A Return Of The King Review 517
I must have read the trilogy three or four times since I was first introduced to it via The Hobbit back in grade-school. I am not a purist, but some of the changes Peter Jackson has made along the way weren't to my liking. For example, I didn't like the deviation in Faramir's character during the Two Towers, despite Peter Jackson's claim that he needed to create additional tension and discord beyond what Tolkien included.
The Return of the King has same flaws, but overall I thought it was a more engaging movie than the previous ones. Beware, there are a few spoilers ahead; obviously, most of the Slashdot crowd knows the story in the books, but what will follow should be considered a spoiler, as I am describing Jackson's adaptation of the book.
The movie opens at what I thought to be a strange spot - Smeagol's killing his friend for the Ring; why not put this in the first movie? I think this may have been foreshadowing one of the more prominent departures from the book: Jackson decided to increase the tension between Sam and Frodo over the Ring, with Golem playing on Frodo's Ring-induced distrust. This tension did exist in the book, but Jackson makes it more overt. Personally, I thought it was a little over the top.
Obviously, the book is too large to be made into even a three-hour movie, but I found that one large part is missing that I hoped would be covered: the Battle of Bywater. In the book, when Frodo, Sam, Merry and Pippin arrive back at the Shire, they discover that Saruman and his thugs have enslaved the Hobbits. I have hope that this may be added into an Extended-Edition (probably due out this time next year).
A good chunk of this movie is spent on the moments leading up to the battle, the battle itself, and the immediate aftermath. As a result, I noticed that there were a lot of speeches of the sabre-rattling kind made by principal characters that I'm sure weren't there in the book -- a kind of Holywood-ization in the Gladiator spirit. It probably makes the movie more interesting to people who haven't and won't read the book.
The humor that could be found in The Two Towers (specifically, Gimli) carries over into The Return of the King. I didn't mind the humor, though I know it's an addition that Jackson made.
Along the way, I noticed other small deviations, but I'll leave those for Tolkien fans to argue over.
Enough complaints; there were a lot of great scenes, and many of the plot lines were handled deftly by Jackson.
Shelob getting Frodo, and Sam taking him for dead, is done particularily well. Jackson didn't change much at all here, and the effects are great.
From the book, I remember a strong impression of bleakness as Sam and Frodo take the final stage of their journey to Mount Doom -- Jackson got that dead-on. Jackson does an excellent job showing the toll that the Ring is taking on Frodo.
The battle outside the walls of Minas Tirith puts the battle of Helm's Deep to shame. The high walls of the city built into the cliff, with a huge army of orcs outside the walls, have to be seen to be believed. I don't actually remember any in-depth description of the battle outside Gondor (in fact, I don't remember any great battle depictions from any of the books -- bad memory?), but Jackson does a great job of providing one. The trebuchets are particularily engaging.
Overall, I would have to say that this was my favorite of the three movies. The movie was a little more grim, a little darker, and showed some of the violence and fighting in a more disturbing fashion. I am hoping that some of what I perceived as shortcomings will be fixed in the Extended Edition (the Two Towers's Extended Edition was a much better movie that the theatre version). I can't wait to see it again.
Questionable MO (Score:5, Funny)
Because you hit her with a cinderblock ?
FOR THE LAST TIME--No Scouring of the Shire (Score:5, Informative)
In every single LOTR article, someone brings up how they hope for the Scouring, when it's already been covered that it won't appear. Peter Jackson has been open about this since the very beginning. Stop talking about how you hope it appears!
Re:FOR THE LAST TIME--No Scouring of the Shire (Score:3, Interesting)
Yeah, yeah (Score:3, Funny)
The sooner you and your "friend" face up to the reality of your relationship, the happier you'll both be. Vancouver is a very progressive city; it's not as if you two will have to fear for your lives when you hold hands in public.
As for the rest of your friends, the real ones will accept you as you are.
This review was a bit lame (Score:3, Interesting)
Aintitcool.com has at least three articles of reviews, the latest one containing about TEN submitted reviews in them. Read those for in-depth reviews that don't bring up the Scouring (for the last freaking time, it wasn't filmed and won't appear, not even in the extended version) or other vague descriptions ("the scenes were cool, this character was funny, it was good, can't wait for extended version which I felt was better last time").
