(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lordoftherings.net%2Ffilm%2Fexclusives%2Frotkteaser%2Fimages%2Frotkteaser_poster.jpg&hash=c8cf80ea9db6af7ab1076e4b9cb74f5459352cd4)
6 months.
This needs its own topic.
okay, just to do a little re-cap of the various tidbits of news about this...
In an interview with the Chicago Sun-Times, Elijah Woods says that Return of the King's running time may push toward three and a half hours.
Billy Boyd, who plays fun-loving hobbit Pippin in The Lord of the Rings trilogy, has glowing words for The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. Boyd tells the Calgary Sun that he has seen a rough cut of the third, and final, installment. "I don't think people have any idea — it's incredible," says Boyd, who thinks the last film is by far the best of the trilogy. "We've started with the best source material and then the script they wrote is probably the best screenplay I've ever read." He adds that he "was near tears just reading the screenplay. It was so emotional. On top of that, people already know the character and have been on journeys with all these guys. This is sort of the end of all those stories. It's just got so much going for it before (Jackson) adds the special touches."
Empire Online chatted with Sir Ian McKellen at their annual film awards about the third installment The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, and things are sounding good... "I've got a little secret to tell you," he whispered in Empire Online's ear. "In an e-mail I got just now from Peter Jackson, I asked if he was coming tonight and he said 'no,' he can't but he's recorded a video message and then he put a PS at the bottom. It said: 'And Return of The King is looking very, very good!' So, I tell you, if Peter Jackson's boasting how good the third film is now, then we'd all better watch out!"
i really hope this one racks up all major oscars and gets the credit it deserves
Yeah, I'm really pumped for this. After "Hulk" has come and gone, this one is next on my plate.
Mmmmm... Return of the King... agggggggggrrrr (yeah, that's supposed to be Homer gurgling.)
I was just about to make this topic myself.
Can. Not. Wait.
Trailers? When? Where?
http://www.theonering.net
Not forgetting the preview on the Two Towers 2 Disc DVD!
Quote from: redlumhttp://www.theonering.net
Not forgetting the preview on the Two Towers 2 Disc DVD!
I have been looking around and cannot find it. I'll go ahead and assume the teaser/trailer is not out yet...
aw
I can not wait for this movie!!
i beleive the LOTR series is the only line of movies ever that are garunteed to be great before they are even released. Its a good feeling to know that as great as the first two are, PJ is saying ROTK is the best by far.
Quote from: BankyPJ is saying ROTK is the best by far.
Well, yeah...
Banky wrote: i beleive the LOTR series is the only line of movies ever that are garunteed to be great before they are even released. Its a good feeling to know that as great as the first two are, PJ is saying ROTK is the best by far.
EX-MUTHAFUCKIN-ZACTLY. They're what I call a 'sure thing'. I was pretty sure that 'Matrix:Reloaded' would be a guarunteed pleaser but I wasn't as deeply satisfied 'film wise' with it as I was after watching 'Towers'. Plus, Matrix 2 ended on a clincher, so it didn't feel complete, whereas 'Towers' rounded off the film nicely so if you're still impatient for the next one, you still feel as if you've watched a full masterpiece, right there. Well, thats how I feel.
As I've said before somewhere, I can't can't even imagine how good 'Return of the King' is going to be.
After seeing Two Towers I reread The Lord Of The Rings in its entirety for the first time in over 10 years. I had to remember what happened in ROTK...
I'm more than excited for this film...
aw
That's somewhat spoiler-ish for those who haven't read the books.
those photos r great. they have a different look from the first two.
can't wait either. its going to be the movie. best christmas present we could ask for.
Quote from: DerekThat's somewhat spoiler-ish for those who haven't read the books.
I edited my statement, but for no real reason, since I was remarking that I would (hypothetically) cry over the joy of having completed an amazing film trilogy, as well as never being able to return to it in a new form (aside from added DVD scenes).
aw
damn, i'm getting all giddy for this one...
Quote from: dufresnedamn, i'm getting all giddy for this one...
Same here.
Did anyone else watch Fellowship right before they saw Two Towers in the theatre? At this point, its a geeky dream of mine to watch the extended cuts of both Fellowship and Two Towers before seeing Return Of The King. And then, obviously, when ROTK comes out (in a format that will most likely contain some extended footage), I will attempt to watch all three in a row...
aw
that's some dream you got there...
Quote from: bonanzatazthat's some dream you got there...
But shucks, it'll never happen. Who am I kidding?
aw
Elijah Wood Calls Final 'Rings' Flick 'A Full-On War Movie'
Source: MTV News 07.28.2003 7:55 AM EDT
While they may not have guns or tanks, there are a couple of hobbits who promise the next and final "Lord of the Rings" film could give "Saving Private Ryan" a run for its money.
"It's a full-on war movie," Elijah Wood proclaimed recently, when asked about this year's "The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King."
"As Elijah said, lots of war," his hobbit partner Dominic Monaghan added for emphasis.
The two pals — who played Frodo Baggins and Meriadoc "Merry" Brandybuck, respectively, in "The Fellowship of the Ring" and "The Two Towers" — will soon return to New Zealand for pickup shots and re-shoots under director Peter Jackson for the final installment of the fantasy tale, which hits theaters December 17.
"Hasn't Pete said he reckons it's gonna be the most massive war movie ever shown on film?" a wide-eyed and visibly excited Wood asked his colleague.
"Ever onscreen, yeah," answered Monaghan.
"That's what Peter is saying," Wood continued. "I mean, it's a massive boast, but I'd say it's pretty close to that."
Last year's "The Two Towers" ended with a cliffhanger as the duplicitous Gollum resolved to lead Frodo and Sam (Sean Astin) into a trap. As fans of the classic "Rings" books by J.R.R. Tolkien already know, what's awaiting the heroes is the giant spider Shelob, but nobody will know what the big-screen version will look like until "Return of the King" gets closer.
"You get things like Shelob, which a lot of the fans have been waiting for, because Shelob actually is in the second book, but it's gonna be in the third film," Wood explained.
"Return of the King" will also resolve most of the various plot threads from the first two films, specifically the fates of the Ring of Power and the brave and noble Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), on an epic and somewhat tragic scale.
"['Return of the King'] is truly sad," Monaghan said. "It's the kind of bringing together of a lot of stories. And what the fellowship has to sacrifice to essentially save Middle Earth is huge. So you see these people facing the consequences of their actions. It's just a beautiful, beautiful film."
"There is something really emotional about it," Wood agreed.
Fans who can't wait until December 17 to get their "Rings" fix can look forward the August 26 DVD release of "The Two Towers," followed by an expanded edition in November. Both will be loaded with extras.
"You're gonna get the theatrical release, which will be frozen in time," Wood promised. "You'll always have what you saw at the cinema on a DVD. And then, Sean Astin's short film, which is called 'The Long and Short of It,' is gonna be on the DVD. A little bit of a teaser for 'Return of the King,' maybe. [And] the cool thing about the special edition of the DVD that comes out in November is that it's an extended cut, so it's gonna have about 35 minutes of extra footage cut back into the film."
"Plus a new score, new documentaries and new commentaries," Monaghan said, adding with a wry smile, "What a beautiful Christmas gift that will make."
/*waits for trailer.
*like a schoolboy
http://www.aintitcoolnews.com/display.cgi?id=15741
There's some details at the above link about the added bits in the extended edition of TTT. I think the extensions will make a greater improvement to this one than they did for the fellowship.
I have thus far been entirely unimpressed with the LOTR trilogy. I have watched the first six hours and still don't feel as if I have seen a film. I have massive issues with the argument that I have to reserve criticism until I have seen the final instalment, when they have been released as 3 films and so should be judged as such.
I am not being controversial for controversy's sake as I genuinely don't care what other people think- just the reasons behind their thought- but do never the less think that these films are beautifully disguised, shallow, uninvolving, undemanding and hollow reels of celluloid.
I have never seen a three hour film that relies entirely on landscape and special effects to engage the audience, although I have seen worse films (Matrix Reloaded / Batman and Robin). I think the narrative and characters supposedly driving it are dated and very uninteresting. Frodo is the only character who goes through any personal metamorphosis and yet this is hugely dull and does not warrant so much screen time.
I am sure that the third will be very similar to the other two and will please many who are easily pleased.
Quote from: aaron2601I have massive issues with the argument that I have to reserve criticism until I have seen the final instalment, when they have been released as 3 films and so should be judged as such.
The books came out in volumes as well. I've never heard of anyone just reading one of them. It seems silly. Judge the chapters, judge the volumes, judge the movies on their own, but don't make the mistake of thinking you've know the whole story.
QuoteI have never seen a three hour film that relies entirely on landscape and special effects to engage the audience...
Christ, I coulda sworn there were living actors in this film. Are you telling me all of those guys were made by computers?? That's fucked up shit, dude...
QuoteI think the narrative and characters supposedly driving it are dated and very uninteresting.
Really, you found the characters dated? You don't have a friendship or work with any wizards or hobbits or anything of that sort? Come on, everyone had a Balrog in their highschool...
QuoteFrodo is the only character who goes through any personal metamorphosis and yet this is hugely dull and does not warrant so much screen time.
Watch the third film, then comment on character development, arcs, metamorphoses, etc. For all we know, PJ could totally drop the ball on the third one and you will have been right. But you might as well finish the story to find out...
aw
Thats a shame. But I think you'll get a better perspective of other charcter arcs in the Return of the King. Most notably, Sam, Aragorn and Pippin(in addition to Frodo). I dont really think its fair to say that the only audience engagement comes as a result of the effects, I just think that the theatrical editions are perhaps weighted more on the set pieces. This isn't neccessarily a bad thing but maybe you should seek out the extended edition if you haven't already. The majority of the extensions or additional scenes are purely for the sake of the characters and really help the general flow.
Quote from: aaron2601I have thus far been entirely unimpressed with the LOTR trilogy. I have watched the first six hours and still don't feel as if I have seen a film. I have massive issues with the argument that I have to reserve criticism until I have seen the final instalment, when they have been released as 3 films and so should be judged as such.
I am not being controversial for controversy's sake as I genuinely don't care what other people think- just the reasons behind their thought- but do never the less think that these films are beautifully disguised, shallow, uninvolving, undemanding and hollow reels of celluloid.
I have never seen a three hour film that relies entirely on landscape and special effects to engage the audience, although I have seen worse films (Matrix Reloaded / Batman and Robin). I think the narrative and characters supposedly driving it are dated and very uninteresting. Frodo is the only character who goes through any personal metamorphosis and yet this is hugely dull and does not warrant so much screen time.
I am sure that the third will be very similar to the other two and will please many who are easily pleased.
worst first post ever?
Quote from: themodernage02Quote from: aaron2601...stuff about LOTR.
worst first post ever?
I don't think so. I agree with a lot of what he said, myself. People who love the series
will be pleased, and people who don't care for it won't have much to really appreciate. That's what I've got from seeing the first two films, where only a few parts in each impressed upon me anything worth note.
Quote from: OnomatopoeiaQuote from: themodernage02Quote from: aaron2601...stuff about LOTR.
worst first post ever?
I don't think so. I agree with a lot of what he said, myself. People who love the series will be pleased, and people who don't care for it won't have much to really appreciate. That's what I've got from seeing the first two films, where only a few parts in each impressed upon me anything worth note.
worst 413th post ever?
God knows I'm looking forward to this 'masterpiece in the waiting' but I hope its not ALL war, you know?
Found here (http://www.theonering.net/) ROTK trailer (http://lightsout.bla-bla.com/gallery/3/rotk_trailer_hi.mov)
This is what the site says: TheOneRing.net brings you this exclusive first look at THE RETURN OF THE KING! This file was sent to us by person or persons unknown, it shows 1:35 minutes in GLORIOUS Quicktime a TON of shots from ROTK. Sam and Frodo in Mordor, Pippin and Merry, Gandalf at Minas Tirith, fell beats, Pelennor Fields, Orcs and Men fighting, Aragorn and MORE! !!!MAJOR SPOILERS!!!
Dammit, I missed. They were asked to take it down
a second link (http://www.casualh4x0r.com/rotk.mov).
Thats down now too...
Here's another:
http://home.primus.ca/~liam3/video/728_rotk.mov
Thanks red. That's a nice little taste of the upcoming epic. More battles, more of those beloved characters and best of all...more of that psychotic little fucker Gollum.
Peter Jackson Gives Return of the King Update!
Source: Stuff Saturday, August 2, 2003
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King director Peter Jackson talked to the official fan magazine about progress on the third film.
"We're shooting, we're cutting, the visual effects still have a long way to go before they are done, we haven't started recording the music yet - so for me there may be light at the end of the tunnel, but the premiere in December still seems a long, long way away from where I am at the moment," Jackson said.
Jackson admitted to sadness that he had now finished filming scenes with the trilogy's stars. "I have experienced my last day of shooting Elijah Wood as Frodo and my last day of shooting Viggo (Mortensen) as Aragorn. Those to me are more profound than what my personal last day is going to be."
He said "The Return of the King" would be the best of the three films, and his personal favorite.
"It is the movie that I want to be most proud of, so I am working very hard to make sure that happens. I think when people look back at the three films, I want Return of the King to be the one that really lingers with them in terms of the emotional experience."
"I want it to be the reason why we made the other two films."
Quote from: jokerspathQuote from: dufresnedamn, i'm getting all giddy for this one...
Same here.
Did anyone else watch Fellowship right before they saw Two Towers in the theatre? At this point, its a geeky dream of mine to watch the extended cuts of both Fellowship and Two Towers before seeing Return Of The King. And then, obviously, when ROTK comes out (in a format that will most likely contain some extended footage), I will attempt to watch all three in a row...
aw
Hehe... I have the same dream... :oops:
Quote from: Lucinda BryteQuote from: jokerspathQuote from: dufresnedamn, i'm getting all giddy for this one...
Same here.
Did anyone else watch Fellowship right before they saw Two Towers in the theatre? At this point, its a geeky dream of mine to watch the extended cuts of both Fellowship and Two Towers before seeing Return Of The King. And then, obviously, when ROTK comes out (in a format that will most likely contain some extended footage), I will attempt to watch all three in a row...
aw
Hehe... I have the same dream... :oops:
You need not be ashamed, sister...
aw
6 New pictures (probaby from the ROTK preview on TTT DvD).
http://www.theonering.net/scrapbook/group/926
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg-nex.theonering.net%2Fimages%2Fscrapbook%2F7836.jpg&hash=2163bd036db0aa7fef645ecec10911b83870da23)
Battle at the Pelennor fields. (I hear they motion captured horses)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg-nex.theonering.net%2Fimages%2Fscrapbook%2F7835.jpg&hash=4e06307f5b1476b3cfd786e8e41c8d9e8f8085f0)
Osgiliath over run
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lordoftherings.net%2Flegend%2Fdownloads%2Frotkteaser%2Fimages%2Fgollum_poster.jpg&hash=6d194f2e41e4c4ff7667be60fbfd04e845e8b29e)(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lordoftherings.net%2Flegend%2Fdownloads%2Frotkteaser%2Fimages%2Fgandalf_poster.jpg&hash=278aaa572730304488d9f191a45220ea9031124f)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lordoftherings.net%2Flegend%2Fdownloads%2Frotkteaser%2Fimages%2Farwen_poster.jpg&hash=04268706928a9d84b6b4dce853c15f6a4c2f9d25)(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lordoftherings.net%2Flegend%2Fdownloads%2Frotkteaser%2Fimages%2Ffrodo_poster.jpg&hash=adf8c8b064ee4e0d52b8600ac985824b03523a18)
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lordoftherings.net%2Flegend%2Fdownloads%2Frotkteaser%2Fimages%2Fsam_poster.jpg&hash=2ddab2cfa271b923aa760b88bdd46b8801b36fa9)
gollum :yabbse-thumbup:
the rest of em :yabbse-thumbdown:
they can do better than that.
backtracking a little bit, since i just found this forum yesterday and i love it.
not a huge fan of lord of the rings. i saw the first one and thought it was amazing, so i'm expecting two towers to be huge, every time i saw the trailer in theaters, i jizzed myself every time. then i saw it, and i was in awe. i absolutely hated it. it barely moved the story along and found it do be brain numbingly numbing. so when return of the king comes along, i hope it goes the same path as two towers, and sucks (a little arrogant, i know). another problem, i love imdb, on the top 10 of the top 250, both fellowship and two towers are in it. it's taking amazing movies like one flew over the cuckoo's nest, dr. strangelove, and rear window out of places where they belong. just the whole geek following with it, and no matter how bad the movie is, they're ignorance won't let them see beyond it.
so.. u dont' like the movies cos they're too popular? and now u want the last one to suck just cos ur fucked up?
that's fucked up mang.
indeed, that's how i live life, by contradicting myself.
New Line Re-Releasing First Two Lord of the Rings Movies!
Source: Variety
New Line Cinema will re-release The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring and The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, with additional scenes and footage added, just two weeks before the worldwide December 17 release of The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King.
The plan calls for putting the films on 100-150 screens in the top 10 U.S. markets. Many other U.S. cities will have one cinema participating in the special extended edition screenings. Running times for the extended editions are 208 minutes for "Fellowship of the Ring" and 214 minutes for "The Two Towers."
Advanced ticket sales are scheduled to begin in late September or early October on exhibitor Web sites and movie ticketing sites like Fandango, MovieFone and Movietickets.com.
Starting the week of Dec. 5, the extended DVD cut of "Fellowship of the Ring" will be released in some 100 or so theaters in the U.S. and in 20 theaters in Canada.
Then, the week of Dec. 12, "The Two Towers" will be released, leading up to a worldwide Dec. 16 daylong marathon, during which all three films will be shown back-to-back. The screenings that day will include a 3 p.m. showing of "Fellowship" followed by a 7 p.m. screening of "Two Towers" and then an 11 p.m. screening of "Return of the King," which will carry over into Dec. 17 -- the day of its global release.
that is sooooo fucking cool!!! I wish I could be in on that, though I would get pretty burned out after two in a row, I don't know how lucid I'd be for the last one.
But fueled by coffee and excitement, I will one day attempt a home version of this on wonderful dvd.
Seriously, this is a great thing. But there is no way I'd make it through , I'd end up hating it...
aw
im doing the three day thing. just got to get me sum tickets and a senorita or 2 to go w/.
i heard that golum and Sam have a sex scence in ROTK
Quote from: Bankyi heard that golum and Sam have a sex scence in ROTK
So what? Are you anti-gay now or something?
no in fact im eagerly anticipating the steamy showdown.
This is funny.
http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0167260/board/nest/3215388
Quote from: rustinglassThis is funny.
http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0167260/board/nest/3215388
Yes, it was amusing. I stopped reading, however, after somebody wrote, "I think David Lynch's 'Dune' is incredible." That movie scarred my childhood.
The Return of the King Trailer Online This Monday!
Source: New Line Cinema
New Line Cinema will debut the new trailer for The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King in theaters around the world on Friday, September 26.
In North America, the 2 min., 30 sec. trailer will play exclusively with New Line's Secondhand Lions, now in its second weekend of release. It will be in theaters throughout the weekend and will then debut online at LordoftheRings.net on Monday, September 29.
On December 17, the Journey ends. Co-writer/director/producer Peter Jackson's adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien's revered trilogy concludes with the worldwide release of The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. With intimate, emotional stories set against an epic backdrop, "The Return of the King" tells the dramatic final story of these men, their relationships and rivalries, and how through courage, commitment, and determination even the least of us can change the world.
/Just saw this the trailer in front of Matchschtick men. Gave me chills. Some of the shots...man - one of the most impressive shots has all the effects work in the background, but its just so damn impressive.
From the reports I've read I think for some reason the UK one is different to the American one.
I saw the new trailer too (the American version, if there is a difference). It looks great, but it lacks a certain oomph...mainly with the music. Doesn't work quite as well as the awe inspiring Two Towers trailer with the Requiem score. Nonetheless, it looks amazing, and the text saying 'This Christmas, the journey comes to an end' put a big lump in my throat.
Quote from: Ghostboy'This Christmas, the journey comes to an end' put a big lump in my throat.
I keep wondering - at the end of the film (in cinemas this is) will there be a standing ovation? I guess it depends on the tone the film departs on. Maybe a kind of teary eyed slow-building clap would be more appropriate.
Much better quality version available now. Server is under considerable strain though.
http://www.sf-film.dk/sf/trailers/rotk/trailer/ROTK_trailer_large.mov
Better Quality Quicktime Trailers
Hi-Res (http://progressive2.stream.aol.com/newline/gl/newline/lordoftherings/ReturnOfTheKing/returnoftheking_nl480_dl.mov)
Med-Res (http://progressive2.stream.aol.com/newline/gl/newline/lordoftherings/ReturnOfTheKing/returnoftheking_nl320_dl.mov)
Lo-Res (http://progressive2.stream.aol.com/newline/gl/newline/lordoftherings/ReturnOfTheKing/returnoftheking_nl240_dl.mov)
I found it sort of cliche....
yeah it had great visuals but it didnt really have that "umph" as GB wrote
Peter Jackson to Present Rings Trilogy in New York
Source: Variety
The Film Society of Lincoln Center and New Line Cinema in January will present a weekend-long event screening special extended editions of the first two films in Peter Jackson's "Lord of the Rings" trilogy, plus the upcoming final chapter, "The Return of the King," introduced by the director and cast. Running Jan. 10-11, the event marks the first time all three films will be shown together with the director in attendance.
Jackson, who co-wrote, directed and produced the trilogy, will introduce the Saturday screenings with members of the cast and participate in a Q&A following the night's final screening of "The Return."
