shown in the theatres. Was this the theatre version?
(nt)
I still have this parody somewhere in my collection. Kind of a Fritz the Cat meets JRR Tolkien. I think it would have made a better movie than the NZ team did, especially since they chose to screw with the story.
Oh, yeah! "Barnes & Noble" Bookstore used to sell this one (may still do, the one close to me moved to other side of town to bigger store).
They also had another one -- this one was more of a booklet (roughly 5 x 7") -- can't remtmber title or author, except that the title started with the words "Guide To The Roadkill of " (or: "Guide To Roadkill of ") and showed Baggins lying in the road with tire marks across his stomach.
yeah !
and some cool explosions! That should keep you occupied.
(nt)
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