Advanced Screening? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Advanced Screening? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Advanced Screening? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Advanced Screening? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Advanced Screening? (Score:5, Interesting)
The company I worked for when the movie "The Sixth Day" came out got an advanced screening as thanks for having loaned Phoenix Pictures some high-tech looking equipment that was used in some of the sets. So, the company reserved a movie theater for a private screening for employees and friends. AFAIK, Phoenix only provided the film. I think the company paid for the theatre time. Some of our equipment also made brief appearances in sets of all three of The Matrix movies, and in "Mission to Mars", but there were no advanced screenings of those.
Ok, so maybe that could be considered 5 samples, only one of which resulted in an advanced screening. So it's probably not very likely without having some major, high-profile, connection to the movie. But it's definitely not impossible.
god dammit (Score:4, Funny)
Re:god dammit (Score:5, Funny)
Go now, and no making sad puppy dog faces.
Re:god dammit (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:god dammit (Score:3, Interesting)
Can someone explain to me why these movies are such a big deal?
Re:god dammit (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, their are several reasons why they're a big deal.
The first one that comes to mind is: length. No one has ever filmed, for the cinema -- TV mini-series don't count -- a 9 1/2 hour epic with a single narrative framework. The only films I know of that come close are The Seven Samurai at 3.5 hours and The Sorrow and The Pity, which if I remember correctly clocks in at 5.5 hours. And the latter was a documentary.
And no, the Star Wars trilogy doesn't count either. The stories are separately coherent.
The
As I recall... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:god dammit (Score:5, Funny)
Re:god dammit (Score:3, Insightful)
I can understand why some people don't like fantasy.
I don't understand why people who don't like fantasy post to Slashdots about LotR.
Re:god dammit (Score:3, Funny)
Hmm, I think the phase "If it's any consolation..." should probably read, "If there's any way for me to save face..."
Re:god dammit (Score:3, Funny)
Re:adaptation (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Who gives a shit? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:god dammit (Score:5, Interesting)
Two words: Library Card. It's free and widely available in most "civilized" countries.
Matt Damen in "Good Will Hunting" made fun of a student for paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for a Harvard education you could get for $1.97 in late fees at your local library. As a non-college graduate who works with people whose average education is a Masters in CS, and whose wife has a Masters from Harvard, I can tell you he has a good point.
The books are great. Start with The Hobbit. They are my favorite books I have ever read.
P.S. If you should think from my post that a college degree is unnesecary, you should know that I am painfully finishing my college degree after a 10 year absence - one course at a time while working 40 hours a week and commuting 1.5 hours each way. I thought I was smart enough to drop out of college, but now I'm eating my humble pie - and I can tell you it tastes like shit! I think those people with MS degrees make more than I do even if I work harder and know more than some of them. It can also really help when applying for jobs. I want one (an MS) but I need my BA first.
Re:god dammit (Score:3, Insightful)
I can say with absolute certainty that I learned more from my own reading than I ever learned in school.
On the other hand, though, the formal/structured nature of school forced me to learn about quite a few topics I would have chosen to skip over if I was simply reading the things I wanted to read.
Anyway, if you want to go the self-taught route and be a success minus the
What not to do... (Score:5, Funny)
Seriously, anybody who's been to any of the 12:01am showings for movies like LotR or Star Wars knows what I'm talking about. You'll get hordes of people dressed up like Gandalf (albeit some morbidly obese variant of him) trying to hit you with a broom handle that they insist on calling a quarterstaff.
On a side note, what sort of self-respecting /.er would be wary of spoilers regarding LotR?
Re:What not to do... (Score:2)
Re:What not to do... (Score:2)
Sigh,,, (Score:5, Funny)
That being said I have tickets for 12:01.
Who cares if you flunk a couple in the long run anyways?