On Sunday Film Society program director Richard Pena will host an extended conversation with Jackson, revisiting highlights of his career and exploring the "Rings" trilogy in depth.
The new trailer is good, one hell of a flick we got coming up. Loved how the images/music slowed at the end to dramatic effect.
20 Minutes of The Return of the King Seen!
Source: Fox News
Fox News' Roger Friedman got a chance to watch about 20 minute of The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King which he now believes to be a frontrunner for at the Oscars. Here's a taste...
Early last evening I got to see about 20 minutes of "The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King," Peter Jackson's third and final installment in his epic rendering of the Tolkien books.
As we could have predicted, the scenes a few of us had the pleasure of screening were top-notch, indicating that Jackson and the folks at New Line Cinema will go boldly into this year's Oscar race with every intention of winning.
And why not? "Return" looks amped for success. We saw about five completed sequences. A couple of them involved Frodo, Sam, and Gollum. Two others were impressive, expansive battle scenes. We got a look at Liv Tyler, Viggo Mortensen, Bernard Hill and Hugo Weaving — as well as at Elijah Wood and Sean Astin — in full regalia.
One thing that jumped off the screen right away: Howard Shore 's terrific score seems even better used in "Return." And Jackson has grown even more accomplished with his special effects and CGI.
One battle scene in particular, which starts with about 500 extras and then pulls back to an army of computer-generated thousands, will be quite stunning on the big screen.
Will "Return" finally earn this group some well-deserved Oscars? In all likelihood, Jackson is the front-runner for Best Director, certainly, a nod to the enormous achievement of these three films. And this year, maybe for the first time, Hill, Astin, and a couple of the other actors will be up for Best Supporting slots.
i really hope that they sweep the oscars
Yeah, I'm hoping the reigning theory that everyone was waiting until the third movie to start doling out most of the Oscar hardware for Lord of the Rings is true.
So I hope the movie and Peter Jackson rake in the awards this time around.
With the actors, however, I think they might have missed their chance to honor McKellan. He should have won for Fellowship of the Ring; Gandalf the White doesn't have as much compelling action in the second two films as Gandalf the Grey did in carrying the first movie.
Actorwise, I imagine we're looking at Wood, Astin and Mortensen as the best Oscar contenders from the final film.
And if Gollum is as amazing in the final film as he was in the second, I hope there's something they can do for Serkis.
Got Tickets for The Lord of the Rings Trilogy Marathon?
Tickets are going on sale Thursday, October 9 for New Line Cinema's upcoming "The Lord of the Rings Special Extended Screening Engagement". The tickets are also already becoming available at this moment for select theaters on Fandango.com and MovieTickets.com. The schedule for this special theatrical screening series is as follows:
December 5-11
Special Extended Edition The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring.
December 12-15
Special Extended Edition The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers.
Tuesday, December 16
One-time-only marathon of both the Extended Edition prints followed by the first screenings of The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King.
The list of participating theaters includes;
AL, Birmingham Carmike Summit 16
AL, Mobile Carmike Wynnsong 16
AR, Little Rock Rave Motion Picture Colonel Glenn 18
AZ, Tempe Harkins Theatres Arizona Mills 24 Cinema
AZ, Tuscon Century Theatres 20 Park Place
CA, Bakersfield Pacific Stadium 14
CA, Dublin Regal Cinemas Hacienda Crossings 20
CA, Fresno Regal Cinemas Stadium 21 Theatre
CA, Hollywood Arclight 15 Cinema
CA, Orange AMC @ The Block 30
CA, Sacramento Century Theatres Complex 14 Cinema
CA, San Diego AMC Mission Valley 20 Theatre
CA, San Francisco Sony Metreon 15 Cinemas
CA, San Jose Century Theatres Oakridge 20
CO, Colorado Springs Cinemark 17
CO, Denver Regal Cinemas Colorado Center 9 Theatre
CT, Manchester National Amusements Showcase 16 Buckland
CT, North Haven National Amusements Showcase North Haven 12
DC, Washington Loews Cineplex Uptown Theatre
FL, Aventura AMC Aventura Mall 24
FL, Boca Raton Muvico Palace 20
FL, Fort Meyers Regal Cinemas Bell Tower 20
FL, Orange Park AMC Orange Park Mall 24
FL, Orlando Regal Cinemas Waterford Lakes 20
FL, Pensacola Rave Motion Picture Pensacola 16
FL, Tampa AMC Veterans 24
GA, Chamblee Regal Cinemas Hollywood 24
GA, Columbus Carmike 15
HI, Honolulu Pacific Consolidated Ward 16 Theatre
IA, Davenport National Amusements Showcase 53 Cinema 18
IA, Johnston Carmike Wynnsong 16
ID, Boise Regal Cinemas Stadium 22
IL, Chicago AMC River East 21
IL, Springfield Kerasotes Showplace 8
IN, Fort Wayne Rave Motion Picture Jefferson Point 18
IN, Indianapolis Kerasotes Showplace 16
KS, Olathe AMC Studio 29
KS, Wichita Warren East 12
KY, Louisville National Amusements Stony Brook 10
LA, Baton Rouge Tinseltown Movies 10
LA, Harahan AMC Palace 20
LA, Shreveport Tinseltown USA 17
MA, Boston Loews Cineplex Boston Commons 19
MA, West Springfield National Amusements Showcase 15
MA, Worcester National Amusements Showcase Cinemas 18 North
MD, Baltimore Senator Theatre
MI, Flint National Amusements Showcase Cinema 12
MI, Grand Rapids Celebration Cinema 17
MI, Lansing Celebration Cinemas 18
MI, Southfield Star Southfield 20 Cinema
MN, Minneapolis Mega Star Cinemas Southdale Center 16
MO, Saint Louis Wehrenberg Theatres Ronnies 20
MO, Springfield Goodrich Theatres Springfield 8
NC, Concord AMC Concord Mills 24
NC, Raleigh Consolidated Theatres Raleigh Grand 16
NC, Winston Salem Carmike Wynnsong 12
NE, Bellevue Douglas Theatres Twin Creek Cinema 16
NJ, Cherry Hill Loews Cineplex Cherry Hill 24
NJ, New Bruswick Loews Cineplex New Brunswick 18
NM, Albuquerque Century Theatres Rio 24
NV, Henderson Regal Cinemas Green Valley Ranch 10
NV, Reno Century Theatres Park Lane 16
NY, Albany Regal Cinemas Crossgate 18
NY, Farmingdale National Amusements Farmingdale 14
NY, New York Loews Cineplex 42nd Street E-Walk
NY, Rochester Tinseltown 16
NY, Syracuse Regal Cinemas Carousel Mall Cinema 19
NY, West Nyack Loews Cineplex Palisades Center 21
NY, Williamsville Regal Cinemas Transit Center 18
OH, Cleveland Valley View 24
OH, Columbus AMC Lennox Town Center 24
OH, Maumee National Amusements Showcase Maumee 18
OH, North Canton Tinseltown USA 15
OH, Springdale National Amusements Showcase 18
OK, Oklahoma City AMC Quail Springs 24
OK, Tulsa Wallace Theatres Palace 12
OR, Portland Regal Cinemas Lloyd Center 10
PA, Harrisburg Regal Cinemas Harrisburg 14
PA, King of Prussia Regal Cinemas King of Prussia Stadium 16
PA, West Homestead Loews Cineplex Waterfront 22
RI, Warwick National Amusements Showcase 15 Cinemas
SC, Columbia AMC Dutch Square Cinema 14
SC, Greenville Regal Cinemas Hollywood 20
TN, Franklin Carmike Thoroughbred 20
TN, Knoxville Regal Cinemas West Town Mall 9
TN, Memphis Malco Paradisio 14
TX, Austin Regal Cinemas Gateway 16
TX, Corpus Christi Century Theatres Corpus Christi 16
TX, El Paso Tinseltown 20
TX, Houston Regal Cinemas Marquee Stadium 23
TX, Plano Cinemark Legacy 24
TX, San Antonio Regal Cinemas Fiesta 16
UT, Sandy Megaplex 17
VA, Hampton AMC Hampton Town Center 24
VA, Richmond Regal Cinemas Short Pump 14
WA, Seattle AMC Cinerama
WA, Spokane AMC River Park Square 20 Theatre
WI, Madison Marcus Theatres Point 16
WI, New Berlin Marcus Theatres Ridge Cinema 20
Funny:
(From TheOneRing.net)
There anyone else you would like to work with? A director or an actor?
Andy Serkis (Gollum): Director yeah! I was talking tonight about my favourite films and ehh.. P.T. Anderson, the director of Boogie Nights, Punch Drunk Love and Magnolia.. I love his films and I'd really love to work with him. The Coen brothers.. There are loads and loads of good directors out there.
A New Return of the King First Look
Source: AOL
America Online has a new first look clip of The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King which features old footage, interviews and some clips from the new film.
You can watch the behind-the-scenes look at the film in QuickTime format here (http://progressive.stream.aol.com/aol/us/moviefone/movies/2003/lotr3_014381/lotr3_fl_dl.mov)! The third movie hits theaters on December 17.
'Lord of the Rings' May Be Stage Musical
LONDON - Indian composer A.R. Rahman and a Finnish folk troupe have been commissioned to write songs for a musical stage version of "The Lord of the Rings," the show's producer announced Tuesday.
Rahman, a veteran Bollywood songwriter who scored the Andrew Lloyd Webber-produced musical "Bombay Dreams," will collaborate with the group Varttina on the adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkein's fantasy trilogy, which has spawned a hit film series.
"We are recreating Middle-earth and we needed the music that goes with it to be unique," said Kevin Wallace, who's producing the West End show.
"A.R. Rahman writes brilliant melodies with an exotic quality and we know he will write something which audiences will adore."
Tolkein is thought to have drawn on the Finnish folk epic the "Kalevala" to create the world of Middle-earth and the story of a hero's quest for a magical ring. The Finnish language inspired the Elvish tongue of Tolkein's trilogy.
The "Lord of the Rings" musical is scheduled to open in London in spring 2005. Wallace has said the production is budgeted at $13 million, which would make it the most expensive musical in West End history.
ATTN: NYC RESIDENTS. (you lucky bastards).
LORD OF THE RINGS TRILOGY WEEKEND | January 10 & 11, 2004
All three films shown as one event, with the director and cast in attendance.
On Saturday, January 10:
All screenings will be introduced by cast members.
• The Fellowship of the Ring (extended edition)
10:00 am
Tickets: $15 / $20
• The Two Towers (extended edition)
3:00 pm
Tickets: $15 / $20
• The Return of the King, followed by a Q&A session with Peter Jackson and cast
8:30 pm
Tickets: $25 / $30
On Sunday, January 11:
Conversation with Peter Jackson
Revisiting the highlights of his career and exploring The Lord of The RingsTrilogy in depth, hosted by Richard Peña, Program Director of the Film Society of Lincoln Center
2:00 pm
Tickets: $50 / $100
SPECIAL PACKAGES
• Three Movie Package
Prices: $45 / $60
• Full Weekend Package
Prices: $95 / $150
All three movies + Conversation with Peter Jackson
All reserved seating (prices vary depending on seating area). Note: Limit of four tickets or packages per order
TICKETS ON SALE STARTING OCTOBER 27
• Buy in Person at the Alice Tully Hall Box Office, Broadway at 65th Street, NYC (Monday - Saturday 11am - 6pm; Sunday 12 noon - 6 pm) starting October 27. For information, please call (212) 875-5050 after October 27.
• Charge Tickets by Phone by calling Centercharge: (212) 721-6500 (Mon - Sat 10 - 8; Sun 12 noon - 8) starting October 27. There is a $5.50 handling charge per ticket when ordering from Centercharge.
Film Society Members have until the end of this week to get their ticket orders in before they go on sale to the general public next Monday, October 27. For information on joining as a Film Society Member, contact wmccord@filmlinc.com
>> Info online for LOTR: http://www.filmlinc.com/specials/lotr/lotr.htm
Return of the King Running Time, Wallpapers & Premiere
Source: The Hollywood Reporter, TheOneRing.net Monday, October 27, 2003
TheOneRing.net has uncovered that the running time for Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, opening December 17, looks to be 210 minutes - about 3 hours and 30 minutes. Meanwhile, the official site for the film has posted three new magnificent wallpapers which you can find here,
http://www.lordoftherings.net/media/desktops/creatures_witchking1_1280.jpg
here
http://www.lordoftherings.net/media/desktops/creatures_witchking2_1280.jpg
and here!
http://www.lordoftherings.net/media/desktops/creatures_witchking2_1280.jpg
Also, the New Zealand government has announced a NZ$4 million ($2.4 million) package to promote "The Return of the King." The world premiere will take place in Wellington - home town of the trilogy's director - on Dec. 1, with key events to include a dinner for international media and a prime ministerial reception for the cast and key crew.
"These events will be followed by a series of New Zealand-focused functions and receptions for media and industry leaders coinciding with premieres in 10 overseas cities between December and March," said Pete Hodgson, the cabinet minister in charge of "Lord of the Rings."
"These will be modeled on similar events held around the premieres of the first two 'The Lord of the Rings' movies, which were successful in raising New Zealand's profile as a filmmaking destination."
New Zealand government spending on "Rings" has topped NZ$8 million ($4.8 million) since 2001.
..3 and a half hours ..LoL ..thats long as hell..
so i guess the extende cut will run at 4 plus hours............
The final poster for the final ( :cry: ) Lord of the Rings film has now been released.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg-www.theonering.net%2Fimages%2Fscrapbook%2F9469.jpg&hash=5e7e060e25c796eda9a92795c50eccb4c6abdecd)
Larger and wallpaper versions available here:
http://www.lordoftherings.net/index_rotk_teaser.html?theatrical
cool, its about a million times better than the ultra lame two towers poster. but, i still say they missed out on the biggest oppurtunity to take advantage of some drew struzan posters.
Peter Jackson on The Return of the King!
Source: Ain't-It-Cool-News Friday, November 7, 2003
Ain't-It-Cool-News talked directly with The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King director Peter Jackson who revealed the scene with Saruman & Grima got cut but will end up on the DVD. Also, no scouring of the Shire will be seen.
We have decided to save the Saruman sequence for the DVD. It's a great little scene. 7 mins long. Chris is wonderful, as usual. Brad is in about 6 shots. It was a film maker decision - nothing to do with the studio.
The problem is that the sequence was originally shot for The Two Towers, as it is in the book. Since The Two Towers couldn't sustain a 7 min "wrap" after Helm's Deep, we thought it would be a good idea to save it for the beginning of the Return of the King. The trouble is, when we viewed various ROTK cuts over the last few weeks, it feels like the first scenes are wrapping last year's movie, instead of starting the new one. We felt it got ROTK off to an uncertain beginning, since Saruman plays no role in the events of ROTK (we don't have the Scouring later, as the book does), yet we dwell in Isengard for quite a long time before our new story kicks off.
FULL ARTICLE: http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=16462
Lord of the Ring: Return of the King
Soundtrack Review with track samples.
http://www.theonering.net/perl/newsview/8/1068391654
Just going through these clips now and I damn love them. The roaring theme at the end of the Return of the King trailer is apparently the theme for Minis Tirith.
From imdb.com
Lord Of The Rings actor Christopher Lee is fuming after discovering all of his scenes have been cut from the third and final fantasy epic. The 81-year-old, who plays Saruman in the first two Lord Of The Rings films, says he was "shocked" and mystified by his exclusion from The Return Of The King -- which hits cinemas worldwide next month -- and has vowed to boycott the star-studded premieres. Lee says, "The only reason I'm able to say this is because it was on the internet and has been for some days. I only heard recently. As far as I'm concerned, I'm only telling you this because it has been revealed on the internet, someone has talked and it certainly wasn't me. Of course I am very shocked, that's all I can say. If you want to know why you would have to ask the company New Line or director Peter Jackson and his associates because I still don't really know why. I can't say any more because I signed a confidentiality agreement and I honored my word." And after being asked if he planned to attend any of the premieres, Lee snapped back, "No, what's the point? What's the point of going? None at all."
----------------
This is unfortunate on a couple of levels. It's been great to see an acting legend like Lee bounce back these past few years in such big fantasy films, and to have him booted from the capper of the LOTR trilogy is too bad. Especially since, from what I understand, he might have been the most devout Tolkien fan in the cast, and had been dreaming of playing Gandalf all his life.
On a narrative level, I think the omission of Gandalf the White's triumph over Saruman will be one of the biggest holes in the adaptation. It will seem odd not to have that closure and I will certainly miss one of the most powerful moments in the book:
He raised his hand, and spoke slowly in a clear cold voice: 'Saruman, your staff is broken.' There was a crack, and the staff split asunder in Saruman's hand, and the head of it fell down at Gandalf's feet. 'Go!' said Gandalf.
what a baby. alright, maybe he does have a right to be pissed, but come on! at least he was in the movie to begin w/, argulably one of the biggest movies ever made.
how could he scenes be cut though? i mean, isn't he a big thing in the return of the king? (i've only read fellowship and two towers)
this has all got to be wild internet rumors. there is absolutely NO freaking WAY that ALL of his scenes were cut. perhaps some of his scenes were. but for a character as important as his, to not find a few minutes out of 3 1/2 hours to follow up and finish off, would be ridiculous. i dont believe this. he's still in the movie.
yes it doesn't make much sense to cut these scenes it ROTK is three and a half hours long anyway..damn, whats with a few more minutes on a darth vader-like character.....???..lee does a great job why cut it..it IS a slap in his face ..and yes he is a LOTR fanatic..........
but still its not ALL that bad...IMO the extended cut of FOTR is way better thsan the theatrical cut ..(it's all about fleshing out the characters ..and exploring the story more).....and thers something comforting about that (which this is unique)..the extenede cut of TTT will be fantastic aslo..along w/ the theatrical and extenede cut of ROTK.....and still with the extended cut of ROTK those scenes involving lee will be in it ..so its not that big of a deal IMO....b/c as soon as ROTK hits on the exetended version all the 2-diskers are sold...... :!:
OH YEAH ONE LAST THING......I FINALLY GOT AROUND TO READING ALL THE POSTS IN THIS THREAD..AND EVEN IF THE STORY DOESN'T GRAB YOU IF YOU CALL YOURSELF A 'CINEPHILE' THEN YOU ARE NUTS TO THINK THAT THESE FILMS ARE NOT MODERN MASTERPIECES..THESE FILMS ARE BEAUTIFUL...ALSO i HAVE NEVER READ THE BOOKS, AND I AM NOT THE TYPE WHO WATCHES ALL OF THESE BIG EPIC LIKE FILMS AND GET WASHED UP IN THEM.(MY FORTE IS LYNCH, ARONOFSKY..)..ITS JUST I AM A RATIONAL FAN OF FILM AND REALIZE THE MAGIC OF THESE FILMS...... 8)
From theonering.net:
"I was watching the uk morning show This Morning aware he was going to be on it and he has infact verified that his character will not be featured in ROTK, he seemed sad when he mentioned it but due to a confidentiality agreement he was not able to comment further."
http://www.theonering.net/staticnews/1068655898.html
I guess it's just a repeat of the news stated earlier, but it just shows that it is (more than likely) true. Maybe if Petey catches wind of people's disappointment and outrage of Saruman's exclusion then he'll put the scene back in.
..
If you read the interview with Peter Jackson on AICN, he explains it all. He says (SPOILER) that Saruman was supposed to bite it at the end of the last one, just like the giant spider was supposed to be at the end of the last one. They ended up moving both sequences to the beginning of the third. As editing progressed, PJ realized that Saruman's fate worked against the pacing at the beginning of the film, and decided to leave it for the extended edition DVD.
Andy Serkis to be the Face of King Kong?
In a great interview at the Toronto Sun with Andy Serkis about his work as Gollum in The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, an interesting bit is mentioned about director Peter Jackson's upcoming King Kong:
Serkis has an even bigger assignment ahead of him. Rumour has it he'll be the face of King Kong in Peter Jackson's planned 2005 remake of the legendary ape epic.
"Ssssh!" he says, giving another mischievous smile — and a thumbs-up gesture. It's just between us and the cat.
Sounds like Jackson will be using a similar technique for creating King Kong as he did with Gollum, where Serkis would act out the role and then the big ape would be computer generated in afterwards!
Rest of the Serkis interview here. (http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1069197009873&call_pageid=968867495754&col=969483191630)
I think Serkis should go do a PTA film instead. ... I'm ready to see that dude as a flesh-and-blood character.
(Not that I don't love Gollum, my precious...)
I was also hoping to see some action between Gandalff and Saruman... he needed to have his ass kicked at some point... The movie will be so good that we wont even notice I guess...
I cant wait to see this... less than a month to go!
Quote from: Find Your MagaliI think Serkis should go do a PTA film instead. ... I'm ready to see that dude as a flesh-and-blood character.
Check out 24 Hour Party People. He's great in that.
Quote from: GhostboyQuote from: Find Your MagaliI think Serkis should go do a PTA film instead. ... I'm ready to see that dude as a flesh-and-blood character.
Check out 24 Hour Party People. He's great in that.
And watch his screentest on the Extended Two Towers DVD, that's some intense stuff.