Midnight Movies (Score:5, Interesting)
The 1970's were also an era of a certain type of movie that can only be called an 'anti-date' movie. These films were all but guaranteed to make you feel so weird and repulsive after seeing them that you ran the risk of associating the shock induced by the movie with the person whom you went to the theatre with. Often you wouldn't know this was going to feel this way until the film was almost complete.
Movies in the 1995-2003 era are more-or-less engineered to induce precise emotions in the audience. There are few real surprises either good or bad. Everybody knows fairly well in advance how they are going to feel after the movie's over and they're leaving the theatre. You may not know what is exactly actually going to happen in the movie, but you have a fairly good idea how it's going to make you feel. Compared to the rollar-coaster risk that you took with 1970's movies, this is not really a bad thing.
Some examples of the 'anti-date' midnight movies of the 1970's are:
Clockwork Orange (1971 Stanley Kubrick)
Seven Beauties (1975 Lina Wertmuller)
El Topo (1969 Alexjandro Jordokoski)
Taxi Driver (1976 Martin Scorsese)
Chinatown (1974 Roman Polanski)
The list can go on and on. I'm amazed now that there was any romance at all in the 1970's. The fact that childern were still born to people who went to lots of movies is a testament to the human spirit.
Familiar phrase... (Score:2)
Can I assume that the battle at the Black Gate is left out, and that portion tightened up into the siege of Minas Tirith? I could see how that could make for another couple hours easily...
Re:Familiar phrase... (Score:2, Informative)
Well (Score:5, Informative)
Re:And that irks me... (Score:4, Insightful)
Imagine at the end of RotJ, after the destruction of the death star, but before the Ewok dance number, we are subjected to twenty minutes of Luke returning to Tatooine and discovering a sith jedi is still loose and making things miserable for Mos Eisley. It might make a good sequel, but it doesn't belong in the movie.
But PJ did put in a return to the Shire, Sam getting married, and the Grey Havens. So it does have closure.
Re:And that irks me... (Score:3, Funny)
Hmm. Could we have that INSTEAD of the Ewok dance number? Especially the new one?
No wait. Let's do that with all the Ewok scenes
Re:And that irks me... (Score:3, Insightful)
And exactly *how* does that make him worse than Tolkien? It wouldn't surprise me if Tolkien would suck at film making. You see, writing books and directing movies are two entirely different tasks. Tolkien was an excellent author of a book, and obviously good at inventing a story too. Jackson is an excelle
Yes, bad memory (Score:5, Informative)
The ride of the Rohirrim, the chapter covering the beginning of the battle of the Pelennor fields, is an incredible passage; probably my favourite little bit of fiction ever. I suggest you re-read before claiming status as Tolkien fan.
Re:Yes, bad memory (Score:5, Interesting)
The Battle of Helms Deep was also described in great detail in the Two Towers book. It was a hard chapter to read though and I had to read it with a dictionary and draw a map at the same time; a map which I refined many times while reading. He used many words from Old English that are no longer used, or have changed meaning over the years. H.P. Lovecraft used a similar technique to give an ancient air to his stories: writing in an older, more formal, style. I can't remember all the antiquated words right now, but certainly, "gore" was one which he used to mean, "A small traingular piece of land" and I have never heard anyone else use it to mean that.
Thanks for your review. I can't wait to see the movie!
Re:Yes, bad memory (Score:2)
Re:Yes, bad memory (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Yes, bad memory (Score:3, Informative)
The bit between where an entrance ramp on a highway meets the highway is a "gore point".
In sewing, gores are triangular pieces inserted between other pieces that help provide shape to a garment, often under the arms of jackets and such.
Re:Yes, bad memory (Score:5, Interesting)
No, not Old English. Old English isn't recognizable to modern English speakers. Here's a bible verse in old, middle, and modern english:
Old English:
And tha laedde se deofol hyne. and aetywde him ealle ricu eorthan ymbehwyrftes. on anre byrhmhwile
Middle English:
& e deuel ledde hym in to an heiy hil, & shewede to hym alle e rewmes of e roundnesse of ere in moment of a tyme
Modern English
The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world.
The orthography doesn't show up correctly here; The thorns and eths don't appear. Sorry about that.