Some tidbits from an upcoming issue of Newsweek:
--- With the last installment in the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy about to be released, Newsweek has learned that New Line studios, which made $650 million in the U.S. alone with the first two films, offered some cast members an initial round of "The Two Towers" bonuses that left many cast members out in the cold. Though the movie had been an even bigger hit than "Fellowship of the Ring," the bonuses were smaller. The actors wanted assurances that there would be a more equitable offering in the future. When the studio declined to make promises, 18 actors banded together and composed a letter to Time Warner chairman Richard Parsons pleading their case. The group was ultimately convinced that going over New Line's head to Parsons would only initiate mutually assured destruction between the cast and the studio. They did not send the letter. Instead, they made what New Line executive vice president Mark Ordesky diplomatically calls "a vigorous appeal" to the studio's leadership, telling them that it was difficult to imagine spending the final quarter of 2003 attending press junkets and premihres when some of them, particularly those with smaller roles, really did need to get jobs to make a living. New Line agreed to create a new bonus pool. Crunching numbers with one of the actors everyone trusted-without any agents at all, and with a lawyer only to type up the agreement-the studio struck an egalitarian deal for both "The Two Towers" and "Return of the King," paying cast members above and beyond their profit-participation deals, and even awarding the many actors with no deal in place at all. The bonuses restored good will. But sources also tell Newsweek that the cast is now auditing the studio. And director Peter Jackson and Miramax, who initiated "The Lord of the Rings" years ago, have teamed up for an audit of their own. New Line's Ordesky, an old friend of Jackson's insists that the studio does not consider the audits confrontational.
---- With the journey over, Orlando Bloom, who plays the elf Legolas, tells Newsweek about the emotional end of filming. "I was definitely welled up, man," he says. "I was choked. I was suddenly reminded of how lucky I was to be a part of this process and how much it changed me -- Viggo being a real mentor to me, and Peter being this incredibly amazing, visionary director. They cut together a little gag reel. It was, like, four minutes of all these different Leggy moments from the whole shoot and outtakes and stuff. It was hilarious! It had all this '80s music. You know that song 'Hungry Eyes'? 'One look at you and I touch the sky?' They had this homoerotic thing where they had a shot of Viggo pulling out his sword and looking at me, and me looking at him and drawing my bow. It was brilliant, man." ((** NOTE FROM ME: I hope we get this on the ROTK:EE**))
FINALLY, A BIT OF A SPOILER. Sweep the text to read...
--- Peter Jackson's "The Return of the King" begins with a flashback to what seems like the beginning of time -- young Deagol is fishing with his creepy brother Smeagol when suddenly a fish on his line pulls him out of the boat and underwater, where he spots a gold ring half-submerged in the riverbed.
Of course, as we saw in the documentary on TTT:EE, that's Serkis himself playing Smeagol.[/size]
trailer's already making me fucking cry.
http://www.lordoftherings.net/trailer_rotk/trailer_medium.html
Mght be interested in seeing the pictures from the Red Carpet premiere in Wellington. Huge parade, they really deserve it.
http://www.theonering.net/scrapbook/group/1187
Lotsa trailers w/ LOTR! Dec. 1, 2003
Source: JoBlo.com by: Mike Sampson
I'm sure you've heard by now the news that the first SPIDER-MAN 2 trailer will be attached to prints of RETURN OF THE KING when it opens on December 17th. But do you know what other trailers will be attached? Well we here at JoBlo.com have a first look at the list of trailers scheduled to be playing before ROTK on the 17th and what an impressive list it is! Besides SPIDER-MAN 2, there are no less than eight trailers scheduled to run before the film and almost all will be your first look at big 2004 films. The three films we've seen something from before are HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN, HIDALGO and SHREK 2 (the latter of which just premiered before ELF) and all are available in the JoBlo.com Trailer Archive.
The first of the biggies is a teaser trailer for RIDDICK, Vin Diesel's follow-up to PITCH BLACK. The film, which has officially ditched THE CHRONICLES OF from its title, is scheduled for release on June 11th. Next up is THE WORLD OF TOMORROW starring Jude Law, Gwyneth Paltrow and Angelina Jolie. This sci-fi/action film was independently financed until picked by Paramount a while back and is currently scheduled for a TBD 2004 summer date. (Also listed as a possibility from Paramount is a trailer for the MTV comedy THE PERFECT SCORE.)
I was surprised to see the trailer for I, ROBOT wasn't attached to MATRIX REVOLUTIONS but Fox went for THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW instead and left ROBOT to premiere in front of ROTK. If it's anywhere near as good as TOMORROW's teaser trailer, we're in for a treat. Next is the trailer for the latest Dwayne "formerly The Rock" Johnson action flick WALKING TALL. It co-stars Johnny Knoxville as two guys who kick-ass after their hometown is overrun by criminals and lowlifes. Last but not least we have the first trailer for KILL BILL, VOL. 2, which I believe needs no introduction.
So all in all those who're excited to see ROTK when it's released only have something else to look forward to in the theaters. For those of us not inclined to hit ROTK in theaters (or for those of us who attend press screenings that unfortunately don't usually run trailers) these trailers will very likely be online right around the 17th.
Banky you are always full of interesting information... thank you :)
I will be seating in that theatre the 17th, early, and waiting to see all those trailers and that fucking great movie!!!!
Quote from: andykBanky you are always full of interesting information... thank you :)
i appreciate that but i think two others should get that praise
Quote from: BankyQuote from: andykBanky you are always full of interesting information... thank you :)
i appreciate that but i think two others should get that praise
Yep, the Mac clan.
But you're very informative too Banky, you just have slowed down a little bit.
BTW, that's an awesome avatar.
Quote from: Banky...Next is the trailer for the latest Dwayne "formerly The Rock" Johnson action flick WALKING TALL. It co-stars Johnny Knoxville as two guys who kick-ass after their hometown is overrun by criminals and lowlifes...
Son of a bitch...
Do you know how big this is going to be in the south? If you ask any country boy what his favorite movie is, 3 out of 4 will say "Walking Tall." Top that off with The Rock in the starring role...
It's going to be a big hit in the south.
Anyone going to see the extended versions of the first two films this Friday?
‘The Return of the King’ invades ABC’s Primetime Thursday. ABC NEWS SPECIAL is scheduled to be shown at 10:00pm EST and PST, Thursday, December 4 (Today!)
Primetime's Jay Schadler got an exclusive look at the last days on the set of the blockbuster films. Schadler spent a whole day with director Peter Jackson and star Viggo Mortensen — as well as untold numbers of orcs, elves and assorted fanciful creatures.
Click link here (http://abcnews.go.com/sections/Primetime/Entertainment/lord_of_the_rings_031204-1.html) to read an article about Schadler's experience on the Lord of the Rings shoot.
It's been about twelve hours now since I saw ROTK, and I just can't believe it's over. It seems like just the other day that I went to see 13 Days to see the first teaser, or downloaded that first bit of footage from apple.com back in 2000....
It's pretty overwhelming, this feeling and the film itself. I'll post more later.
Stamp out ghostboy's eyeses!
Can't wait to hear your review. :)
Quote from: GhostboyIt's been about twelve hours now since I saw ROTK, and I just can't believe it's over. It seems like just the other day that I went to see 13 Days to see the first teaser, or downloaded that first bit of footage from apple.com back in 2000....
It's pretty overwhelming, this feeling and the film itself. I'll post more later.
comon man give us a little more than that
I'll be writing my full review later. For now, I'll just say that this one is just...massive.
It also has more narrative errors than the others, in terms of pacing and whatnot, and there is some trouble in wrapping it up cohesively. I think Peter Jackson might have needed more time to fine tune it, and I'm sure the extended edition will reflect that when it comes out.
But none of that matters, in the end. At least not to me.
I didn't want the lights to come up at the end.
Quote from: GhostboyI'll be writing my full review later. For now, I'll just say that this one is just...massive.
It also has more narrative errors than the others, in terms of pacing and whatnot, and there is some trouble in wrapping it up cohesively. I think Peter Jackson might have needed more time to fine tune it, and I'm sure the extended edition will reflect that when it comes out.
But none of that matters, in the end. At least not to me.
I didn't want the lights to come up at the end.
God, hearing that makes me want to cry. Half because of the sadness the movie will be, and half because of my envy of you Ghostboy.
Quote from: Gamblor the ManwhoreHalf because of the sadness the movie will be, and half because of my envy of you Ghostboy.
Sinner.
Quote from: GhostboyI didn't want the lights to come up at the end.
girls, look away crude joke coming.....
was it because you had a nerd-boner?
Quote from: MacGuffinQuote from: Gamblor the ManwhoreHalf because of the sadness the movie will be, and half because of my envy of you Ghostboy.
Sinner.
:!:
Let me preface this by saying I'm a little tipsy as I type. More thoughts later, and if you have Q's, by all means, ask away...
8) So I managed to catch the movie too. My initial thoughts:
HOLY
FUCKING
SHIT
Okay, so if you're not a real LOTR fan, don't like fantasy movies or whatever-- I dare you not to gasp or mutter 'holy shit' AT LEAST 5 times during this movie. The scope is unlike anything I've ever seen. The action is shockingly huge and wonderful. And that's just the icing on the cake.
Yes, like Ghostboy said, you're not seeing the full-perfect-version of the movie. But I dare you not to be in awe of what's on the screen. I was worried that the omission of Christopher Lee was going to be a problem... it really wasn't. There's so much more else going on. Sean Astin deserves an Oscar nomination. He's that good, and has to (literally and figuratively) carry the movie near the end. Amazing work.
There were at least 7 or 8 crowd-cheering-moments, where characters are given their moments to shine (Even Miranda Otto in the biggest).
If you haven't seen the Extended cuts of the films, see them before ROTK, you'll enjoy the movie more-- especially the longer 2 Towers.
God. I'm still reeling from the whole thing. What Jackson and Co. has put together is just wonderful and my words of praise can in no way do them just justice. I hope they sweep the Oscars.
:onfire: :multi: :Fade-color :!:
ooooooooh baby, i can't wait!!!!!!
Quote from: GhostboyIt also has more narrative errors than the others, in terms of pacing and whatnot, and there is some trouble in wrapping it up cohesively. I think Peter Jackson might have needed more time to fine tune it, and I'm sure the extended edition will reflect that when it comes out.
The theatrical edition of The Return of the King reportedly clocks in at 210 minutes - or 3 and 1/2 hours long. Still not enough for you? Well, director Peter Jackson, speaking to the press in New Zealand this week (according to The Hollywood Reporter) reportedly hinted that The Return of the King: Special Extended DVD Edition, due to be released next year, could clock in at over 4 hours long! Set to be added back into the film are a number of scenes, including one (much talked about online recently) involving the fate of Saruman at Isengard.
wow, 3 &1/2 hours?! perhaps weak2ndact and ghostboy could validate this?
Quote from: Weak2ndActcharacters are given their moments to shine (Even Miranda Otto in the biggest).
I didn't see the film but I think I know what you're talking about.
If so... It's my favourite part of the book, for years and years I've imagined how it would look on screen...I hope peter has a better vision than mine.
I'm sure the BBFC passed it as 3hours and 20 including credits, with a directors recommendation of where to place an intermission (which apparently Warner Villages here are going to do).
Great news about the extended version!
Quote from: ©bradwow, 3 &1/2 hours?! perhaps weak2ndact and ghostboy could validate this?
Really. I got people on my back for not liking the first two and bugging me to see the extended editions instead. I'm looking at the lengths for both and thinking, "Where am I going to find the time?". With Return of the King, I'm seeing it but really dreading it. An entire friday afternoon will be spent just for this movie. No way I'm seeing the extended version at all. My problems with the series are deeper than the solution of 40 minutes added to it.
It's definitely a full 210 minutes. Doesn't feel like it, though.
Weak2ndAct, what did you think of the scene where Billy Boyd sings that song to Denethor? I can't get that montage out of my head.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Really. I got people on my back for not liking the first two and bugging me to see the extended editions instead. I'm looking at the lengths for both and thinking, "Where am I going to find the time?". My problems with the series are deeper than the solution of 40 minutes added to it.
I don't think they'd radically change your view of the movie but I certainly think they would resolve (to some extent) the issues you have with battle emphasis, pacing, videogame syndrome, character depth.
Everyone keeps talking about how much better the extended version of Two Towers is, but it's not. It's longer and it contains more information, but a lot of the scenes (save a small handfull) are unnecessary and just throw of the pacing of the film.
I mean I love these films and I'm glad I bought the Extended cut, but I'm also going to go back and buy the original release because it's better.
should we go ahead and move this thread to 'now showing?'
Quote from: ©bradshould we go ahead and move this thread to 'now showing?'
Is it the 17th?
Quote from: MacGuffinQuote from: ©bradshould we go ahead and move this thread to 'now showing?'
Is it the 17th?
OHH!! you were SLAMMED down mista brad
Quote from: ®edlumQuote from: The Gold Trumpet
Really. I got people on my back for not liking the first two and bugging me to see the extended editions instead. I'm looking at the lengths for both and thinking, "Where am I going to find the time?". My problems with the series are deeper than the solution of 40 minutes added to it.
I don't think they'd radically change your view of the movie but I certainly think they would resolve (to some extent) the issues you have with battle emphasis, pacing, videogame syndrome, character depth.
This is what I'll do then. I just realized ROTK comes out during finals week for me at school. This isn't a bad thing at all, but a great one. I don't need to study and will have little to do, so during this week I promise I will watch both extended versions and the final film on friday. I'm going to give the trilogy a fair shot with open eyes since I saw the last two only during theatrical release. OK? You guys should consider this a miracle.
Also, quite funny, Pedro.
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetAlso, quite funny, Pedro.
yes. very quite.
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetOK? You guys should consider this a miracle.
Bless you. You're too good to us.
I saw the trailer for the fifth or sixth time before the Last Samurai today...god that is the most heart-wrenching trailer, I want to cry every time I see it. I hope this movie is everything the guys on the dvd commentary said it will be, but I'm making sure to distance myself just a
little bit, to not be too expectant of anything.
Edit: Forgot to read the page before this...
Weak2ndAct, thanks for the great review, you've got my fucking shaking from wanting to see this so bad...fuck finals man. I need to see this movie now!!!!!
Quote from: MacGuffinSinner.
:twisted: This should be your next sig quote: "We see a deadly sin on every street corner, in every home, and we tolerate it. We tolerate it because it's common, it's trival. We tolerate it morning, noon, and night. Well, not anymore. I'm setting the example. And what I've done is going to be puzzled over, and studied, and followed... forever. "
Quote from: Gamblor the Manwhore:twisted: This should be your next sig quote: "We see a deadly sin on every street corner, in every home, and we tolerate it. We tolerate it because it's common, it's trival. We tolerate it morning, noon, and night. Well, not anymore. I'm setting the example. And what I've done is going to be puzzled over, and studied, and followed... forever. "
I had that one with the Gluttony avatar. Thanks for noticing, Prince Of Darkness.
Quote from: MacGuffinQuote from: Gamblor the Manwhore:twisted: This should be your next sig quote: "We see a deadly sin on every street corner, in every home, and we tolerate it. We tolerate it because it's common, it's trival. We tolerate it morning, noon, and night. Well, not anymore. I'm setting the example. And what I've done is going to be puzzled over, and studied, and followed... forever. "
I had that one with the Gluttony avatar. Thanks for noticing, Prince Of Darkness.
Dammit, slammed by Mac again...I'll show you!
Quote from: Pedro the WombatQuote from: MacGuffinQuote from: ©bradshould we go ahead and move this thread to 'now showing?'
Is it the 17th?
OHH!! you were SLAMMED down mista brad
that i was. :shock:
whoa!! the official Taco Bell SLAMMADGE-count in this thread is skull-crushingly UNPRECEDENTED!
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
This is what I'll do then. I just realized ROTK comes out during finals week for me at school. This isn't a bad thing at all, but a great one. I don't need to study and will have little to do, so during this week I promise I will watch both extended versions and the final film on friday. I'm going to give the trilogy a fair shot with open eyes since I saw the last two only during theatrical release. OK? You guys should consider this a miracle.
GT, you intentions and your open mind are supremely admirable. However, if your opinions of the first two don't change for the better with the extended editions, I think you should skip the last one and spend four hours with a film (or films, or books) you really love. I really wish you could love Return Of The King, but I'm guessing you won't.
Quote from: picolaswhoa!! the official Taco Bell SLAMMADGE-count in this thread is skull-crushingly UNPRECEDENTED!
yeah...ive never seen slamming quite like this anywhere else.
I posted this to "Now Playing", but I guess since its not the 17th yet (although technically it IS "now playing" at preview screenings in the U.S.):
------------
I just saw this movie at a preview screening on Saturday morning, and despite being the only movie I know with 4 "the"'s in the title, it was simply amazing!!! I think this movie was a lot better than the last two put together. The entire movie was like an emotional rollercoaster... with highs and lows, moments of happiness and sadness... I was tearing at certain parts... I swear... I've never actually teared at a movie before... the acting was also amazing. The battle scenes were the best i've ever seen in a movie. The CG though, could have been better at times... but the overall movie gets an A+ (9.9/10) in my book.
‘Lord of the Rings’ director PETER JACKSON is coming clean about his controversial decision to cut the 7-minute ‘Saruman sequence.’
“It never was in Return of the King. The scene was never in the script,” Jackson told to IGN.COM.
The particular sequence created a stir last month, when CHRISTOPHER LEE, who plays the evil wizard Saruman the White, came out publicly on a British morning talk show stating that he was ‘shocked’ to learn about Jackson’s decision to cut his only scene in the third Lord of the Rings movie.
“We had a 4 hour 15 minute cut of Return of the King with everything in there that we shot but it was too long. It felt like the emotional impact of the film was being diluted, it was just too long. So we started trimming the film back and the Saruman scene was one of many scenes we cut,” Jackson explains.
Jackson also tells ign.com that he believes all the reports on the internet about not giving the 81 year-old actor Lee proper notice were “completely wrong”.
“There were phone calls, faxes. He's (Christopher Lee) fine, but he's got a website with fans who've started a petition which I don't think is necessarily in his best interest to have a petition starting up. I don't think it was Christopher for a second that drove that. I think it was just fans. It just brings a lot of publicity to it that he's not really feeling that way, but his fans are fighting the battle and it brings a lot of unnecessary publicity to it. But the scene's great and it will be on the DVD and everyone will get a chance to see it. It's a good scene and at least it will complete the story in terms of the three films.”
I felt the movie was just perfect the way it was... I personally don't like the extended editions, because if the scenes were important enough to keep, they would have been kept. I feel the theatrical versions of the trilogy are great the way they are.
Quote from: MacGuffin"It never was in Return of the King. The scene was never in the script," Jackson told to IGN.COM.
I'm guessing this refers to "The Voice of Saruman"-chapter originally being the ending of the Two Towers script, where it belongs. We love these films despite their pacing issues, don't we? The sequence should never have been moved, no matter how long it would've dragged the conclusion of TTT. Probably no more than Return of the King's apparent many endings. Ach! These changes. They say ROTK is the most faithful to the book, is it true Ghostboy?
I haven't made it past the first 100 pages of Fellowship yet...I started it when the first movie was released, and then decided to wait and just let everything come as a surprise. I'm really curious now to see what the differences are...
Quote from: TheVoiceOfNickI felt the movie was just perfect the way it was... I personally don't like the extended editions, because if the scenes were important enough to keep, they would have been kept. I feel the theatrical versions of the trilogy are great the way they are.
::buzzer sounds::
wrong.....
in my upmost geekest reply i must infact freely admit that the extended cuts are much better.....
the scenes in TTT:EE w/Boromir and Faromir (whatever ther're names are).fleshed out their relationship...and shoudl have been in the theatrical cut.......
Of all the scenes in both extended editions we've seen so far, I don't understand why those scenes were cut out. They make both Fellowship and Return Of The King stronger pieces, not to mention The Two Towers itself.
Quote from: GhostboyOf all the scenes in both extended editions we've seen so far, I don't understand why those scenes were cut out. They make both Fellowship and Return Of The King stronger pieces, not to mention The Two Towers itself.
correct!!!!
.....good point about FOTR....when you wath it post TTT:EE...you think of Boramir on a new level that 's beniicial ..and feel more deeply about his fate....i thought when watching the TTT theatrical that Faromir character was "stupid"(i guess)..but just the added addition of those scenes ...changed my mind....and has really gotten me psyched up about his character in ROTK....
Well, it may be "better", but i'm cool with just seeing the theatrical versions... the way things were wrapped up in Return of the King was very Magnolia-esque...
A funny thing I read in the latest issue of Empire. John Rhys said something about how certain he is that a studio is going to want to remake The Lord of The Rings before he dies.
What if this happens? What the fuck if this happens?
EDIT: Just watched the behind the scenes on the TTT ext. Richard Taylor. Is that the most annoying voice ever?
Quote from: kotte
EDIT: Just watched the behind the scenes on the TTT ext. Richard Taylor. Is that the most annoying voice ever?
But he makes everything sound so fantabulous.
Quote from: kotte
EDIT: Just watched the behind the scenes on the TTT ext. Richard Taylor. Is that the most annoying voice ever?
No, the most annoying voices on the dvd were Elijah Wood and Sean Astin on the Cast commentary, I mean I think they're nice guys, but they need to learn to shut the fuck up and stop sucking each other off. I couldn't stand listening to them speak on the commentary, using really boastful, romantic language, they sound like they're trying really hard to sound smart. My favorite part is when Elijah is like, "You know, I think the ring has like a symbolism about power and evil..." I laughed my ass off. The ring represents power and evil? Wow, what an amazing, hard-to-see insight.
And besides, they kept talking over Andy Serkis, who, after watching the making of the Long and Short of it (which the short itself sucked), is a fucking funny, smart guy, but he couldn't get a word in.
Quote from: kotteEDIT: Just watched the behind the scenes on the TTT ext. Richard Taylor. Is that the most annoying voice ever?
Was it more annoying than the stunt woman who didn't know who Errol Flynn was?
Quote from: kotteJust watched the behind the scenes on the TTT ext. Richard Taylor. Is that the most annoying voice ever?
Mark Ordesky qualifies.
on the Felowship DVD, I dont know who it is but on the designer track, that is the most annoying voice to listen to.
Quote from: Withnail
Mark Ordesky qualifies.
OOOHHH! We got a winna!
Quote from: Gamblor du JourQuote from: Withnail
Mark Ordesky qualifies.
OOOHHH! We got a winna!
I think it's a tie between him and Taylor.
Quote from: Gamblor du Jour
No, the most annoying voices on the dvd were Elijah Wood and Sean Astin on the Cast commentary, I mean I think they're nice guys, but they need to learn to shut the fuck up and stop sucking each other off. I couldn't stand listening to them speak on the commentary, using really boastful, romantic language, they sound like they're trying really hard to sound smart. My favorite part is when Elijah is like, "You know, I think the ring has like a symbolism about power and evil..." I laughed my ass off. The ring represents power and evil? Wow, what an amazing, hard-to-see insight.
And besides, they kept talking over Andy Serkis, who, after watching the making of the Long and Short of it (which the short itself sucked), is a fucking funny, smart guy, but he couldn't get a word in.
Fully agree. Astin and Wood needed to pipe down. They might as well just have let Boyd and Monaghan riff on the whole movie.
Bernard Hill, the dreamy Miranda Otto and Brad Dourif told some good stories, but Bloom and Rhys-Davies were kind of dry. And it really seemed wrong not to have Viggo and Ian on there.
BTW, one of my favorite moments on the behind-the-scenes stuff is the look on the faces of Wood and Serkis after Astin stomps off the set when Serkis accidentally tears his wig off.
Quote from: Gamblor du Jour
the Long and Short of it (which the short itself sucked).
..... :shock: ..WTF???????.that was guerilla filmaking at it's Zenith......
Quote from: NEON MERCURYQuote from: Gamblor du Jour
the Long and Short of it (which the short itself sucked).
..... :shock: ..WTF???????.that was guerilla filmaking at it's Zenith......
Guerilla...having some of the most experienced, talented professionals at your disposal at the site of the biggest trilogy of all time with any equipment you'd want...really guerilla.
I haven't seen the short, but I've always thought Guerilla Shooting was more about how you did it, rather than who or what you used to do it.
Quote from: GhostboyI haven't seen the short, but I've always thought Guerilla Shooting was more about how you did it, rather than who or what you used to do it.
Hmm could be, but when I hear guerilla, I think of more of a rough, risky, bare-bones way of doing things. More ragtag than anything. The short didn't seem hastily done or anything, but I could be wrong.
Quote from: Gamblor du JourQuote from: NEON MERCURYQuote from: Gamblor du Jour
the Long and Short of it (which the short itself sucked).
..... :shock: ..WTF???????.that was guerilla filmaking at it's Zenith......
Guerilla...having some of the most experienced, talented professionals at your disposal at the site of the biggest trilogy of all time with any equipment you'd want...really guerilla.
......i forgot to click this " :wink: " at the end of my previous post....i thought it was funnnny that you mentioned in an earlier post about austinn's short becuase it was the dumbest sh*t i have ever seen(next to a clark film)....
..and i think guerrilla is how, and not with what annd whom with....
Quote from: NEON MERCURY
......i forgot to click this " :wink: " at the end of my previous post....i thought it was funnnny that you mentioned in an earlier post about austinn's short becuase it was the dumbest sh*t i have ever seen(next to a clark film)....
..and i think guerrilla is how, and not with what annd whom with....
Ahhh, I understand now. I knew I picked up some of that Neon Mercury sarcasm. It takes a fine eye to perceive it.
reviews are pouring in, and most of them are excellent.
I really wish I didn't have to work today. I'm dying to see the marathon. Of course, it sold out in Dallas in less than an hour in October, but I could make my own at home with the extended editions, and then go see ROTK first thing tomorrow morning. I'm getting excited as hell about seeing it again.
Anybody going to see a midnight showing tonight? I am. ... Not that I'm not a geek (I am), but I'm doing it more because of the facts that (1) I have utterly ZERO free time during my days and nights for the rest of the month and (2) since I'm a night person, I'd be awake from midnight to 3 a.m., anyway, winding down from work, so since I'm awake, I might as well check out this little art film with the elves and orcs.
harry knowles reviews return of the king:
"I've already given 6 hours and 44 minutes of my life over to RETURN OF THE KING, I've seen it twice. On Tuesday, I'll see it again, and after that, I imagine I'll see it 3 more times by the end of the week.
This is frankly one of the greatest films ever made. It towers over the other so-called epics of the year in a way that one could only imagine it was like when INTOLERANCE was released 87 years ago. ..."
read the rest here. http://www.aintitcoolnews.com/display.cgi?id=16667
Quote from: Find Your MagaliAnybody going to see a midnight showing tonight? I am. ...
Hell yeah man, I'm gonna get there at around 10 just to get a good place in line. We were gonna dress up, because my roommate does a killer impression of Gollum and I have hairy feet, but I think we gave up.
Amazing. 44 reviews at Rotten Tomatoes so far and none of them bad. Has a movie every garnered a 100% rating?
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/TheLordoftheRingsTheReturnoftheKing-1127213/
Quote from: RaikusAmazing. 44 reviews at Rotten Tomatoes so far and none of them bad. Has a movie every garnered a 100% rating?
Other than a small movie with 2 reviews, no. I think Finding Nemo came the closest with a 98% approval rating after it was all said and done. I doubt Return of the King will get 100% simply because if one critic I know reviews it, he will shit tank it. I know there are others who carry a strong dislike for the trilogy. I'm part of that group as well, but I'll admit if Return of the King is good. I just don't expect it to be.
Bought my tickets on movietickets.com... I feel like the fucking looser from the comercial... but I had no time to go to buy it myself and I'm going tonite at 12:01... wooohoo I cant wait... my precious!!!
The film is simply amazing.
I can't really find words to describe it yet but it'll come to me soon.
If I wasn't crying because of the emotional weight of the film, I'd be crying because it's over now. I've seen the last piece of the puzzle, and I suspect many of you others have as well by now. Like kotte, I need to rearrange my thoughts, this just stacked them like a deck of cards, and floored me while doing it.
Edit: Spelling
killing the last few minutes before i head off to the midnite show here. didnt plan on going till tomorrow but got the tickets today on a whim. i am pretty excited. curious as to how many here did the trilogy tuesday today?
Just got back from it. Goddamn, that movie's long.
Maybe it's because I'm running on less than 5 hours sleep, but even after FOTR and TTT, I have this feeling of disappointment that eventually goes away with subsequent viewings and gets annihilated with the extended dvd release. I'll wait till more people have seen it to post what I think should've happened (perhaps because I half expected it, not having read the books).
I just came back. I have to get my thoughts straight, but I think that this may be the best movie ever made. I think there is nothing negative to say about it, not even that it is too long, because its perfect.
This movie should win all the Oscars, including Best Film, Best Director, and most of them should get a special Oscar for acting, because they were all amazing... especially Sam.
The movie has everything you can ever want in a movie and its so well done that it blows your mind. I'm extremely happy about it.
I didnt sleep last night so I've been without sleep for about 40 hours now, and I was so exited that I didnt want it to end and as soon as I got here I needed to write this about the film. I have to add that Im not a LOTR fan, I wasnt excited at all when the 1st one came out (I was after I saw it), and I didnt read the books until this year.
THE MOVIE IS FUCKING EXCELLENT!
Quote from: RaikusAmazing. 44 reviews at Rotten Tomatoes so far and none of them bad. Has a movie every garnered a 100% rating?
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/TheLordoftheRingsTheReturnoftheKing-1127213/
Yes, quite a few. Most noteable is Toy Story 2 with a 100% after 111 reviews.
Here is the link to the top movies.
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/top/bestofrt_year.php
SPOILERS
And since I know no one can stear away from the text directly underneath the spoiler sign, I wrote this.
REAL SPOILERS
Favorite moments (not in ant particular order):
* Lighting of the beacons
* Gandalf putting his arm around Pippin. Actually, the whole father/son relationship
* "I can't carry it for you, but I can carry you"
* Pippin's drunken Withnail imitation at the start
* Confrontation w/ the Witch King
* Pippin's singing montage
* Sam and Frodo talking "At the End of All Things"
* The Smeagol/ Deagol flashback
I'm forgetting so much. I seriously need to see it again.
Quote from: Withnail
* Pippin's singing montage
Agree. Very powerful.
This film just blew my mind. Makes me proud of cinema.
Lord of the Rings? More like Lord of the Boring Overblown 3 and a half hour crap. :(
This was a good movie. Yah!
Pirates was better though. :(
Seriously.
If Johnny Depp had played every part in Lord of the Rings (and he could have, too) it would have been really good. :(
seriosuly this was a good movie but not the perfection some make it out to be
It's funny...thinking back on moments in the film makes me want to cry more than I wanted to watching the film. I need to see this one again and again. This is not the best movie ever made, but it's a damn good one.
i thought it was good, but i dont know if i was just tired or what but i didnt enjoy it any more than either of the first two. i also thought the ending, ending, ending, ending was just terrible. good for the extended dvd, but really who gives a shit? it just went on for far too long i thought. could've ended really as soon as SPOILER the damn eagles picked up Frodo and Sam or any of the closest endings to that END SPOILER i dunno, i need to see it again. i was really tired. the battles were pretty cool. i also kinda felt like (as in matrix 3) a lot of the middle of the film i was watching the 'secondary characters' and not frodo or aragorn or anyone i really cared about. also, liv tyler was in the film about 3 minutes, why does she have her own poster? also, i was under the impression from the talk about the film being powerful and everyone watching with tears in their eyes and some major players not living, that some of the MAIN characters were going to die. but everybody really important survived. i hadnt read the books so i thought it was possible frodo would bite it, or maybe one of the other hobbits or legolas, or shit SOMEBODY in the fellowship. i liked it a lot, but the structure seemed to be too slavish to the book to cram in all this stuff and not enough of a movie plot. i dunno. i need to see it again.
Quote from: themodernage02i also thought the ending, ending, ending, ending was just terrible.
It's been three films. A proper ending is in it's place. I admit it would've been nice with the end after the long 'fade to black' but I would've felt cheated. All that struggle. 10 hours of magic cinema. Huge battles in amazing locations. All the agony...all that struggle...Frodo destroys the ring. THE END.
Cheated.
well howabout when Viggo gets crowned? or when they all bow down to the hobbits? or any of endings before the final one? did we really NEED to see sam getting married ANYWHERE but the extended dvd? i dont think so. pj just went a little crazy towards the end there and forgot that he still needs to trim his movie of the fat.
Quote from: themodernage02well howabout when Viggo gets crowned? or when they all bow down to the hobbits? or any of endings before the final one? did we really NEED to see sam getting married ANYWHERE but the extended dvd? i dont think so. pj just went a little crazy towards the end there and forgot that he still needs to trim his movie of the fat.
Viggo get's crowned? Well the title is Return of the King.
I see what you're saying but it's been a long journey.
There are some diversions you can make from the book (and they made plenty, which is fine) but the person who had the very last line in the book HAD to have that last line in ROTK. THAT's the ending. My two cents.
More thoughts after I let it all sink in some more....
Quote from: Find Your MagaliThere are some diversions you can make from the book (and they made plenty, which is fine) but the person who had the very last line in the book HAD to have that last line in ROTK. THAT's the ending. My two cents.
More thoughts after I let it all sink in some more....
Never read them. Who has the last line in the book?
I think this is true:
Quote from: Bankyseriosuly this was a good movie but not the perfection some make it out to be
And this is true:
Quote from: GamblorIt's funny...thinking back on moments in the film makes me want to cry more than I wanted to watching the film.
thought of something else: am i wrong or is Bilbo writing his book ONLY in the extended Fellowship of the Ring? because that means for everyone who hasnt seen the extended version (or read the books), Frodo 'finishing' the book at the end of King is completely pointless. because they never saw Bilbo writing in it in the first place. is PJ THAT tired? or did he not realize that?
Quote from: themodernage02thought of something else: am i wrong or is Bilbo writing his book ONLY in the extended Fellowship of the Ring? because that means for everyone who hasnt seen the extended version (or read the books), Frodo 'finishing' the book at the end of King is completely pointless. because they never saw Bilbo writing in it in the first place. is PJ THAT tired? or did he not realize that?
No, if memory serves, there's a short scene of Bilbo writing the book when Gandalf arrives in the regular FOTR. ... And either Gandalf or Frodo is looking at some maps at one point.
I think the part of ROTK that is much richer if you've seen TTT:EE is the whole Denethor arc. ...
I've never seen the extended edition, so yes, that was in the original
well here's what happened to cbrad this afternoon...
last exam was yesterday, so went on a drinking binge. went downtown, then to an after party. at about 5 in the morning i decide it is time to hit the hay. me and 3 buddies all agree to get up early and see the 2:45 pm show.
i wake up around 1:30pm, and i call everyone up. two of them answer. the others were still passed out. i pick up one of them and we get to the theater at about 2 to buy tickets, thinking that showing up 45 minutes early would give us the sufficient amount of time to obtain tickets. i mean, this is athens georgia, right? no way it would be sold out, especially the afternoon showing on the first day. right?
WRONG.
not only was that showing sold out, but EVERY SINGLE MUTHER EFFIN ONE for the whole night!! in all my years and experience of going to movie theaters, i have never seen anything like that. there was a guy, no joke, that was even scalping tickets for $20!!!
so, we start to freak out and we call our other two buddies and they wake up and freak out with us. we haul ass home and call the only other theater in athens. no answer. we get in the car and head over there, even though we knew it would probably be sold out as well.
i double park in front of the theater. i tell my buddy to wait in the car while i go check and see. "if i come back smiling, u'll know its good news" i say. i start to walk to the ticket counter, and from the distance i see a sold out sign. fuck me. i turn around and walk back, my head sunken, my shoulders slumped, my penis flacid. there goes my day, i thought. there's no hope.
however, something strange happened.
as i was walking back to my car i got this strange feeling. i can't exactly explain it. all i know was something told me that i should walk back and check the ticket window one more time. i don't know what it was. (perhaps and act of god, or better yet, the ring?) i turn around and slowly walk back to the ticket counter. i turn the corner, and i read the sign:
8:00 & 9:00 showings sold out[/size]
i look at my watch. it's 2:50pm. there's a showing at 3:30. it's not sold out!!! success! i run to the ticket window like the strung out, desperate, film dork on too much caffiene that i am. "4 tickets for the 3:30 showing!!" i yell. the ticket dude says "$20 dollars." i open my wallet. i only have a $10 dollar bill. fuck, why didn't i think to stop at the ATM? lucky enough they took credit cards. i slapped one down. the ticket dude says there will be a .75 cent charge to use a credit card. i say "i-don't-give-a-flying-shit, it's-fine,-i-just-want-to-see-the-fucking-movie-keep-the-card-if-you-want-thank-you.
and the rest is history.
soo, the movie...two words and a punctuation mark...
god....damn....![/b]
this is why we go to movies, for experiences like that. i couldn't even count how many times i got chills down my back. i don't really know where to begin. i want to see it again and get my thoughts together before i start breaking it down... on second thought, i'm not sure i want to break it down anytime soon. it's just too good for words. (and yeah, i may sympathize w/ some about the multiple endings, but a minor complaint)
if u haven't seen it yet i don't know what the hell u are waiting for. go now. now now now now.
...and no i'm not drunk.
Themodernage, I felt kind of like you did right after I saw it. There's no denying that the denoument is drawn out. But sit with it a while...I can't imagine being satisfied without those endings. What I'm hoping is that in the extended edition, PJ smooths them out and makes them more unified. But I wouldn't wish for the exclusion of a single one.
The movie gets better the more you think about it. Until you see it a second time and it gets even better.
Strong opening for Rings finale
The final film in The Lord of the Rings trilogy has raked in $8m from midnight screenings on its first day of US release, its distributor has said. Midnight takings for The Return of the King amounted to almost half of the first film's entire US opening day box office receipts two years ago.
Distributor New Line hopes the movie, released on Wednesday, will break the $1bn global box office barrier.
Titanic holds the current box office record, taking $1.83bn in 1997.
New Line also said takings from Wednesday's midnight screenings equalled nearly a third of the $26.2m first day takings for the second Rings film, The Two Towers.
Executives hope the latest movie's fast start will propel it beyond worldwide totals made by The Fellowship of the Ring ($861m) and The Two Towers ($921m).
"This thing is so gigantic, we really don't know where we're going," said New Line head of domestic distribution David Tuckerman.
After its midnight debut, The Return of the King went on to be shown in more than 3,700 US cinemas during daytime and evening screenings on Wednesday. New Line also reported strong ticket sales for those later showings.
Just came back. How the fuck does a movie get THAT good! Jesus. Movies are called 'masterpieces' all the time but this picture defines whats meant by a movie masterpiece. And it did the impossible; it lived up to THAT much expectation. Incredible. Faaaar from perfection but really, who expects absolute perfection? I'm in the mood right now where you feel like your words just won't do it proper justice.
Fave bits (MAJOR SPOILERS)
* The climactic Mount Doom struggle (that shot of Gollum falling with the ring: WHOA)
* Yeah that Pippen singing montage was nice
* That hilariously brilliant scene with Shelob sneaking in on Frodo
* Actually, any scene involving Gollum
* Sam being excluded from the pack (Astin is sooo good in this)
* Any battle scene
Actually, I can see right now that I'd just keep going on til each scene is listed! So yeah, love this movie. The best in the trilogy to me (it eclipses the others in my eyes) and as far as the Oscar's go, give it all the statues right now, there's no competition, its sure as shit the greatest picture I've seen in ages let alone this year....
I saw this yesterday at the first available (10.30am) screening at my local, where fotunately and to my suprise I found that I was not the only one. In fact the cinema was packed. More importantly, they weren't just nerds or geeks, a whole cross section of people: couples of many ages, people on their own, pensioners, groups young kids, families. So to sit amongst these people and all love this movie was fantastic when in most other circumstances there would be twenty empty seats around me.
One of things that made this the best cinema experience I've ever had (and probably wont experience again) is how aware I was of its importance. As a filmmaking exercise, a personal three year cinematic journey, a study in brilliant filmmaking, and one of the best stories ever told. Most of these parts of the Lord of the Rings didn't really hit home until afterwards where I asked myself 'when am I going to see it again'? I suddenly realised that I didn't want to see it again, mainly because I'd just be trying to recapture something that isnt possible. Which was that despite having read the books, I was watching the story unfold in a kind of 'real-time', savouring every moment because I knew it would be the last time I could do it. I'm sure this nonsense will wear off soon, and I'll be back at the cinema undoubtedly with the same problems you had, Cbrad.
This is a brilliant film. Perfectly constructed.
Favourite moments:
Lighting of the Beacons
What has happened to my son?
Faramir going back to defend the river.
Smeagol splitting up Sam and Frodo
...Shelob
Merry and Pippin second to charge after Aragorn
Every single scene in Mordor
Bowing down to the hobbits
All the good-byes.
I was very excited to see this, but when the movie first started I got very apprehensive. It seemed very choppy the first few minutes. The Smeagol/Deagol scene was pretty long and everyone was anxious to get to familiar faces. Momentum needed to be picked up again after the victory at Helm's Deep, but it seemed stringed along. Luckily the feeling passed about 20 minutes in. And by the end I could hardly remember my reservations.
SPOILERS WITHIN:
The scope of the movie is breathtaking. I was skeptic about people saying they were crying but I welled up a couple of times. The Lighting of the Becons was simply powerful. I don't know why it was so powerful--it just was. There are a few lines in this movie I shall endeavour to remember. Some that I just loved and I have no reason why. "Shadowfax, show them the meaning of haste." I found Gandalf's "death's journey" talk with Pippen very touching and calming as well. His metaphor for heaven was simple and heartfelt. It was neat to see Gandalf go all Jackie Chan with the staff too. I guess living for centuries and centuries make room for some Kung Fu lessons somewhere in there.
Eowyn's scene took me completely by surprise and it was completely perfect. Not very much Gimli and Legolas, but of the scenes they were in they made the most of it. "Certain death, small possibility of success... what are we waiting for?" The whole elephant/Legolas scene was a bit... inflated. But I guess Elves are like the monkeys of middle earth. Still worked with Gimli's line, however.
The sound in this movie as well. Wow. I've got to give props to the sound engineers and Jackson when they settled on the sound of the nazguls. It made the audience uncomfortable every time they screamed and you could understand why every character was holding their ears. Also, during the battle scenes when you could hear the arrows hitting the ground like rain--it really worked.
As for the ending(s), I liked all of them save the final. It was depressing to see the elves, Gandalf, Bilbo and Frodo departing for the sea. I would have liked it if it had ended with Frodo finishing his book. Of course, that's not a big complaint, just being picky.
Maybe someone can answer this: I was under the mistaken impression that Frodo died at the end. I read the books when I was in fourth grade, so I can't remember much, but for some reason I just knew it was going to happen and suddenly... it didn't. Is there any reason why I should have thought that?
um..... this is a great film......
i like
SPOILER.....AHEAD
the green ghost army
ROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!
..but this is the best...epic....annnd it should win many awards...like seabuscuit......
I loved this movie!!! But I think I have been spoiled by the extended cuts. While watching ROTK I couldn't help but feel that a few scenes seemed to need more development. And i really wanna see that Saruman scene that was going to be in the beginning of the movie. BRING ON THE EXTENDED CUT!!!
and yes the ghost army is amazing!
My fellow film student friend tried to tell me he didn't like the dead army because it felt like a deus ex machina. I proceeded to bitchslap him.
continue to bitchslap him
I just got back from it...holy mother of god!
no point repeating what has been said many times
I honestly never thought that peter jackson would pull it off so well. He did a great job. I consider the film to be pure genius.