Spoilers (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah, right.
I heard there's a book that tells the whole sotry of the three movies... And more!!!
And it's written by a good author, too...
Kriox
Spoilers? (Score:5, Funny)
Spoilers? Like what? Gollum is Frodo's father? Sam tying the deflector dish to the warp drive to escape Mordor? OTOH, with what I've heard is being cut, maybe I shouldn't be suprised.
Definite spoiler (Score:5, Funny)
Oh man! That just ruined it for me!
Re:Definite spoiler (Score:5, Interesting)
I'll be VERY dissapointed if they cut out the confrontation at the doors of Orthanc. This was strongly hinted at on the Two Towers extended documentaries.
This confrontation is EXTREMELY important because:
1) It's the last time you'll see Saruman.
2) It's where Perry gets a gander at the Palintir which forces him to go with Gandalf to Minas Tirith. He winds up as gaurd for Denethor's chambers (actually more of a bard, Denethor keeps him around to tell Shire tales). Ultimately, he ends up saving Faramir when Denethor flips out because he's been hitting the Palintir too hard
Re:Definite spoiler (Score:5, Funny)
Perry?
Did Pippin and Merry get merged into a single character?
Or maybe you meant Mippin?
The scouring of the shire (Score:5, Interesting)
Most books are too big to fit in a movie, and these books are bigger than most. By big I mean big with details, plots, characters, etc, not just big in pages. If Jackson had to cut something out without changing the main plotline, Tom Bombadil and the Scouring of the Shire were the best choices.
Re:The scouring of the shire (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The scouring of the shire (Score:5, Insightful)
for me the shire part is as meaningful as the rest of the rotk book, if not more important. Frodo did what he did FOR the shire and the return to there to see it being corrupted by Saruman(who they let go earlier, and could have slain) has a certain bitter and sad feel to it. Return to shire also shows how the other hobbits that were on the journey had changed and grown into something much more than they were when they left Shire, from pusharounds into somebody who can take care of themselfs(and of their kin). Luckily there's lots of other plotlines in the book as well, though not any as so touching.
well, I just hope that at least some new people will pick up the books and read them with thought.
Re:The scouring of the shire (Score:5, Insightful)
The hobbits asked him to help them when returning to the shire. He flat out told them NO.
Re:The scouring of the shire (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes! My dad first pointed this out years ago when I first read the books - I'd noticed a difference in style as the trilogy progressed. I always thought that Fellowship was by far the best written section because of this. By RotK, it starts to feel like the Silmarillion - interesting, but not exactly fun to read. The closing puts it back into context, showing again that these are simple people transformed by great events largely beyond their control.
Re:The scouring of the shire (Score:4, Interesting)
And I feel the scouring of the Shire was very much needed to show those things.
Just my 2c.
Re:The scouring of the shire (Score:5, Insightful)
Among about a million other things, LotR is a classic "coming of age" tale. Merry and Pippin start out kind of silly and end up mature and experienced. JRRT actually has them grow taller to make it even more obvious that they are like children growing up. In this sense, the book is not over when Sauron is beaten. Perhaps JRRT wants to say that evil in the world is not isolated in obvious bad guys in far away lands, but it also exists and has to be fought in our own neighborhoods.
LotR is full of observations that such things show in multiple levels.
PS: While I don't agree with all his choices, I think the PJ did a fantastic job making the movie he wanted to make.
Re:The scouring of the shire (Score:2, Insightful)
it just wouldn't fit in the movie (Score:5, Insightful)
For example, the book starts out with Frodo sitting on the most important thing in the world for 20 years. Then Gandalf tells him he must leave the shire immediately and he still stays for another 6 months.
The movie is much more human-centric. See how Boromir and such are changed.
As such, there really is no way to put the scouring of the shire in. The climax is when the entire world is saved, especially the human world. There is no way to follow that with saving a small group of shut-ins.
If I were filming the books, I'd do the same thing.
Re:The scouring of the shire (Score:5, Insightful)
The scouring of the shire was one of my favorite parts of the books. It made the rest of the books more real for me. You don't just blow up the Death Star and go home to a world that is suddenly rosy and new.