SPOILER
I think I spotted jackson's cameo... he is a captain of the mercenary ships when gandalf is describing the evil army to pippin.
It's very late. I need to get my shit together.good night
Quote from: rustinglass
I think I spotted jackson's cameo... he is a captain of the mercenary ships when gandalf is describing the evil army to pippin.
I saw that, but wasn't sure if it was him or not.
Yup that is definitely him. I remember him jumping off the screen, I wasn't even looking for him specifically. He had some rad hair, hah.
Im at a loss for words right now, ill just say i went thru the whole range of human emotions while watching it. My heart raced, my hands trembled, i held back tears, i felt like cheering, etc. Honestly one of the most, if not THE most intense and rewarding viewing experiences ive ever had...
Quote from: GhostboyQuote from: rustinglass
I think I spotted jackson's cameo... he is a captain of the mercenary ships when gandalf is describing the evil army to pippin.
I saw that, but wasn't sure if it was him or not.
Meanwhile, I spotted that cute little girl of Jackson's within the first 10 minutes.
She was cute in the first movie, a bit on the overacting side in the second movie and just a bit too obvious in third.
I don't see her getting a nomination. :P
'Return of King's' opening day: $34M
1st-day gross best of series, 6th best in history
"The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King" took in $34.1 million domestically on opening day, easily beating the debuts of the fantasy epic's first two installments, distributor New Line Cinema said Thursday.
It was a record debut for a movie opening on Wednesday, surpassing the $28.5 million take for "Star Wars: Episode I -- The Phantom Menace" in 1999.
The film also had the sixth-best single-day gross ever, behind "Spider-Man" with $43.6 million and $39.4 million on two different days, "The Matrix Reloaded" with $37.5 million and $34.4 million on two different days, and "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets" with $34.2 million.
Those films ran far shorter than "Return of the King," whose three-hour, 20-minute running time limits the number of screenings theaters can squeeze in each day.
By Sunday, "Return of the King" should have handily passed the $102 million that "The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers" grossed domestically in its first five days last year.
The film also took in $23.5 million in 19 other countries where it debuted Wednesday, including Great Britain, Germany and France. The movie was opening in about 10 more countries Thursday and Friday and gradually expands to other territories over the next couple of months.
New Line executives hope the final chapter of the saga will ultimately top $1 billion worldwide, becoming the second movie to cross that mark, after "Titanic" with $1.8 billion.
"Everyone wants to have closure and see the last part of the story, so I think we should be able to hit that mark," said Rolf Mittweg, New Line's head of worldwide marketing and distribution. "People are storming to the theaters. All shows have been sold out virtually."
Unlike many sequels, which can lose steam with each successive movie, "The Lord of the Rings" has expanded its audience as the story unfolded.
Part one, "The Fellowship of the Ring," took in $18.2 million domestically on day one in 2001, topping out with a total domestic haul of $314 million and a worldwide tally of $861 million.
The middle chapter, "The Two Towers," opened last year with $26.2 million domestically on its way to a $340 million domestic total and $921 million globally.
The release of "Return of the King" closes a seven-year odyssey to adapt J.R.R. Tolkien's mammoth chronicle about an alliance of humans, wizards, elves, dwarves and hobbits aiming to destroy a ring of ultimate power and stop an evil lord from enslaving the mythical land of Middle-earth.
The films were shot simultaneously in New Zealand by relatively untested director Peter Jackson, who had been best known for a series of cult-horror flicks and the acclaimed 1994 drama "Heavenly Creatures," which helped launch Kate Winslet's career.
With about $300 million committed to the production by New Line and other investors, the project was a major risk if the first film flopped. But by the time New Line dazzled critics with 26 minutes of footage at the 2001 Cannes Film Festival, the studio knew it had a winner.
"This may have been the biggest gamble in cinema history," said Paul Dergarabedian, president of box-office tracker Exhibitor Relations. "For New Line, this is a feather in their cap. This is their legacy. To me, it's the strongest intersection of critical acclaim and box-office success in a series of films that I've ever seen."
"If I return, think better of me, father"
If the wrongfully menacing Faramir of the Two Towers theatrical cut wasn't redeemed by the Extended Edition, then this line sure made me feel for him in Return of the King.
What really surpriced me, was how it seemed like the actors had been holding back a bit the last two films, to just let it all pour in this one. In the first two, you never saw Billy Boyd/ Pippin bring forth emotions like he did in the "I saw him!" scene, or Sam really cry over any of Frodo's fake-deaths until he was stung by Shelob. And is it just me, or was Elijah Wood twice as good in ROTK as he was before?
um, how come no one is seeing this? i expected this thread to be 20 pages strong by now. :?
Saw it last night. My thoughts have all been expressed here by others.
Slight disappointment, but still pretty in awe of the whole thing.
Too long, tried to do too much in a single film, yadda yadda...
If they'd have cut about an hour and made the extended release contain everything they cut and then the stuff they actually did cut, I think it would have been a better piece.
But still, it was pretty great on its own.
I'd have to say that these three are the greatest films ever made. Not necessarily the best acted, or the best story or what have you, but overall looking at the entire piece from start to finish, collectively I think they're the best work that cinema has ever offered in history. Yes, better than Star Wars anything. Without a doubt.
Seems odd that I would say that about a film that I walked away from feeling like it was just "so-so".
saw it yesterday with sigur ros. he was sobbing like a little girl by the ending,
Greatest movie ever made. Period. 8)
Man, I can finally visit this thread. It was driving me crazy.
Saw it last night... fuckin' A! What an amazing movie (not the best ever, by far, but an amazing movie none-the-less)
I really need to see it again... my jaw was down throughout the entire last 2/3rds of the film.
Almost everything in this movie was great, so I'm just going to list my disapointments:
SPOILERS
-The Witch Captain or whatever never fought Gandolf. His deat was amazing, but that dude was sent to kill Gandolf, they never even met.
-The so-fucking-cheezeball ending... I liked parts of it and some of it was necessary, but that slow-mo scene of everyone coming in to see Frodo made me want to vomit a little. I don't need that many slow motion close ups of Elijah Wood's overacting.
Oh, and some things I noticed:
-The head Orc/Gobblin or whatever that was heading up the battle looked like Sloth from the Goonies and had the voice of Dr. Claw from Inspector Gadget.
-During the scene where they were going to burn Faramir, David Wenham was replaced temporarily by Thom Yorke.
Quote from: ©bradum, how come no one is seeing this? i expected this thread to be 20 pages strong by now. :?
me too. weird. i'm taking my little brother to see it today so i'll get a second viewing.
i watched two towers this morning, and one thing i noticed that was somewhat off in return of the king was the score. i say this b/c in two towers, during one of the beginning montages w/ aragon, legolas, and gimley running-- the powerful LOTR theme that plays there, well, it was from what i remember completely absent in ROTK! i don't know, maybe i'm being picky but the score didn't have the same effect on me that the other two did. it almost felt like it was rushed and just thrown together at the last minute. i dunno. it's not as big a deal as i've made it out to be.
I liked the score specially the theme of the dark tower, I think it played a couple of times during the battle... very pulsating.
not sure if i like this or the first one better..
my qualms with it are the same as the other two (lots of things are strangely adapted from a non-reader of the books pov, i never really got the character of Frodo etc.) with the addition of they SHOULD HAVE CUT AT "i'm happy to be with you, at the end of all things.." had they cut there, i would have liked rotk 107x more. nevertheless, this is an amazing movie. it is, of course, brilliantly made and one of the most exciting of the year.
my favourite parts:
- the rejection
- the shot of the spider coming out of the cave.. sneaking sneakingly..
- the whole giant moment where everyone's getting closed in on into a little circle, and cut to sam and frodo climbing the tallest thing in the world with no food or water or sleep to help them. holy crap.
- the shot of gollum that goes THROUGH the ring
- The Return of the Moth.
i think it should have ended after the bow to the hobbits.
i gotta say though that i think Fellowhip was the crown of the series
I've only seen Part 1.
Are Frodo & Sam a couple of fags or something?
Quote from: picolasnot sure if i like this or the first one better..
my qualms with it are the same as the other two (lots of things are strangely adapted from a non-reader of the books pov, i never really got the character of Frodo etc.) with the addition of they SHOULD HAVE CUT AT "i'm happy to be with you, at the end of all things.." had they cut there, i would have liked rotk 107x more. nevertheless, this is an amazing movie. it is, of course, brilliantly made and one of the most exciting of the year.
...
- the shot of gollum that goes THROUGH the ring
I'm with you as far as kinda wishing for more character and less story, I really wish they let the characters drive the films, which they did, but they're still slaves to the story. And to be honest, I wish Frodo had died, that would've been so tragic and emotionally tearing. But instead he leaves and somehow, thinking back on it, it's sadder that he had to leave his friends behind, being so scarred by the ring. My friend told me that it was supposed to resemble a war veteran completely scarred by combat that he can never appreciate or enjoy the life he led before. Looking at that way is terribly fucking tragic.
And the shot of Gollum through the ring....ahhhh! I love it!
Quote from: themodernage02i also thought the ending, ending, ending, ending was just terrible. good for the extended dvd, but really who gives a shit?
Quote from: kotteIt's been three films. A proper ending is in it's place.
Quote from: Ghostboy...I can't imagine being satisfied without those endings.
Quote from: RedlumFavourite moments [...] All the good-byes.
Quote from: RaikusAs for the ending(s), I liked all of them save the final.
Quote from: RegularKarate-The so-fucking-cheezeball ending...
Quote from: picolasthey SHOULD HAVE CUT AT "i'm happy to be with you, at the end of all things.."
Quote from: Bankyi think it should have ended after the bow to the hobbits.
:-D Let's play the "where do you think it should end" game.
(PS: All quotes are out of context)
saw it again today. liked it about the same, a lot, but didnt fully love it. still thought the weakest part is the endings which get less and less effective after each one. there seemed to be 6 places it could've ended and been better than the final 7th one. oh well.
Quote from: RegularKarate
-The Witch Captain or whatever never fought Gandolf. His deat was amazing, but that dude was sent to kill Gandolf, they never even met.
Quote- AICN
From the horse's mouth: 'Remember the scene in which the Witch King is asked what he's going to do with Gandalf, and he says I will break him? This pays off big time in a battle between the Witch King and Gandalf as Gandalf and Pippin ride to save Faramir from the pyre. At the end of the battle, the Witch King breaks Gandalf's staff and then the Rohirrim turn up and the Witch King gets distracted. The beginning of this confrontation is one of the $$$ shots in the ROTK trailer: the Witch King's fell beast landing on the ramparts in front of Gandalf and Pippin on Shadowfax.'
Remeber that super cool shot in the trailer, with the Nazgul landing right in front of Pippin and Gandalf on the horse..?
Also...this is the coolest thing I've read about the extended cut:
QuoteAICN'The Mouth of Sauron scene changes the emphasis of the entire final battle between men and orcs at the Black Gates. In the theatrical cut, Aragorn and Co. ride up to the gates, they open, and orcs come out to fight. In the extended version, they are greeted by the Mouth of Sauron (played by the Matrix's Train Man, Bruce Spence), who has pointy teeth and a pointy helmet that covers his eyes (he doesn't need them, see? He's just a mouth). He rides out to show the heroes Frodos mithril vest, recently stolen by the orcs at Cirith Ungol, and to let them know that Frodo is dead and the ring is on its way to Sauron. Aragorn believes him, and the heroes despair. Going into battle at the Black Gates, the heroes have no hope at all it's their last stand for sure, and Aragorn's line for Frodo refers to his sacrifice, not to buying time.'
I'm chocked. This movie was nearly perfect. :shock:
QuoteAICN'The Mouth of Sauron scene changes the emphasis of the entire final battle between men and orcs at the Black Gates. In the theatrical cut, Aragorn and Co. ride up to the gates, they open, and orcs come out to fight. In the extended version, they are greeted by the Mouth of Sauron (played by the Matrix's Train Man, Bruce Spence), who has pointy teeth and a pointy helmet that covers his eyes (he doesn't need them, see? He's just a mouth). He rides out to show the heroes Frodos mithril vest, recently stolen by the orcs at Cirith Ungol, and to let them know that Frodo is dead and the ring is on its way to Sauron. Aragorn believes him, and the heroes despair. Going into battle at the Black Gates, the heroes have no hope at all it's their last stand for sure, and Aragorn's line for Frodo refers to his sacrifice, not to buying time.'
wow thats insane. it completely changes the meaning of the battle scene.
also, noticed that gandalf thing too. whats up with that?!? 3 1/2 hours and they couldnt find room for that?!?
LOS ANGELES (AP) — Movie audiences shelled out a king's ransom for one last trip to Middle-earth.
"The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King" raked in $73.6 million in its first weekend and put up a five-day haul of $125.1 million since debuting Wednesday, according to studio estimates Sunday.
That put it well ahead of the fantasy trilogy's first two chapters. Part one, "The Fellowship of the Ring," grossed $47.2 million over opening weekend and $75 million in its first five days, while the middle chapter, "The Two Towers," had a $62 million opening weekend and took in $102 million over its first five days.
"Return of the King" did not set records for best domestic opening weekend, but it put up the highest numbers ever for a worldwide debut. The film added $121 million in 28 other countries since Wednesday for a global total of $246.1 million, surpassing the $202.8 million five-day opening for "The Matrix Revolutions" last month. <cm-bd>¶
"That is amazing. The worldwide sweep of this movie is unprecedented. To have a quarter-billion-dollar gross in five days shows what a broad swath this movie cuts," said Paul Dergarabedian, president of box-office tracker Exhibitor Relations. "These would be good numbers for a film to do in its entire run, but this is just the beginning."
The worldwide record was all the more remarkable considering "Matrix Revolutions" opened virtually everywhere simultaneously, while "Return of the King" has yet to debut in many markets, among them Japan, Italy and Australia.
The fast start boosts the prospects for "Return of the King" to top the $861 million total worldwide gross for "Fellowship of the Ring" and $921 million take for "Two Towers." "Return of the King" could become the second movie to top $1 billion worldwide, after "Titanic" ($1.8 billion). <cm-bd>¶
Quote from: Find Your MagaliLOS ANGELES (AP) — Movie audiences shelled out a king's ransom for one last trip to Middle-earth.
"The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King" raked in $73.6 million in its first weekend and put up a five-day haul of $125.1 million since debuting Wednesday, according to studio estimates Sunday.
That put it well ahead of the fantasy trilogy's first two chapters. Part one, "The Fellowship of the Ring," grossed $47.2 million over opening weekend and $75 million in its first five days, while the middle chapter, "The Two Towers," had a $62 million opening weekend and took in $102 million over its first five days.
"Return of the King" did not set records for best domestic opening weekend, but it put up the highest numbers ever for a worldwide debut. The film added $121 million in 28 other countries since Wednesday for a global total of $246.1 million, surpassing the $202.8 million five-day opening for "The Matrix Revolutions" last month. <cm-bd>¶
"That is amazing. The worldwide sweep of this movie is unprecedented. To have a quarter-billion-dollar gross in five days shows what a broad swath this movie cuts," said Paul Dergarabedian, president of box-office tracker Exhibitor Relations. "These would be good numbers for a film to do in its entire run, but this is just the beginning."
The worldwide record was all the more remarkable considering "Matrix Revolutions" opened virtually everywhere simultaneously, while "Return of the King" has yet to debut in many markets, among them Japan, Italy and Australia.
The fast start boosts the prospects for "Return of the King" to top the $861 million total worldwide gross for "Fellowship of the Ring" and $921 million take for "Two Towers." "Return of the King" could become the second movie to top $1 billion worldwide, after "Titanic" ($1.8 billion). <cm-bd>¶
Guffin wannabe :)
Quote from: kotteGuffin wannabe :)
Well, aren't we all?
Quote from: Find Your MagaliQuote from: kotteGuffin wannabe :)
Well, aren't we all?
touché.
Peter Jackson looks like Stanley Kubrick.
Quote from: 1976Peter Jackson looks like Stanley Kubrick.
Peter Jackson looks like a really bad hairday!
Quote from: Find Your MagaliQuote from: kotteGuffin wannabe :)
Well, aren't we all?
Oh God. Even I don't wanna be me.
Quote from: MacGuffinQuote from: Find Your MagaliQuote from: kotteGuffin wannabe :)
Well, aren't we all?
Oh God. Even I don't wanna be me.
So imagine how tough it is for us, not even being able to be someone who wouldn't want to be who he is. :?
Quote from: Find Your MagaliQuote from: MacGuffinQuote from: Find Your MagaliQuote from: kotteGuffin wannabe :)
Well, aren't we all?
Oh God. Even I don't wanna be me.
So imagine how tough it is for us, not even being able to be someone who wouldn't want to be who he is. :?
Just be sure not to write yourself into your posts:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimage.pathfinder.com%2Few%2Fdynamic%2Fimgs%2F020816%2F152045__adaptation_l.jpg&hash=7f523a789b09c4f7c7507e543541a49460c1b2bc)
Quote from: Gamblor du JourQuote from: Find Your MagaliQuote from: MacGuffinQuote from: Find Your MagaliQuote from: kotteGuffin wannabe :)
Well, aren't we all?
Oh God. Even I don't wanna be me.
So imagine how tough it is for us, not even being able to be someone who wouldn't want to be who he is. :?
Just be sure not to write yourself into your posts:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimage.pathfinder.com%2Few%2Fdynamic%2Fimgs%2F020816%2F152045__adaptation_l.jpg&hash=7f523a789b09c4f7c7507e543541a49460c1b2bc)
Well, if I
was somebody else on xixax, I would write that I'm now going to cream my pants while dreaming about stealing MacGuffin's copy of "The Three" and pitching it as my own work.
But I'm clearly not that person, my pants are dry and I'm not even sure who wrote "The Three," let along whether or not it exists.
...Hey, didn't this used to be a Return of the King thread?
How about that Samwise Gamgee?
http://www.movie-list.net/exclusive/lotr-supertrailer-480x204.mov
one trailer to rule them all
That's a GREAT trailer. If you don't get excited by that you're stone cold.
Someone posed an interesting question on another site and I was wondering if anyone had the answer.
Spoilers, naturally:
At the end or ROTK, Aragorn becomes King of Gondor, but what of Rohan? I'm sure some appendix in the books cleared this up, but I haven't read them in over a decade. Does Eomer become king? Does Eowyn still retain possession of the kingdom since Theoden told her to rule? Do Eowyn and Foromir hook up and become King and Queen of Rohan (she looked happy with him)?
Or does the kingdom of Rohan sail off while the peoples of Gondor weep like little bitches?
Quote from: Bankyhttp://www.movie-list.net/exclusive/lotr-supertrailer-480x204.mov
one trailer to rule them all
That makes me want to spend all of my money
Quote from: Bankyhttp://www.movie-list.net/exclusive/lotr-supertrailer-480x204.mov
one trailer to rule them all
Goddamn! I CAN'T WAIT to see this. 4 more days :(
Secret to Box-Office Success = cast Hugo Weaving.
SPOILERS
I'm not sure but I think that eowyn marries faramir. But I don't remember if they become the king and queen of rohan
Quote from: rustinglassSPOILERS
I'm not sure but I think that eowyn marries faramir. But I don't remember if they become the king and queen of rohan
they DO hook up and they DO become king and queen of rohan.
***Spoilers***
Im not a big fan of the trilogy and the mythology, just not my type. But I saw Return of the Kings, and visually it is amazing.
My favorite part of the entire film....
When the wacky king sends his son and the soldiers on horseback into a hail of arrow fire. All the while, merry or pippin, whichever one it was, is singing in the background. AND at the same time, the king is seen eating the meat, crunching into the flesh, and blood from the meat dripping down his chin.
Anybody catch the symbolism in this scene? Genius, because the flesh being eaten and chewed symbolizes the carnage that is happening on the battlefield, (which we never see). Also it helps keep this film a PG-13 movie heh..
chris
yes. yes yes yes. FUCK YEAH! OH SHIT man that shit was FUCKING AWESOME!
Best eating scene ever!!!
Quote from: russiasushaBest eating scene ever!!!
Second only to Basic Instinct.
i was actually referring to the whole movie, but whatever.
..saw this a seconnd time.....which makes this the only the second time i have done this ...the other was Congo..of all films....but anyway it still solid......and hold up well....and like kotte said earlier i/we need those endings or else we've been cheated.......
I finally saw this. I enjoyed it much more than Two Towers, but I might ilke Fellowship better.
I certainly didn't hold the film in such high regard as some here do but It would make my top 10 (not top 5) for the year. It had it's moments but I didn't really feel as moved during it as I have in other films this year. I wouldn't be upset if it won Best Picture, but it wouldn't be my pick.
i think it's the best movie i've seen all year. including kill bill, which was a close second. well... maybe not that close.
Now The Lord of the Rings is one of my favorites trilogies of all times
Finally saw this. Went with my brother to see it and during the first half hour, I realized my reaction would be as negative as with the other ones. My brother had the same opinion. We almost left half hour into it but decided to make a bet out it. First one to crack and not be able to stand the movie and walk out would pay the other person $5.