Also, it really showed the character development that had taken place. Merry, Pipin, Frodo, and Sam would have been killed or they would have silently obeyed their captors like the rest of the hobbits if they hadn't gone on the journey they had. Yet they still remembered their roots well enough to know how to rouse their old friends and relations in a time of desperate need. Merry and Pippin really grew up and came into their own in those chapters.
I think an author would be hard pressed to come up with a better denoumont to saving the world. It brought you down slowly from the destruction of the ring. The book did not end with a jolt, nor did I find the last half of the Return of the King to be booring. The level of excitement died out gradually, as day-to-day business returned very gradually, not to normal, but back to a new normal because nothing could be as it was.
Anyway, I was sorry it didn't appear in the movie, but I've still got the books. The first two movies were many times better than I thought they would be and I enjoyed them emensely. I liked that women had a more prominent role in the movies. A feminist couldn't read the Lord of The Rings without grimacing several times but they could watch the movies. I also thought the Two Towers did a brilliant job portraying Gollum and the Hobbits. They were just as I imagined them.
Though I actually liked Tom Bombadil, cutting him was a good call. He was basically irrelevant to the rest of the story. I would have made some of the battle scenes shorter (particularly in the Two Towers - they only made it half-way through the book!). Then we could have seen the scouring of the shire. But I'm really splitting hairs here. The movies are great. I can hardly wait until next week!
Re:The scouring of the shire (Score:5, Insightful)
The Scouring Of The Shire (Score:5, Insightful)
Another ROTK review (Score:2, Informative)
Title (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Title (Score:5, Funny)
Starring a squeaky 8 year old boy playing Sauron, the future Evil Lord, and featuring stale dialogue, and including several characters from the original trilogy, and also one of the Lizard People whose favourite line is "Issa Dat A Ring"
Re:Title (Score:2)
You forgot the Rather Spiffy Edition.
Re:Title (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Title (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Title (Score:2)
Re:Title (Score:2, Informative)
A Memo for EA Employees (Score:4, Funny)
Re:A Memo for EA Employees (Score:3, Funny)
Boss: "Here's your ticket for the movie" ... and hey! Why is it pink?"
Employee: "But I thought you rented out the whole theather
Beware of spoilers? (Score:3, Funny)
Spoilers? Are there any slashdot users who haven't read the book? :-)
Re:Beware of spoilers? (Score:4, Funny)
Changes (Score:5, Interesting)
Changes in Faramir (Score:5, Interesting)
Indeed. The author of the review could learn a lot from your attitude.
For example, he didn't like Jackson and Company's decision on making Faramir a jackass initially. I vsn sympathize with that, I didn't either. Neither did the actor. And then they explained to him (and to the viewers of the documentary DVDs) the problem with Faramir in the book.
One of the many reasons Faramir is so kick-ass in my mind -- as well as being Tolkien's favorite character -- is because, when told about the presence of the Ring in his patrol territory, he answers, "I would not pick this thing up even if it lay by the side of the road." Think about that for a moment.
See, while it's a great moment of personal integrity, it completely undermines the horrible eroding strength of the Ring. What, here's someone who's not tempted at all by the most powerful artifact in the Third Age? Fuck the Hobbits, then -- give it to this dude, he can stroll into Mordor and toss it into the fire without a moment of doubt. Instead of failing, as Frodo technically does.
If you think that hordes of moviegoers wouldn't be talking about this "massive plot hole" as they left the theatre, think again.
So, they decided to make Faramir as vulnerable as everyone else to the lure of power. And instead of a static Faramir as in the book, where he's strong and good and self-disciplined when we meet him, and in the end is still strong and good and self-disciplined (and married), here we get to see Faramir overcome the temptation of the Ring, and progress to being more self-disciplined than he started out. I think Tolkien would count that as a victory.
Personally, I don't consider either version of Faramir superior to the other. The incredibly powerful "I do not love the sword for its brightness" passage can still be read without the movie "tainting" it or anything like that.