The final movie adds no new grievances. Its just a return to what the other movies explored: battle after battle, heroic talk after heroic talk, this movie seems nearly the same in approach to content as the others. It held no place for drama at all. I tried following the movie and storyline but got lost immediately. The dialogue was drenched in detail after detail to this world that would be acknowledged and understood by those whole evaporated themselves into the finer points of this world. My ignorance to it does not at all say I missed a great film, but that the film based itself on the basis of arbiturary facts instead of drama. I would belly ache after every speech (dialogue for one person would extend so long each time that it became that) of detail to how something has to be saved and then the dialogue trying to save itself by having something dramatic spoken always at the end and then cut of scene. Cliche beyond cliche. The action scenes of one-on-one fighting always seemed to allow someone out of nowhere to come in to turn the tide of the fight. Cliche. The battles, yet again, would begin with the large number of men/mutants/elfs readying to fight and then go into a frenzy of intercutting shots where the fighting became shots of killing after killing and different shots of destruction. This became numbing because each battle extended so long. Appreciation of the largeness and scope of the battles were lost. Also, no one really was acting at all. Every character seemed already to incapuslate everything their character stood for just by their appearance and a few lines. For the characters with a heroic position, camera would swoop in and slow down for their entrance while the music turned dramatic to give them recognition of what they stood for. The dialogue they said strayed very little from battle prep talk. Also, emotion in their voice and movements seemed hardly existent. Each character seemed to carry that same drained fairy tale manner of talk that emotion was hardly there. Frodo, though, seemed to be the only one almost out of this shell of major limitations. Wood played his character with a vigor of movement that seemed to convey his strain in the midst of all the poor dialogue he was given. His face seeemed to bleed from emotion all the time.
What I think really dominated this movie were the special effects and again I was not impressed. The elephants and ghosts in battle were effective when I first saw them, but they soon lost flavour. My main reason for disliking the effects is quite general. The movie didn't occupy one realism, but two. Most of the combat battles were quite realistic in brutality as we would see in a movie like Braveheart. The worlds and larger battles showing strange creatures were quite digital with their realism. The movie never occupied one tone of vision for me to be fully involved in this world. I would go from one realism to another just noticing the change and taken out of the realism I was following and just saying, "Well, that's done by computers." instead of continually being involved. The movie should have stuck with one realism and considering live action could never bring these special effects and the digital age isn't all that its cracked up to be in believability yet, I wish this film would have been done in traditional animation. It wouldn't be constricted to development of filmmaking special effects, but timeless already.
For the bet between my brother and I, no one won. We both agreed we had to get out of the movie during the beginning onslaughts of false endings. We couldn't take any more of this movie at all. After walking out, I quickly met the snobbery many people have who love the movie and think lowly of those who don't. A friend of mine who was also into movies saw me and asked what movie I saw and when I said LOTR, he asked what I thought. I told him I thought it was lame and he said if I thought it was lame, that I surely must not have seen many movies. I thought that was fine, but last year I had to explain to this person who Federico Fellini was.
:?:
I'm honestly pretty speechless after reading your review, Gold Trumpet. My first thoughts are, how can someone hate this movie so much, I mean, what movies could possibly meet your standards? These thoughts aren't really fair because you can say what you want, you explained why you didn't like it. But I'll never, ever be able to truly understand what the hell you are talking about. Hope that doesn't sound scathing, but I'm honestly wondering if you do like any movies. I hope this doesn't sound rude, your review is just so harsh for a movie that I, and a lot of people, don't seem to have much of a problem with. Is it the fantasy genre that you don't like? I can understand that, I have a hard time with the dialogue and acting myself, but I look past it because the story and mythology are so engaging if you let yourself get into it. The cg does look like cg, but don't you see that if you get into the movie first, the cg becomes a part of the movie, just like any lighting or costuming or models would. And for cg, it's pretty damn good looking. Of course it's not perfect, but you can say that about a lot of special effects. Models, for example, I can always spot them, but when they look so good, I'm forgiving.
This isn't meant to be condescending in the slightest: how'd you get lost in the story? I haven't read the books, but found it to be easy to follow, though I have watched the dvds more than you have (you did say a while back that you would finally watch the two movies before you saw this one, right?).
Quote from: Gamblor du Jourbut I'm honestly wondering if you do like any movies. I hope this doesn't sound rude, your review is just so harsh for a movie that I, and a lot of people, don't seem to have much of a problem with.
Two parter: I love many movies and have a large movie collection to prove it. My main reason for highlighting the negative comments over the positive is because this is a discussion board. Enough people agree with the majority opinion on what films are good and all, so for discussion's sake, negative opinions are neccessary. Also, I think discussion usually is floundering here so I do what I can to push it.
For the second half, my venom against this movie may seem so high because I don't disagree with just with those who liked it, but disagree with and resent the acclaim it is getting by the media as being "high art". It isn't and if it goes on to dominate award shows, it will only make Hollywood a bigger tight wad on financing riskier projects. This film is mainstream to the core.
Quote from: Gamblor du JourIs it the fantasy genre that you don't like?
Not at all. Princess Mononoke is one of my favorite movies.
Quote from: Gamblor du JourThe cg does look like cg, but don't you see that if you get into the movie first, the cg becomes a part of the movie, just like any lighting or costuming or models would. And for cg, it's pretty damn good looking. Of course it's not perfect, but you can say that about a lot of special effects. Models, for example, I can always spot them, but when they look so good, I'm forgiving.
I still disagree. Models and CG effects seem to hold distinct differences because models still aim to be realistic and I don't think you can spot
all of them. Some models are complete failures, of course, but they hold more realistically than CGI, which, still in its beginning stages, still looks very fake even when trying to be realistic. When only used on minimal levels does CGI really work for creating the realistic.
Quote from: Gamblor du JourThis isn't meant to be condescending in the slightest: how'd you get lost in the story? I haven't read the books, but found it to be easy to follow, though I have watched the dvds more than you have (you did say a while back that you would finally watch the two movies before you saw this one, right?).
It is prolly because you have watched the dvds since then. I tried last week to rewatch them, but I honestly couldn't bring myself to renting any of them. I think the long length of each extended edition was what I was thinking about and I really dreaded it. Also, the first two bored me equally anyways to where I lost interest in the finer points of the story so it was apparent I'd be lost in the third one beyond the very general story.
Actually, you were far less hard on it than I thought you'd be. I still don't see why you torture yourself though...but then, I do the same thing.
Quote from: GhostboyI still don't see why you torture yourself though...but then, I do the same thing.
Hah, its because I actually care very much about movies. if I didnt like any movies, I'd just dismiss all of them. I explode with all my frustations in reviews longer than casual reading.
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetFor the second half, my venom against this movie may seem so high because I don't disagree with just with those who liked it, but disagree with and resent the acclaim it is getting by the media as being "high art". It isn't and if it goes on to dominate award shows, it will only make Hollywood a bigger tight wad on financing riskier projects. This film is mainstream to the core.
But mainstream movies ALWAYS win the awards. When was the last time "high art" swept the Oscars? ... If a mainstream film is going to take home the big prizes, it may as well be ROTK. And maybe that Oscar haul will lead to somebody getting $15 million to make a "risky" fantasy film that is more in tune with your cinematic tastes.
The alternative is another mainstream film, maybe Cold Mountain, sweeping the Oscars simply because the Weinsteins pumped so much money into the advertising and campaigning.
In a world in which the Oscars always go mainstream, I don't see why or how ROTK is any more offensive than any other studio pick.
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetAlso, I think discussion usually is floundering here so I do what I can to push it.
Well done, I think my reply to your first post is the longest one I've written, heh.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
For the second half, my venom against this movie may seem so high because I don't disagree with just with those who liked it, but disagree with and resent the acclaim it is getting by the media as being "high art".
Your pessimism about the movies does ring true with a voice in the back of my head that wants to agree with you. But looking at the trilogy as a whole, I go back and say that they have done something great in creating this universe. The movies are, um, thick with layers that add to middle-earth, the music, the look, the dialogue (which is cheesy at times, I agree, but it does have to compensate for the amount of story, and I do wish at times they'd stopped and had some good quality character motivated events, but for a plot-driven movie, it's pretty good). But I do think some critics are a little overzealous with their praise.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
I still disagree. Models and CG effects seem to hold distinct differences because models still aim to be realistic and I don't think you can spot all of them. Some models are complete failures, of course, but they hold more realistically than CGI, which, still in its beginning stages, still looks very fake even when trying to be realistic. When only used on minimal levels does CGI really work for creating the realistic.
Models do have a great history (2001, Star Wars, Blade Runner are all amazing). But there is no other way to make these films aside from animation as you said, but this has already been done. You can't make a vast army or a flying nazgul with models or without spending tons of money and time, cg is the only way to go. The use of cg will always look fake, but by using it, the filmmakers recognize this and they do one hell of a job trying to prove otherwise. Some of the cg looks amazing (that one closeup of Gollum talking in his sleep, the dead army), it's all a great achievement. CG is trying to create something that couldn't be real otherwise, but because it's not real, when it's used in the forefront as much as it is in LOTR, of course it will look fake, though it's trying to be realistic. Even makeup up close will look fake, so will models. Fake is fake, and cg is an amazing tool that is very fake.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
It is prolly because you have watched the dvds since then. I tried last week to rewatch them, but I honestly couldn't bring myself to renting any of them. I think the long length of each extended edition was what I was thinking about and I really dreaded it. Also, the first two bored me equally anyways to where I lost interest in the finer points of the story so it was apparent I'd be lost in the third one beyond the very general story.
I'm not going to suggest seeing ROTK again, I don't want you to go on a murderous rampage as a result of that, heh. But letting yourself sink into the world a little more really does help, watch the behind the scenes of the extended dvd, then watch the films, listen to commentaries, emerse yourself, it gets you in the mood, like foreplay.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
I still disagree. Models and CG effects seem to hold distinct differences because models still aim to be realistic and I don't think you can spot all of them. Some models are complete failures, of course, but they hold more realistically than CGI, which, still in its beginning stages, still looks very fake even when trying to be realistic. When only used on minimal levels does CGI really work for creating the realistic.
i completely agree with this.
Quote from: Gamblor Du JourThe use of cg will always look fake.
but not this. cg is still in its infancy. it is used frequently when it should not be as an 'easy out' when the filmmakers can find no other way to do something. it is not always the best way. sometimes is, not always. a million different ways to do 'special effects', a plethora of different solutions to those problems. filmmakers seem to be lazily relying on cg sometimes when it isnt the right tool for the job. (not pointing out LOTR, just movies now in general). cg will probably eventually become a much more efficient and realistic tool than it is now. so for now, small doses, not overloads.
I think the only real reason CG became so suddenly prevalent is because of the malleability of it...it's like working with physical objects with the ability to bend the laws of phyiscs, and that opens up a lot of opportunities. Having just started to skirt around the edges of using it myself, I've developed a massive new appreciation for it, but I also wonder why sometimes filmmakers rely so heavily on it. I guess they figure if it's out of sight, it's out of mind, and they can just leave it up to the CG artists.
That said, I'm blown away by most of the CGI in LOTR. There are plenty of shots that don't work completely, especially in the third one (daylight shots are tough), but they're plenty impressive nonetheless.
Quote from: themodernage02
Quote from: Gamblor Du JourThe use of cg will always look fake.
but not this. cg is still in its infancy. it is used frequently when it should not be as an 'easy out' when the filmmakers can find no other way to do something. it is not always the best way. sometimes is, not always. a million different ways to do 'special effects', a plethora of different solutions to those problems. filmmakers seem to be lazily relying on cg sometimes when it isnt the right tool for the job. (not pointing out LOTR, just movies now in general). cg will probably eventually become a much more efficient and realistic tool than it is now. so for now, small doses, not overloads.
My statement was a little too exaggerated. Of course cg is good in small ways, but films like LOTR are paving the way so they can be done better in the future by trying to make them look better now. There are some people who use it when it shouldn't be used (George Lucas, that pompous fuck), but Peter Jackson is trying to make incredible cinema and advance it at the same time. Looking at FOTR and then looking at ROTK, their use of cg is already improving (granted, they had more money and equipment). I think films like the Hulk and Spiderman are doing damage to cg by using it too much and not making it look good at all.
Seeing it in three hours. Man, I'm psyched! If it's half as good as Two Towers, I'll be pleased.
CG in the future, will look so incredibly realistic and it will be so attainable, that I believe, many films of the future will be interlaced with so much CGI you will never be able to tell the difference.
CG will no longer be used for just unimaginable moves or actions that a character may make, but CG will be used for common shots, pick up shots, ect. Also, I believe this goes for Indie films also.
20 years from now, its going to be interesting to see if there is a nostalgia around these non believeable CGI films that run rampant in our movie theatres...
chris
I think that the CGI in ROTK was pretty top notch. Granted there are a few scenes where it is obviously CGI, but for the bulk of the movie, it looks stunning, and there will be shots containing CGI that you probably aren't aware of.
PJ should be commended at not overusing such a tool, and instead, making as much of it as "real" as possible.
Quote from: Find Your MagaliThe alternative is another mainstream film, maybe Cold Mountain, sweeping the Oscars simply because the Weinsteins pumped so much money into the advertising and campaigning.
True, but ROTK is a far worst choice to sweep the Oscars because unlike the usual candidates to winning Oscars, ROTK is in high competition to setting box office records. Projects that are over blown and over zealous in pleasing the audience (like ROTK) may be given unwarranted credibility with Oscar approval also Hollywood may be more focused on giant epics that are really just cash cows. Studios would focus more on these films in every avenue of promotion and become even stuffier to smaller films.
Quote from: Gamblor du JourEven makeup up close will look fake, so will models. Fake is fake, and cg is an amazing tool that is very fake.
Fake is fake, but I think models and make up (when done well) look very believable in realism to a point where it can be intercut into regular movies. CGI, on minimal levels, can too. CGI is an amazing tool that is very fake, but I'd argue that if the entire movie was going to slam so much use of it, that it should be totally made up in CGI to be tonally whole in one realism.
Quote from: Gamblor du JourBut letting yourself sink into the world a little more really does help, watch the behind the scenes of the extended dvd, then watch the films, listen to commentaries, emerse yourself, it gets you in the mood, like foreplay.
Now there's a statement that may be hard to back up.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
Quote from: Gamblor du JourBut letting yourself sink into the world a little more really does help, watch the behind the scenes of the extended dvd, then watch the films, listen to commentaries, emerse yourself, it gets you in the mood, like foreplay.
Now there's a statement that may be hard to back up.
Well, it worked for me. After I got the extended FOTR, I was near obsessed with the movies. After TTT extended, I got really excited to see ROTK, where before I didn't even care.
Quote from: Thecowgoooesmooomany films of the future will be interlaced with so much CGI you will never be able to tell the difference.
We're already at that point. There was a bit on the Attack Of The Clones DVD showing all these CG elements in shots that you would never in a guess were fake....stuff like Ewan McGregor hugging that alien. Of course, you don't look for things like that in movies like Star Wars, since there are so many other noticeable special effects in every shot. Once effects like these start getting integrated into small scale films, that's when it will really get impressive.
Got out of it last night at 12:30 feeling emmensely satisfied.
I really enjoyed the way humour was laced throughout the battle + long dialogue scenes.
Pippin-kicks-arse.
Never one for analysing the production value, the characters won out in the end for me. I believed in these characters, Frodo, Aragorn, Gandalf, and think that the feelings expressed by all of them were universal.
Stupidly, I waited for Leg-less and Aragorn to get it 'awn, but lucked out on that one.
I could write a PHD on the homo-erotic themes in LOTR. Esp. ROTK.
Sam and Frodo: Best-fucking-love-story-ever.
QuoteThecowgoooesmooo wrote:
many films of the future will be interlaced with so much CGI you will never be able to tell the difference.
We're already at that point. There was a bit on the Attack Of The Clones DVD showing all these CG elements in shots that you would never in a guess were fake....stuff like Ewan McGregor hugging that alien. Of course, you don't look for things like that in movies like Star Wars, since there are so many other noticeable special effects in every shot. Once effects like these start getting integrated into small scale films, that's when it will really get impressive.
Yes thats very true.
But in the future, it will be amazing because young teenagers will be able to shoot their own indie films, take it home, capture it onto Final Cut 300000 and then with ease, add CG effects that match Lord of the Rings or any current film that uses CG. The production value achieved at low costs in the future, will be mind boggling.
chris
I was watching the Wrong Turn DVD and there are things that are cg in the background that i never would have guessed
one of the things I loved most about this movie was the pacing. The camera just MOVED throughout the film, through the battle scenes, when Gandalf takes Pippin on the horse to quickly go to Minas Tirith etc.
and the helicopter shots really helped this in certain spots.
IT JUST MOVED MAN!
While I definitely think the film is a remarkable feat of visual artistry, the LOTR trilogy didn't involve me emotionally. There were a few moments in the third film that were gripping, such as the cremation scene, but I admired the technical wizardry more than the characters or story.
I saw this on Christmas with my family. We decided to go at the last minute, so by the time we got there all the good seats were taken. We ended up sitting in the front row, something I swore I'd never do. Next day I had a kink in my neck the magnitude of which I hadn't experienced since the time I slept in a rowboat.
The more individual opinions I read, both here at Xixax and elsewhere, the more I begin to understand what the major difference between the books and films is [and as it's a fairly major one, it's interesting to note how the story has become popular in both its forms].
Tolkien makes no effort to engage the emotions. His is a trilogy of history textbooks, more concerned with the events [and the languages] than with the characters.
Jackson is all about the emotions. His is a trilogy of cinematic epics, trying to be concerned with both the events and the emotional depth of the characters. A movie audience needs to connect with those on screen. And this is why, ultimately, there are going to be those that hate the films.
Jackson has adapted a mammoth work of fantastical history that had very little emotional subtext to begin with, and tried to add some while still remaining faithful. It's not easy, and he doesn't always pull it off. The films are melodramatic and sentimental, which will work for some and not for others.
It's odd that people didn't pull Tolkien up on it in the first place and say, "You know, man, you're really fucking shallow."
Would have made it a whole lot easier [from a story point of view, at least] to adapt the thing...
EDIT: sounded a bit too insulting.
After reading Gold Trumpets review of the movie, the first word that comes to mind...
Shallow.
Seriously, I don't have anything personal against you or anything. But after watching the best movie of a trilogy that is, without a doubt, one of the greatest accomplishments in the history of cinema - and then coming home and reading that review, it really is the first word that comes to mind.
I could say a lot on your review and how much I disagree with it (one thing I could say, I guess, is that I hate it when people have the nerve to walk out of a movie), but right now I'd just like to touch upon one thing.
The "cliches" you list aren't really cliches, you might as well point out that tracking shots and dialogue are cliches, too. They are just common filmmaking techniques to get an emotion or idea across to the viewer, to be able to use them correctly is the mark of a great filmmaker. But when someone lists them as cliches, it's different. Either the person has some extraordinary vision or they have a stick up their ass.
Now unless you come out with an amazing film that doesn't use any "cliches" (note the quotation marks), I don't think anybody should take your advice on what are cliches and what aren't.
No offense, though. :wink:
alright gt, it's been a while since u and i have had at it.
(whilst it may seem that this reply is fueled w/ anger and frustration (actually, it is) i must say that i don't hate gt and i wish not to attack him. there was a time, yes, when he and i argued w/ one another frequently, and my rage was overpowering, leading me to say things that were insulting and just plain rude. i'm happy to say that i have grown since then and even enjoy reading gt's posts. but this, this fucking post just got to me, and i had to respond. so enjoy.)Quote from: The Gold TrumpetFinally saw this. Went with my brother to see it and during the first half hour, I realized my reaction would be as negative as with the other ones. My brother had the same opinion. We almost left half hour into it but decided to make a bet out it. First one to crack and not be able to stand the movie and walk out would pay the other person $5.
are you kidding me? u see, i really can't take any of ur review seriously after hearing this. i just can't understand how someone who is as film literate as u are could be so bored w/ the first 30 minutes of this movie-- meanwhile, you can sit through a many of fellini films that are much more tiresome. i can't see stanley kauffman (ur mentor, yes?) making bets w/ his little brother as to who will walk out during the first 30 minutes simply out of spite.
QuoteThe final movie adds no new grievances. Its just a return to what the other movies explored: battle after battle, heroic talk after heroic talk, this movie seems nearly the same in approach to content as the others. It held no place for drama at all. I tried following the movie and storyline but got lost immediately. The dialogue was drenched in detail after detail to this world that would be acknowledged and understood by those whole evaporated themselves into the finer points of this world. My ignorance to it does not at all say I missed a great film, but that the film based itself on the basis of arbiturary facts instead of drama.
i'm not sure i'm understanding what your saying here, nevermind the fact that you just said "based on the basis." your saying that the film wasn't dramatic and was simply reiterating fact after fact from the book? i think your stubbornness is having too much an affect on your movie reviews. u go into it knowing you're going to hate it, and during your viewing w/ your little brother you're looking for faults (all of which are either false or completely incoherent, i must say) to validate your already negative opinion when in fact, what you should do is let the film wash over you, w/o any preconceived notion that it will be bad or any cynicism towards the trilogy. you then may be able to see the drama that is very much there.
QuoteI would belly ache after every speech (dialogue for one person would extend so long each time that it became that) of detail to how something has to be saved and then the dialogue trying to save itself by having something dramatic spoken always at the end and then cut of scene. Cliche beyond cliche. The action scenes of one-on-one fighting always seemed to allow someone out of nowhere to come in to turn the tide of the fight. Cliche. The battles, yet again, would begin with the large number of men/mutants/elfs readying to fight and then go into a frenzy of intercutting shots where the fighting became shots of killing after killing and different shots of destruction. This became numbing because each battle extended so long. Appreciation of the largeness and scope of the battles were lost. Also, no one really was acting at all. Every character seemed already to incapuslate everything their character stood for just by their appearance and a few lines. For the characters with a heroic position, camera would swoop in and slow down for their entrance while the music turned dramatic to give them recognition of what they stood for. The dialogue they said strayed very little from battle prep talk. Also, emotion in their voice and movements seemed hardly existent. Each character seemed to carry that same drained fairy tale manner of talk that emotion was hardly there. Frodo, though, seemed to be the only one almost out of this shell of major limitations. Wood played his character with a vigor of movement that seemed to convey his strain in the midst of all the poor dialogue he was given. His face seeemed to bleed from emotion all the time.