Re:Changes in Faramir (Score:3, Insightful)
You talk about the development of Faramir in the movie, but I tend to think of Faramir more as a foil to Boromir; Faramir is what Boromir should have been. Faramir, along
Hobbit battle rage (Score:5, Funny)
I imagine that this end battle is what Lucas shaped his Endor battle after, to a degree - at least in concept. Little 'cute' guys kicking the asses of much bigger, more agressive baddies in a humorous manner.
Re:Hobbit battle rage (Score:5, Funny)
If you're right, Peter Jackson can never be thanked enough for keeping Middle Earth Ewok free.
Re:Hobbit battle rage (Score:3, Informative)
Saruman didn't have any real Orcs posted in the Shire. They were all men. A few were suspected to be part orc bred, but human enough to pass in Bree. Indeed the spies in Bree ended up in the Shire.
nit (Score:2)
The Collection! (Score:2)
It will include the LOTR trilogy, and Peter Jackson's greatest film, Bad Taste! [badmovies.org]
Faramir (Score:3, Interesting)
I do understand Jackson's desire to have some character development for Faramir - I'm just hoping he provides the development that I expect.
I thought many complaints about the change were unjustified until we've seen the other half of that characters development.
Jedidiah
Re:Faramir (Score:3, Interesting)
What they did NOT show is that he is much gentler and more compassionate than his father. I agree, having him simply let Frodo go did NOTHING for the story. The Osgiliath thing really gave us a chance to be introduced to Gondor and find more things about Faramir and Denethor.
Gollum != Golem. (Score:3, Informative)
I saw it too.. (Score:5, Informative)
Okay, now that you all envy me, here's my mini-review:
It was really, really good. 3x the special effects of the last one. Spider (Shelob? or something like that) was AWESOME. Battle scenes were great. The Orlando Bloom elephant takedown will be talked about (and certainly parodied) for years. Gollum is constantly good in every scene he's in. His acting is awesome-- he gives Sam this one look look (it's in the trailer) that basically says "you're so screwed" while simultaneously kissing Frodo's ass. Sean Astin gives his best performance ever as the devoted best friend. There's a real cool "woman vs. funky snake-headed dragon" faceoff. The end battle sequence is cool, as is the volcano stuff-- flaming lava balls flying through the sky like giant comets. The sound was cranked up when I saw it, and the screaming, screeching audio was top-notch.
The bad: Some boring/slow parts, including the Liv Tyler subplot and the now-notorious "thirteen endings" featuring tons of Unexplained Stuff-- giant eagles, a mysterious boat trip to...somewhere. And at three hours and twenty minutes, you really really start to feel it at the end.
That said, I'm getting to see ANOTHER advanced screening tomorrow! It's my favorite of the three by far, and certainly one of the best movies of the year.
As far as Peter Jackson-- much of what he said at that screening has been reported widely already-- he's doing king kong (one of the films that got him interested in filmmaking in the first place), he wants to do Hobbit but there are legal challenges at the moment, and he talked a bit about making LOTR vs. "Meet the Feebles". He said LOTR was infinitely more complex, but it was just as difficult to do MTF because he didn't have all the people working on it. What else... he talked a bit about adapting the work-- the first thing he did was summarize the books into a ninety page outline-- 30 pages per book. He also talked about getting the rights to the book, working with the Weinsteins (apparently Bob didn't get the concept until he realized that the guy with the sword, axe, and arrows were "specialists") at Mirimax before switching to New Line, and how sometimes he'd be shooting four units simultaneously.
I don't know if anyone's even gonna read this, so I guess i'll finish with that. The point is, it's good. See it. You'll like it.
Scouring of the Shire (Score:3, Informative)
So, no, no scouring in the Extended, however, Christopher Lee's last moments as Sauromon will be added back in to it.
This info taken from many interview, feel free to search around, i am currently to lazy to provide links
Battle of Bywater (Score:2)
Unfortunately, I read that Jackson *never* liked that part of the books and never intended to film it, so I seriously doubt it will happen.
This really sours me on his understanding of the books as a major point of having hobbits in the first place (as far as I can gleam) is that they are going to have the need to have their own power in the 4th Age. That's another big part of Gandalf, many of the elves and
Increased tension between Frodo and Sam (Score:2, Insightful)
In short, i think Jackson might be right in showing an increased tension...at least it will get to the viewers who have not read the books.
One book to tell it all... (Score:3, Interesting)
This movie trilogy was originally proposed as two movies, each made one at time. But the studio decided to take a gamble, and make three movies, and make them all at once. Would have been a disaster if the first movie had bombed, but it paid off in the end. Now that they're a big success, perhaps they wish they'd made one movie for each of the six "books". Then again, that would have meant major characters disappearing for the length of one or more movies...
Smegol (Score:5, Informative)
This is one of the changes that occurred after they started shooting the first one. Originally, Gollum was going to be computer animated with very little mo-cap... but Andy Serkis changed all that, and turned Gollum's portrayal in the movies into a fully fledged character with true depth.
Of course, they'd already started shooting the first one when they discovered this, so this scene with Gollum and Smeagol was put in later.
Do they march with the Orcs? (Score:3)
Jackson didn't even film the Scouring (Score:3, Redundant)
To clarify: (Score:3, Informative)
Gollum == Ring dude.
Watch Out For Spoilers! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Watch Out For Spoilers! (Score:5, Insightful)
That better not be how the movie ends, that would suck. It totally didn't happen that way. Frodo failed in the end, he succumbed to the Ring. The day was only saved by Gollum's greed and subsequent lack of care. That's why Gandalf was never so sure that Gollum should have been killed long ago, that he might still have a purpose.
So tired of this kind of review (Score:5, Insightful)
If we look at LoTR as just a movie, which is bringing some of Tolkein's characters and stories to life (though not all of them, and not in the form that Tolkien wrote them... OF COURSE) -- I think you will find that these movies measure up well against just about any other movie out there. Certainly compared to the absolute CRAP we've been treated to this year (with very, very few exceptions), RoTK has to do very little to rise above the crowd. The first two movies were better by far, IMHO, than Ladyhawke, Krull, Legend, Willow, and a host of other fanstasy movies that we've seen in the last few decades. I have a soft spot in my heart for some of the Jim Henson work from the 80s, but even those are at best no better than LoTR.
I even enjoyed them more than the Sinbad movies of old, and that's saying something.
So if you must compare LoTR to something, compare them to other movies. There have been better, and will be again, but I think these movies will prove to be as memorable 20 years from now as any other fantasy (original or adaptation) has been.
Over Time (Score:4, Interesting)
A few movie critics are beginning to talk not about the fantasy of JRR but the fantasy of Jackson, as if the latter's interpretation will in some way supersede the literary accomplishment of the former.
This can very well happen, although it certainly is not Jackson's intention. What these movies must do over time is enhance the LoTR experience, not replace it.
Only time will tell.
Who the fuck is Golem (Score:3, Funny)
Re:A good review (Score:3, Informative)
Re:A good review (Score:5, Insightful)
On the whole, I'd have to say that ROTK was a strong finish for the series. I loved #1, got a bit bored with #2, but was truly riveted by #3. We all expect the FX bar to be raised with each new mega-budget blockbuster and this was certainly no exception, but for me, the triumph of this film was the nearly seamless integration of the effects. The extensive digital offline work really paid off (with the exception of a few wonky bits of compositing were Hobbits met reality) and the color work was spectacular.
Individual geeks may take issue with this or that infidelity or liberty taken, but in general, the triumph of the LOTR digital post-production pipeline is the stuff that will keep many of the geeks here in the chips for years to come.
Re:A good review (Score:3, Funny)
OMFG U R TEH N00B! (just kidding.)
Re:Spoilers? (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, that's exactly what spoilage would be in this case. I was excited while watching the extended edition of the first movie, since I hadn't read up on what missing things were included. It was more fun that way. I clapped a lot as I saw things show up that I felt should have been there to start with. So, yeah, things like the Scour
Re:Spoilers? (Score:5, Funny)
I take it you didn't get to the part of his review where Sauron wins, Gandalf dies, and the orcs take over Gondor.