1. the only thing more overused in film reviews than the word "pretentious" is "cliché."
2. if those battle scenes/battle speeches didn't make the hairs on the back of your neck stand up straight, something is wrong with you. this inability to connect on an emotional level to not just this film but to many further perpetuates the common held belief that you are in fact not human; rather, part of you is indeed some sort of malfunctioning robot that doesn't know how to love.
3. Emotion in their voice/movements seemed hardly existent? u see, i question your ability to even recognize true emotion in a film.
QuoteWhat I think really dominated this movie were the special effects and again I was not impressed. The elephants and ghosts in battle were effective when I first saw them, but they soon lost flavour. My main reason for disliking the effects is quite general. The movie didn't occupy one realism, but two. Most of the combat battles were quite realistic in brutality as we would see in a movie like Braveheart. The worlds and larger battles showing strange creatures were quite digital with their realism. The movie never occupied one tone of vision for me to be fully involved in this world. I would go from one realism to another just noticing the change and taken out of the realism I was following and just saying, "Well, that's done by computers." instead of continually being involved. The movie should have stuck with one realism and considering live action could never bring these special effects and the digital age isn't all that its cracked up to be in believability yet, I wish this film would have been done in traditional animation. It wouldn't be constricted to development of filmmaking special effects, but timeless already.
i'm really confused here. two realisms? it's fantasy dude. have you read the books? you are aware that this film/book/world is composed of humans, hobbits, elves, dwarfs, and many other powerful, wonderfully different types of living creatures. i'm not understanding your beef here.
QuoteFor the bet between my brother and I, no one won. We both agreed we had to get out of the movie during the beginning onslaughts of false endings. We couldn't take any more of this movie at all. After walking out, I quickly met the snobbery many people have who love the movie and think lowly of those who don't. A friend of mine who was also into movies saw me and asked what movie I saw and when I said LOTR, he asked what I thought. I told him I thought it was lame and he said if I thought it was lame, that I surely must not have seen many movies. I thought that was fine, but last year I had to explain to this person who Federico Fellini was.
you walked out?!? enough said.
Love you, brad. Spot on.
First off I would like to say that i love the LOTR trilogy, and agree that it is an achievement in film that is unrivaled. i say this, not to qualify what i am about to say, i say it just to make sure we are on the same page.
i loved ROTK, thought is was grand and amazing. But after watching all three films I only have a few minor bones of contention.
First) How many times did we get left on the cliffhanger "is that character dead"? I would really like to watch all three and count how many times the story brought us to that question. I know, I know, it was developed to add to the emotional depth and character development. Also, it's just one of those techniques to transfer the books into films. So i can forgive it, no big deal really, but when watching all three I did get a little tired of it. Although it didn't make me think any less of the movies.
Second) How many endings can you tack on to ROTK? I counted 5. I know they are in the books, but I just got the feeling that Jackson didn't really wanna end the film. He was tying up loose ends forever. And no matter what anyone says, there was too much slow-mo on the scene of Frodo laughing at the end. And how long do you have to hold on Ian McKellen's face? i seriously started to laugh b/c it went on too long and brought me out of the movie emotionally. So I know all the ending stuff is in the book, but I don't know why they couldn't use a Galdriel narration to sum it up. I mean the movie started with one, and there was one in the middle of TTT. it would have been a nice way to bookend the trilogy in my opinion.
At any rate these things add up to mere petty arguments with these amazing movies. If this is all I could come up with, then I am doing well. can't wait for the extended ROTK!
ps-- how about that direct homage to the Return of the Jedi Luke/Vader reconciliation scene with the Eowyn /Theodyn post-witch king battle scene. HA! Loved it! Or maybe Lucas took it from the books, whichever, it was great. "Let me save you." (Luke/Eowyn) "You already have." (Vader/Theodyn)
Quote from: ©bradi just can't understand how someone who is as film literate as u are could be so bored w/ the first 30 minutes of this movie-- meanwhile, you can sit through a many of fellini films that are much more tiresome.
I'm actually tougher on Fellini than you think. Ask SoNowThen about my opinion on Satyricon (if he remembers) cause I think its one of his favorites by Fellini though I wrenched the film when last speaking about it.
Quote from: ©bradu go into it knowing you're going to hate it, and during your viewing w/ your little brother you're looking for faults (all of which are either false or completely incoherent, i must say) to validate your already negative opinion when in fact, what you should do is let the film wash over you, w/o any preconceived notion that it will be bad or any cynicism towards the trilogy.
Actually, if that was correct, I'd be able to have seen the
light and would have loved Fellowship because I did think that it would be great when I originally saw it. I expected better from the second and didn't get it and going into the third, expected it to be bad on one hand but expected it to be better than the first two due to the large amount of buzz from everyone.
Quote from: ©brad3. Emotion in their voice/movements seemed hardly existent? u see, i question your ability to even recognize true emotion in a film.
Look at the main actors. For Viggo, Bloom, and Mckellen, their facial movements hardly change and neither their expressions. Even in a war speech or heartfelt confession, they vary little from the drained talk most of the characters inhabit. During battle scenes, they are second rate emotions any other actor could bring. The costumes and make up they all wear are an example of the art of suggestion because they, alone, ask you to really believe these actors inhabit their characters. Nothing in any of the performances are beyond the bare minimum expected in usual fairy tale hoakiness.
Quote from: ©brad'm really confused here. two realisms? it's fantasy dude.
You missunderstood. By two realisms, I mean the digital realism (larger battle scenes involving fairy tale creatures) and the Braveheart-esque realism (combat of people slicing each other up). Tonally, it doesn't work for me. I'll spend time watching the combat scenes and then go to all the fairy tale creatures being involved and see how texturally different they are in believability. I didn't just see the story of humans versus monsters, but humans verus computer created monsters. This didn't allow me to really get involved in the battle scenes that much because I was aware of the technical difference. If this film was animated, every creature, effect, landscape, and emotion would be on equal ground.
Also, this wasn't an argument. It was me just reiterating my already stated beliefs. Cbr, as much as you were trying to hold back on cussing me out, you just basically told me I was "wrong" for not liking the movie. The only point of argument was the second one I quoted.
Gold Trumpet, please tell me what kind of movies you like. You're losing us. At first when you hated a popular movie I liked I thought 'okay, this guy is into smaller "serious" films' and I really respected you for that but now...I still enjoy reading your reviews but they NEVER suprise me. I know it's gonna be negative review. How do you have the energy to write those long posts about movies you hate?
Please, list a couple of films you love.
Quote from: kotteGold Trumpet, please tell me what kind of movies you like. You're losing us. At first when you hated a popular movie I liked I thought 'okay, this guy is into smaller "serious" films' and I really respected you for that but now...I still enjoy reading your reviews but they NEVER suprise me. I know it's gonna be negative review. How do you have the energy to write those long posts about movies you hate?
Please, list a couple of films you love.
What kind of movies I like? I don't know...... That seems like a hard thing to formulate in a couple of sentences. I think people who've read me long enough do know I like many movies, but they also realize though I have a signature perspective on movies that is very pessimistic for most movies coming out now. Also, what discussion do you get from agreeing with everyone? This is a discussion board. Ghostboy seems pretty good on understanding where I come from.
What films I love? For benefit of the topic, Princess Mononoke. Its fantasy, highly spirited and attempts to be an adventure film and nothing more. Its execution is just so good that it goes above the other films like it. Its the best film of its kind and I've seen it 20 times plus. To think, Return of the King will be around 4 hours plus when finally completed on dvd. I really don't see any movie sustainable for repeat viewing that is that long.
Agreeing all the time is boring. If I truly agreed with opinions as little as you do I would not use that argument. So you disagree to get a discussion up and running?
I know that's not true. You just told me a movie you like. You are a little bit more human to me now.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
I'm actually tougher on Fellini than you think. Ask SoNowThen about my opinion on Satyricon (if he remembers) cause I think its one of his favorites by Fellini though I wrenched the film when last speaking about it.
Well, I finally found some common ground with you. I fucking hate Satyricon, with so much disgust that thinking about actually makes my stomach twist and wretch.
Did you like any of the original Star Wars trilogy, Trumpet?
Quote from: analogzombieHow many endings can you tack on to ROTK? I counted 5. I know they are in the books, but I just got the feeling that Jackson didn't really wanna end the film. He was tying up loose ends forever.
Well, there's only ONE ending, when the door closes and the screen says "The End." ... Everything else leads up to the one ending.
The only ending that really gnaws at me is the first one -- the slow-motion reunion of the fellowship. Except for Sam coming in last, it's blatant attempt at a feel-good, tear-jerker moment that coming off a bit wrong, tone-wise.
The rest of the "endings" are necessary resolutions, in my opinion. Not just the tying up of loose ends.
We have to resolve the Aragorn/Arwen plotline, and what better place than atop Minas Tirith (one of the most beautiful settings in film). And the moment with the hobbits there works much more nicely than the one before.
Then we have to have a series of scenes to get the Hobbits back in town and get Sam married.
Then we have to have the final movement, with the war-scarred characters getting onto the boat and sailing away. These are the true goodbyes and endings.
But then you HAVE to end the movie the same way Tolkien ends the trilogy -- with Sam's line. This is not negotiable.
So I don't really see anything that's superfluous, other than possibly the scene with Frodo and the reunion in the bedroom. Beyond that, all the "endings" are necessary.
Yeah I get your point about having 'one' ending. so we can call them 5 resolutions. And yes I think the Minas Tirith thing is a definite must-be-there sort of thing. But that shot of the hobbits at the end of that one would have been an excellent place to pull back and begin a sort of Galadriel narration over the next couple resolutions. then you could come back down for sam's final perspective. And as far as it having to be int he movie cuz it was in the books: Isn't there also some kind of a 'rape of hobbitton' sequence in the books that jackson never even filmed?
I've seen the film 3 times now. And for me the climax is the battle of Minas Tirith. the emotional flow of the films lead me to the victory at Minas Tirith being the resolution, the thing that tells me 'all is well'. The rest including the destruction of the ring is almost epilogue, kind of 'taking care of business'. I do think however, that the extended cut footage may change the pacing and so alter my perception of this.
Quote from: kotteAgreeing all the time is boring. If I truly agreed with opinions as little as you do I would not use that argument. So you disagree to get a discussion up and running?
I know that's not true. You just told me a movie you like. You are a little bit more human to me now.
Maybe I misspoke before. When I mean I disagree to get arguments going, I don't just disagree to get them going. I will more likely reply to a thread where I hold a negative opinion before replying to a thread where I hold a positive opinion with everyone else. But, also, if a thread has just negative opinions and I share the same opinion then I am more unlikely to reply to it. Its just trying to balance things.
Gamblor,
I don't like any of the original Star Wars films. One reason is that I never was brought up to. Most fans seemed to have grown up with Star Wars right there for them while I had to watch them on my own at an older age. Same deal with LOTR. Also, I don't like any of them simply because Akira Kurosawa exists. I don't think Lucas just borrowed some story elements from one of his films, but aimed to grab the depth Kurosawa applied to action films and replace feudal Japan with an exciting futuristic world. Lucas just isn't in the same ballpark in quality of story with what Kurosawa achieved. His drama is mere soap opera to Kurosawa's. I choose Kurosawa over Star Wars and Princess Mononoke over LOTR.
why do you go see movies, when you know you'll end up hating them?
seriously, you hate every movie.
why?
why go see Return of the King when you know you're gonna hate the first half hour of it, the first few frames of it?
why?
you posted about Master and Commander and how much you disliked it, but you knew you were going to dislike it in the first place so why go see it?
why go see movies?
you hate movies.
why post your reviews here? we already know you're going to hate the movie.
why is this pissing me off so much?
Quote from: poserismswhy do you go see movies, when you know you'll end up hating them?
seriously, you hate every movie.
why?
why go see Return of the King when you know you're gonna hate the first half hour of it, the first few frames of it?
why?
you posted about Master and Commander and how much you disliked it, but you knew you were going to dislike it in the first place so why go see it?
why go see movies?
you hate movies.
why post your reviews here? we already know you're going to hate the movie.
why is this pissing me off so much?
Well, I think GT has already answered this, but...
What would be the fun of only seeing movies you love? Fans of cinema should always be looking to expand their horizons, and that means dabbling your toes in all the different pools out there. Check out the amazing wide variety of cinema out there in the world. I'm not the world's biggest fan of David Lynch or Werner Herzog, but I go out of my way to see some of their films, because it helps me define what I enjoy and what I don't enjoy -- and why. ... Same with Brett Ratner and Michael Bay. How would I ever know the brilliance of PTA if I wasn't subjected to the tripe put forth by those two?
And again, it's all subjective anyway. If I offended any Lynch or Herzog or Ratner or Bay fans with this message, I'm sorry. But, on the other hand, who the hell cares what I think, except that it helps stir the conversation, which is what this site is all about -- stimulating conversation and debates.
Quote from: ©bradyou walked out?!? enough said.
That's all you had to say.
Watch the movie, GT. Watch the movie.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpet
For the second half, my venom against this movie may seem so high because I don't disagree with just with those who liked it, but disagree with and resent the acclaim it is getting by the media as being "high art". It isn't and if it goes on to dominate award shows, it will only make Hollywood a bigger tight wad on financing riskier projects. This film is mainstream to the core.
GT....i see your point in your review for return of the king ....but i disagree...all of the negative things that you point out about this film can be true as with all the positives that one points ouit can be true also...(double edged)..........but the reason of the bold words is to point out that just because the a film is mainstream doesn't mean it is not "high art"......i think i know what your'e saying but i tennd to believe that there
are mainstream films that are "high art" (i.e. The Godfather one and two)
Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanQuote from: ©bradyou walked out?!? enough said.
That's all you had to say.
Watch the movie, GT. Watch the movie.
Did you read at what point of the movie I walked out? I think what I missed was irrelevant to whether or not it was a good movie.
Quote from: NEON MERCURYall of the negative things that you point out about this film can be true as with all the positives that one points ouit can be true also...(double edged]
How so? I have an idea to what you mean, but I want you to explain it so I can be percise in my reasoning.
Quote from: NEON MERCURYbut the reason of the bold words is to point out that just because the a film is mainstream doesn't mean it is not "high art"......i think i know what your'e saying but i tennd to believe that there are mainstream films that are "high art" (i.e. The Godfather one and two)
Well...maybe you haven't heard, but I don't think Godfather Part I and II are high art either. I think the first is excellent for composition of scene and acting, but the second one is useless. Many people (I think) over extend the craft of filmmaking in both films to say they cover for the poverty in the stories so my approval of the first is limited. I can't recommend the second, but only revert approval back to the first one because all the understanding of character and plot achieved in the first one is recycled for the second.
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetDid you read at what point of the movie I walked out? I think what I missed was irrelevant to whether or not it was a good movie.
"Before the onslaught of false endings"? Where exactly is that?
See the movie, then judge it. Many a movie has been saved or ruined by its ending.
Not that I'm enthusiastically defending ROTK. I liked it more than the previous two, mostly because there was less dialogue and less acting.
Quote from: Jeremy Blackman"Before the onslaught of false endings"? Where exactly is that?
After the pillow right between the elves on the bed or making Viggo King, whichever came last. I heard what happened later and it seemed as if was an over extended ending that added nothing crucial.
[quote="Jeremy Blackman]See the movie, then judge it. Many a movie has been saved or ruined by its ending.[/quote]
I don't believe in endings saving or ruining a film.
I just can't see how one can think this movie is awful.
Some might think it's perfect, some 'good', some 'ok', some 'not very good but it had some good bits in it' but awful? I just can't believe someone might think that of this film.
Quote from: The Gold Trumpetpillow right
what the hell is a pillow right?
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetQuote from: ©bradi just can't understand how someone who is as film literate as u are could be so bored w/ the first 30 minutes of this movie-- meanwhile, you can sit through a many of fellini films that are much more tiresome.
I'm actually tougher on Fellini than you think. Ask SoNowThen about my opinion on Satyricon (if he remembers) cause I think its one of his favorites by Fellini though I wrenched the film when last speaking about it.
I've never seen Satyricon. Maybe it was Roma you were thinking of.
BTW, Fellini is not tiresome.
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetI don't believe in endings saving or ruining a film.
Then what is their purpose?
Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanQuote from: The Gold TrumpetI don't believe in endings saving or ruining a film.
Then what is their purpose?
to provide resolution to the story and/or emotional developments within the characters.
while endings can deviate from the theme of the movie as a whole, i am hard pressed to think of a film i have seen that i felt the ending either 'saved' it from being bad, or 'ruined' an otherwise good film
Quote from: analogzombieto provide resolution to the story and/or emotional developments within the characters.
Then aren't you missing something if you miss the ending? Maybe "save" is not the right word. Just think of how
less you would like a given movie without seeing the ending. Think of how
more you would like a given movie (AI, Matchstick Men) without the ending. The point is, it's crucial.
I'm just saying it's not fair, because if he saw the whole movie, his opinion would actually be valid, and undoubtedly different (if more negative).
Plus, walking out of a movie and then passing authoritative judgment on it reeks of pretentiousness.
One of my best friends, who loves the books, walked out of Two Towers and isn't even bothering with ROTK. My mom will only watch them with the director's commentary on because the technical aspects are all that interest her. As much as I love the films, I think it's easy to see why someone might not like them much, or at all.
Although I'm still surprised that so many people don't think Two Towers is one of the best movies ever made of all time.... :wink:
Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanQuote from: analogzombieto provide resolution to the story and/or emotional developments within the characters.
Then aren't you missing something if you miss the ending? Maybe "save" is not the right word. Just think of how less you would like a given movie without seeing the ending. Think of how more you would like a given movie (AI, Matchstick Men) without the ending. The point is, it's crucial.
of course you miss something. i think my contention was on the use of the words save and ruin. although now that you mention it, AI's ending did just about ruin what had come before it.
Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanI'm just saying it's not fair, because if he saw the whole movie, his opinion would actually be valid, and undoubtedly different (if more negative).
I definately agree there.
There should really be a new thread but right now the only movie I can think of were the ending really did it for me was 'They Shoot Horses Don't They?'. It didn't save it but it really punctuated it. Had I not seen it I would have probably thought a little less of the film.
Plus I can't believe someone would walk out of a film, or make bets as to who would leave first. Very dissapointing coming from you GT. Where's the respect? If I can sit through the whole of Gone in 60 Seconds you can damn well sit through the whole of Return of the King.
Bastard, copying my avatar theme!!!
that's actually quite cute if i do say so myself.
Some type of billy crystal fetish i suppose...
W-w-whats this?
GT, I just rented Princess Mononoke and can't understand how you can have such polarised reactions to it and Lord of the Rings. I thought it was a fantastic film with one of the best scores I've heard but I can see so many similarities between it and LotR that your criticisms still make little sense to me. Why is Princess Mononoke so superior to the Rings trilogy?
Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanI'm just saying it's not fair, because if he saw the whole movie, his opinion would actually be valid, and undoubtedly different (if more negative).
Plus, walking out of a movie and then passing authoritative judgment on it reeks of pretentiousness.
You've lost your head. You essentially said this before and I replied to it but you aren't responding to what I argued in that reply. Instead of explaining to me how what I missed after Viggo being crowned King was anything crucial judging the movie, you continue saying my point isn't valid because i missed an inch of this film.
Quote from: RedlumPlus I can't believe someone would walk out of a film, or make bets as to who would leave first. Very dissapointing coming from you GT. Where's the respect?
The respect is in the first two movies and the first half hour of the third film. With those minutes, I was open to the film being good and/or getting better as it developed. After that point, I realized the film would be tonally whole in its approach to content but that wasn't a good thing. But, like I said, I did enjoy later moments in Return of the King. Specifically Wood's acting and some minor battle moments so I wasn't completely closed to the movie. I do think the period of time I gave the trilogy to improve was fair, but I don't apologize for making the final film a sort of joke either.
Quote from: RedlumGT, I just rented Princess Mononoke and can't understand how you can have such polarised reactions to it and Lord of the Rings. I thought it was a fantastic film with one of the best scores I've heard but I can see so many similarities between it and LotR that your criticisms still make little sense to me. Why is Princess Mononoke so superior to the Rings trilogy?
Like I did say before in this thread, Princess Mononoke is film simply made with the spirit that LOTR lacks. To get that, it has a better understanding of its place as an adventure film and follows through on trying to be the best film it can within those limitations. LOTR is an adventure film because it does have storylines that really just lead to battles and bigger battles only, but its also an event in which it is trying incapusalate as much of a series of books that it can so it doesn't really become an adventure story (too long to be an enjoyable in that sense) anymore nor even anything of higher value. I mean, fans petitioned to have a fight included in the film when it came on dvd because they thought it was too important. Them winning this is just a sign the film exists not for its own purpose of being a great film, but to transcribe people's favorite book to screen for their pleasure.
So part of your issue is with the films not punching their weight? Aiming for areas outside of its designated genre and comprimising itself in both.
I strongly diagree with your comment about spirit. The movies are chock full of that, man. It's inherent in the story, the production and ultimately the film.
I do understand your take on it being made simply as a translation of a popular book, but what is wrong with this? Is it really relevant when there are many other film adaptations which do exactly the same thing. Most films are an adaptation of somebody else's work: screenwriters>directors.
This may be the most poular source material of all time but I don't think the fans held as much sway as you think. Perhaps the most strongest fan reaction was towards Liv Tyler's Arwen and the makers stuck by their decision to give the character more time on-screen.
Is your reaction not slightly over-blown to counter attack the huge popularity of the films in the perhaps the same way that Altman says he wants to get rid of 14 year old boys at the movies? Maybe I'm just being defensive or something but it's disheartening to hear someone treat the films so lightly.
Anyways Happy New Year, GT.
Quote from: ®edlumI do understand your take on it being made simply as a translation of a popular book, but what is wrong with this? Is it really relevant when there are many other film adaptations which do exactly the same thing. Most films are an adaptation of somebody else's work: screenwriters>directors.
I think you miss what I mean. I'm not knocking adaptations, but I don't think this film is just another adaptation. Maybe the task of adaptating LOTR is impossible, but adaptations of books follow suit in usually a film still being two hours and constricting the story to a plot that can be adaquetely held in a movie. LOTR extends so long that I felt many of the restrictions in book to movie adaptations were being ignored and many things in the movies were too repititve and not really insightful to anything of higher meaning. They seemed to be justified because they were popular moments in the books and the people would demand them to be there. Thats where my example of fans petitioning for a certain fight to be included in the film comes in.
Quote from: ®edlumIs your reaction not slightly over-blown to counter attack the huge popularity of the films in the perhaps the same way that Altman says he wants to get rid of 14 year old boys at the movies? Maybe I'm just being defensive or something but it's disheartening to hear someone treat the films so lightly.
Prolly a little of both. I'd still stand by my same points, but I am carrying an angst to this film because of its acclaim for sure. Also, I'm sure it is disheartening because I've received a lot of negative replies but only a small percentage were actual argument to the art of the film.
Quote from: The Gold TrumpetI think you miss what I mean. I'm not knocking adaptations, but I don't think this film is just another adaptation. Maybe the task of adaptating LOTR is impossible, but adaptations of books follow suit in usually a film still being two hours and constricting the story to a plot that can be adaquetely held in a movie. LOTR extends so long that I felt many of the restrictions in book to movie adaptations were being ignored and many things in the movies were too repititve and not really insightful to anything of higher meaning.
what the hell are you talking about? what restrictions?
gt, do us all a favor; stay out of this thread. u've made ur point. after the much needed gold-trumpet-tranlsation-into-english-process, we've all managed to deduct from ur babbling that u didn't dig the movie. (even though that i have and will continue to question the validity of any of ur reviews, seeing as how u are so susceptible to walking out) I don't know how much more of this erroneous nonsense i can take. i fear that if i read much more, i may do something stupid. (especially if i've had a couple of drinks)
Quote from: GhostboyI'm still surprised that so many people don't think Two Towers is one of the best movies ever made of all time.... :wink:
It's definatly the best of the 3, although I do love them all.
Quote from: ©bradQuote from: The Gold TrumpetI think you miss what I mean. I'm not knocking adaptations, but I don't think this film is just another adaptation. Maybe the task of adaptating LOTR is impossible, but adaptations of books follow suit in usually a film still being two hours and constricting the story to a plot that can be adaquetely held in a movie. LOTR extends so long that I felt many of the restrictions in book to movie adaptations were being ignored and many things in the movies were too repititve and not really insightful to anything of higher meaning.
what the hell are you talking about? what restrictions?
gt, do us all a favor; stay out of this thread. u've made ur point. after the much needed gold-trumpet-tranlsation-into-english-process, we've all managed to deduct from ur babbling that u didn't dig the movie. (even though that i have and will continue to question the validity of any of ur reviews, seeing as how u are so susceptible to walking out) I don't know how much more of this erroneous nonsense i can take. i fear that if i read much more, i may do something stupid. (especially if i've had a couple of drinks)
Then why do you (and everyone else) continue to debate me on my points? Its dumb to say I am going any extra mile on saying my opinion here.
the funny thing is, i havn't seen this yet.
same here.
Make that three.
Four, right over here.
Lord of the Rings was number one yet again raking in nearly 31 mill and bringing the grand total to 291 mill.
***SPOILER***
Does anyone else think Frodo is a little bitch after this movie? Certainly not the hero the 'false endings' portray him as. Is that supposed to be the point? Is there some sort of cynical irony at work?
Anyways, wonderful movie. Wonderful trilogy. Can't wait for the extended cut.
Quote from: Pthe funny thing is, i havn't seen this yet.
Quote from: mogwaisame here.
Quote from: MacGuffinMake that three.
Quote from: CinephileFour, right over here.
um, why is this exactly?
Since its release, the film has earned $677 million worldwide, including $292 million from North America, where it is tracking 12 percent ahead of where its predecessor, "The Two Towers" was at the same time last year. That film ended up with $341 million domestically and $921 million worldwide.
The worldwide total for "Return of the King" is outpacing that of "Two Towers" by about 15 percent, said Rolf Mittweg, president of worldwide marketing and distribution at Time Warner Inc.'s New Line Cinema.
Quote from: ©bradum, why is this exactly?
GT said it wasn't very good.
Quote from: MacGuffinQuote from: ©bradum, why is this exactly?
GT said it wasn't very good.
That means the films rocks. Haven't you learned anything? :)
Quote from: kotteQuote from: MacGuffinQuote from: ©bradum, why is this exactly?
GT said it wasn't very good.
That means the films rocks. Haven't you learned anything? :)
and therin lies the hah-hah.
Maybe someone else has pointed this out, but it wasn't until that second viewing that I realized that Andy Serkis plays one of the hobbits carrying a big pumpkin in a scene near the very end. ... Nice cameo.
Quote from: Find Your MagaliMaybe someone else has pointed this out, but it wasn't until that second viewing that I realized that Andy Serkis plays one of the hobbits carrying a big pumpkin in a scene near the very end. ... Nice cameo.
and I do believe he's in the beginning as well... :)
Quote from: ©bradum, why is this exactly?
it's always sold out... :roll:
just caught a second viewing of this one, and i must say i enjoyed it even more. the multiple endings flowed much better. i am 100% that they are all necessary and wonderful now. i think once you expect them it's not as, um..., well it doesn't feel as drawn out. it really felt like an hour and a half movie to me, and i teared up much more this time.
so, mac, mogs, p, and whoever else hasn't seen it yet...GOOOOOOOO!
alll i have to stay is that ending to lord of the rings: return of the king, was too long. but it was still a good ending anyways.
peace
i finally saw... sorry but i just have to let out. i am not a big fan of lotr and i expected a lot from this film coz of what everyone was saying and how good the critics were saying it was and also coz i was hoping taht this would be the best of the trilogy at least.
i was disappointed though. i think some people here called it a masterpiece, but imo this was far from being one. it had its good points (at least in a way it explored more specific things rather than just about the repetetive theme of man being united to fight for survival in a fantasy world with the help of other beings, like the different relationship between parent and child, death, that frodo was saved because he gave in to temptation but did not hurt anyone unlike smeagle, etc.). sadly, it also had a lot of bad points (many many cliched scenes, it did not bring anything new that would make it better than the other two lotr, and some inconsistencies like hobbits not fit for fighting yet sam being able to kill 3 orcs by himself even though he was the size of a midget, overly exaggerated truimphant scenes, weak symbolism and too predictable) even more than in two towers as far as i remember. and the thing is these points (or maybe things i just didnt like about it) were pretty much the same as in the last lotr.
rotk felt like a mixture of both fellowship and two towers. both of which i thought were just ok. it seemed so predictable many times even if i havent read the book and it was like every a lot of the shots on the characters were money shots. it tried to please the audience in every way it could (not saying this is bad) and most symbolisms it had were so obvious that it felt like a sell out (this problem also lead to its predictability). it felt like it wanted to make the viewer one step ahead of what was happening all the time ( i dont know why?!). and damn it was looooooooooooooooooong!
but of course, obviously lotr is extermely difficult to adapt. and though i was hoping for something more in rotk to change my opinion about the whole trilogy, there was really nothing. the book is problably really good but it seemed that the movie was merely just a regular adaptation.
im not saying it was terible or anything like that, it was okay, but i really really was hoping for more, and imo i got nothing more and nothing less from to add to what my original opinion on the first two were.
sorry for the long post, jsut had to say.;.
Quote from: Sanjuro... too predictable ... it tried to please the audience in every way it could ... it felt like it wanted to make the viewer one step ahead of what was happening all the time ...
Yeah, except for that whole 'return of the king' thing. That was so totally unexpected and surprising.
MAJOR SPOILERS
Just saw this last night....
What a fuckin' huge disappointment. I don't know whether I'm more angry or sad, seeing as how I really enjoyed the first two. How can one make such wonderful films in the spirit of the Tolkien book, then make a sell-out Hollywood trash film for the third? Every major scene in the book was butchered. I held off knowing anything, so I got my major let downs: no Christopher Lee, no Gandalf riding out to hold off the Witch King, no Mouth Of Sauron, and worst of all, no scouring of the Shire (pretty much the whole point of the last volume). Oh, but we did get long drawn out scenes about how much Liv loved Viggo, which, btw, wasn't even in the book. And the Gollum backstory scene at the start, which was wholly not needed.
The major battle was pretty good, but other than that, I was either bored, or laughing at the cheesiness of most scenes. Gandalf was not shown to be the demi-god of middle earth that he really was, Aragorn -- built up for two movies -- basically fizzled out (pffft, return of the king indeed), wayyyyy too much screentime was wasted on anyone from Rohan, and lastly, the Dead Men just looked so cheap. Aaarrrghhh! Why does everyone love this movie???
Oh -- before anyone freaks out, I'm sad to say I will still be buying this on Extended Edition. To have the full set, as well as to see if any of the butchered or missing scenes are redone...[/b]
Quote from: ©bradso, mac, mogs, p, and whoever else hasn't seen it yet...GOOOOOOOO!
i just noticed that this movie will not gross more money than titanic. but i will finally see it this thursday.
Quote from: mogwaiQuote from: ©bradso, mac, mogs, p, and whoever else hasn't seen it yet...GOOOOOOOO!
but i will finally see it this thursday.
I will this coming weekend.
Quote from: MacGuffinI will this coming weekend.
why haven't you seen it earlier? great av by the way.
mac, i am extremely curious why you've waited so long to see some of these flicks? how can you stand it? or is it not a choice because you're too busy usually?
Quote from: themodernage02mac, i am extremely curious why you've waited so long to see some of these flicks? how can you stand it? or is it not a choice because you're too busy usually?
December was not a very good month to me. And it was like being born again returning to a theater.
i will also finally see it this week.
havn't seen it cos i hate crowds and obnoxious idiots, or ppl who make any noise in general, which is inevitable in the opening weeks for big things like this. so now i'm gonna go on a weekday, the earliest session in the morning. and ask the ticket person when the actual movie starts, so i can go into the theatre as the trailers are finishing and still find a good seat. i will be drinking a small coke. yes they still hav Small in this country.
i don't like to drink anything while watching a movie. it makes me want to wee wee later in the middle of the movie or so.
I never get concessions unless I'm with some one and not expecting much from the movie. It's distracting, really.
I never eat or drink anything. Ever.
i'm considering taking the hour drive to atlanta to see this on IMAX. seeing as how i've never IMAXED before, is it really worth my $/time? basically, is the IMAX experience as cool as ppl say it is?
Not with non-IMAX movies I believe, cause you lost in image quality. Unless it has changed since Final Fantasy the Spirits Within
i saw it last night and it was a perfect ending of the trilogy. i was impressed by sean astin how good his perfomance was. can't wait until august/november.
my rankings of the films...
1. Fellowship
2. Return of the King
3. Two Towers
Quote from: SHAFTRmy rankings of the films...
1. Fellowship
2. Return of the King
3. Two Towers
Agree with your ranking.
I think when the first came up it was something new, fresh and something we'd never seen before.
Quote from: SHAFTR1. Fellowship
2. Return of the King
3. Two Towers
yeah.
EDIT: 2X POST! MAX OPINION VALIDATION!
Quote from: SHAFTR1. Fellowship
2. Return of the King
3. Two Towers
no way dude, it goes..
1. Reloaded
2. Matrix
94475856. Revolutions.
Quote from: PawbloeI never eat or drink anything. Ever.
ever?not even this?
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdvdmedia.ign.com%2Fdvd%2Fimage%2Fpulpfictionce_07.jpg&hash=0ce943b46bdb2202c7a12d67b6788d219fde938a)
I know I'm in the minority here (and I'm talking extended release--with exception to RotK) but:
1) Two Towers
2) Return of the King (This could easily take over #1 with it's extended scenes)
3) Fellowship of the Ring
When viewed as the way it was intended, Two Towers evolved into this full, rich and realized version that just didn't come across in the theatrical version. All the movies were great, but I really enjoyed the pacing of TT over FoTR.
Two Towers is still my favorite, too. Both the theatrical and extended versions.
Quote from: GhostboyTwo Towers is still my favorite, too. Both the theatrical and extended versions.
i think mine too. i prefered my own anticipation of how big/crazy things were gonna get in the final chapter to the actual events in ROTK, which seemed less epic than what i has thought.
Quote from: Raikus
When viewed as the way it was intended, Two Towers evolved into this full, rich and realized version that just didn't come across in the theatrical version. All the movies were great, but I really enjoyed the pacing of TT over FoTR.
I saw the first half of the extended edition and I thought it was WAY better than the theatrical version (well I guess first half of the theatrical version). I think I am going to wait until RotK extended gets released and get all 3 extendeds at once.
----
I enjoyed and liked Return of the King but I wouldn't say that I loved it, in fact I think I'd be upset if it won Best Picture. The only performance I thought was that memorable was Ian McKellan (I really don't understand the Sean Astin oscar talk, why because he cried?) anyways, I enjoyed the film but it doesn't make my top 10 of 2003.
What a let down. I was greatly disappointed. The build-up of two epic movies and this is how it ends?
*MINOR SPOILERS*
The movie overall fely too overextended. I think my main problem was with the screenplay. After following the fellowship characters in their journey over the two previous films, they have nothing to do in this film, except fight. It seems like the secondary characters were the focus and the fellowship took a back seat to them. Scenes were on far too long and I kept wondering, what was happening to the other characters. For example, the battle begins and Aragon is gone missing with the Army Of Darkness for what must have been a good 30 minutes. Everything seemed a build-up of one battle or fight after another, leaving no scenes for the characters. Gandolf is reduced to barking orders. I swear I forgot Gimly and Legolas were even in the series. Also, the battles kinda turned into the film into a run-of-the-mill action movie, complete with cheesy lines. When a character says, "No man can kill me!" and his opponent is a woman, you know what the next line is gonna be. It was also a series of seeing characters on the brink of death, but then all of a sudden someone comes to the rescue. All of this made me lose sympathy for the characters I was rooting for within the first two films. I felt the film worked best after the AT-AT's ice attack on Hoth the giant elephant battle, and it came back to being about the characters. I'd rank the films in order when they were released.
THANK YOU LORD!!!! Someone agress with me.
Exactly exactly exactly, Mac. The cheese platter was overwhelming in this instalment.
Let's hope the extended dvd salvages it for the trilogy...
Quote from: SoNowThenLet's hope the extended dvd salvages it for the trilogy...
that was what i was thinking too. i think that mac will get something more out of the extended one. i was in oblivion all the time because i loved it and i didn't pay any attention to the characters. :yabbse-grin:
Quote from: mogwaii was in oblivion all the time because i loved it and i didn't pay any attention to the characters. :yabbse-grin:
It seems like the rest of the world was too.
Quote from: MacGuffinAfter following the fellowship characters in their journey over the two previous films, they have nothing to do in this film, except fight. It seems like the secondary characters were the focus and the fellowship took a back seat to them. Scenes were on far too long and I kept wondering, what was happening to the other characters. For example, the battle begins and Aragon is gone missing with the Army Of Darkness for what must have been a good 30 minutes. Everything seemed a build-up of one battle or fight after another, leaving no scenes for the characters. Gandolf is reduced to barking orders. I swear I forgot Gimly and Legolas were even in the series. All of this made me lose sympathy for the characters I was rooting for within the first two films.
Quote from: themodernage02i also kinda felt like (as in matrix 3) a lot of the middle of the film i was watching the 'secondary characters' and not frodo or aragorn or anyone i really cared about.
i felt the same way. i had pretty big problems with this movie, although i still enjoyed it, there were things even on the 2nd viewing i could not overlook. i didnt have those kinds of problems with the other two.
Pretty good japanese trailer here:
http://www.apple.com/jp/quicktime/trailers/media/lotr3_trailer.mov
TheOneRing.net got a chance to speak briefly to Jackson Monday night who revealed that the extended The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King DVD will be 4 hours and 10 minutes long.
Quote from: themodernage02TheOneRing.net got a chance to speak briefly to Jackson Monday night who revealed that the extended The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King DVD will be 4 hours and 10 minutes long.
Great!
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.coldstate.com%2Fdvddebate%2Fsmallpics%2Frotkr2lrg.jpg&hash=def043ea93f76ce919931ca12258211ea13d26d0)
Digital Bits got info on The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. It seems cover art that might be the U.K. theatrical edition DVD has started circulating around the Net. If it is the real deal, the disc specs for the 2-disc set will include anamorphic widescreen video, English Dolby Digital 5.1 EX and 2.0 Surround audio, 3 documentaries (On the Set - The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, The Battle for Middle Earth and The Quest Fulfilled), 6 A Final Look at Middle-Earth featurettes created for lordoftherings.net (Digital Horses, Eowyn White Lady of Rohan, Minas Tirith, Aragorn's Destiny, Battle of the Pelennor Fields and Samwise the Brave), Trilogy outtakes and bloopers, original theatrical trailers and TV spots, Annie Lennox's Into the West music video, EA's The Lord of the Rings Trilogy videogame preview, and a preview of the Special Extended DVD Edition.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.calsmodels.com%2Fimages%2FXIXAX%2Freturnofking.jpg&hash=d903275a09c88f574d2c1042483ab9cfed88af46)
rotk is definetely great...but i just don't think is better than the two towers...towers is my favorite cause it's the darkest and better developed of the three...i think it's also the more daring and brave, and the one in which the themes of the trilogy are more freely explored. besides there's gollum, a fascinating character.
1. two towers
2. return of the king
3. fellowship of the ring
An image of an advertisement that was apparently present at the International Toy Fair 2004 event. The advert appears to suggest that the Lord of the Rings Trilogy will be available in some kind of special edition package next year. Whether this is an all new release, or just a repackaging of the three films is still uncertain at this time. The advertisement also confirms that the theatrical cut of Return of the King will be arriving in shops this Summer (which could suggest a release later than May) and a release for the extended edition of the film towards the end of the year. For now though, here's the advertisement:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.angelfire.com%2Ffilm%2Fxixax%2Flordofringstrilogyadvertpic.jpg&hash=3980b5008aea0dca967c3c4274794e366102faf8)
You're the Lord of the News Mac, thank you.
Quote from: themodernage02(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.calsmodels.com%2Fimages%2FXIXAX%2Freturnofking.jpg&hash=d903275a09c88f574d2c1042483ab9cfed88af46)
I know WHY they did it, but it seems really wrong to put Liv Tyler on the cover of this one. If you want a female presence, put Miranda Otto on there. She darn near steals the movie, anyway.
Further Details
After storming the Oscars the other night, many of the cast and crew descended upon the annual party held by those good folks at TheOneRing.net. Naturally, discussion at the event soon turned to the extended editions of Return of the King, and thankfully Peter Jackson was more than willing to talk about it. For starters he confirmed that his work on the set is complete, although WETA still have another 350 effects shots to complete! The four (or possibly five) disc package is scheduled for release in November. He also talked briefly about a practical joke played on Elijah Wood that should be included:
Oscar Winner, Peter Jackson: There's a complicated story... you'll have to listen to this. It's just something that we are going to put on the DVD in November for the extended Return of the King. There's this really funny thing that involved these two guys [points at:] Elijah and Dom. We were in Berlin doing our junket before the premiere of the film. All of us were over there doing press every day where they sit you down in front of cameras and you do all this press, except Elijah couldn't be in Berlin - he was in New York. I think he was doing the 'Saturday Night Live' thing but what Elijah agreed to do very kindly was to get up at 4 o'clock in the morning in New York and sit in front of a camera so that the journalists in Berlin could interview him live since he couldn't be there. So Elijah's in a situation where he's in a room at 4 o'clock in the morning and he has no pictures to look at - there's just a camera pointing at him and he has an earphone on. He's live and he can hear the interviewer in Berlin asking questions. They feed several German interviewers and Elijah sits there blankly looking at the camera and answering the questions that are coming through his earpiece. After that had happened three or four times Dominic, who was in Berlin, thought this was an opportunity for a great practical joke! So Dominic comes into the room in Berlin, puts on a German accent and he pretends to be a German interviewer. Elijah has got no idea whatsoever because Dom put on a great accent 'Ah, hello zere Mr Wood I am pleased to meet you'. And then Dom proceeds to ask Elijah the most outrageously rude questions and Elijah's got no idea. He's sat there being filmed and there's this absolute moron asking questions on the other side and he was videoed too. We've got this thing and it's the funniest thing I've ever seen in my life: seeing Elijah trying to hold it together when he's being bombarded with these horrible questions.
New Line Home Entertainment have sent exclusive first details for the Oscar winning Return of the King which stars Elijah Wood and Ian McKellen. This two disc set will be available to own from the 25th May in both widescreen and full screen editions. Each should set you back somewhere in the region of $29.95. The full disc specs:
2.40:1 Anamorphic Widescreen Transfer
English Dolby Digital 5.1 EX Track
English Dolby Surround 2.0 Track
A Journey Completed: A Director's Vision
A Filmmaker's Journey: Making The Return of the King
The National Geographic Special Feature
Multiple Lordoftherings.net Featurettes
- Aragorn's Destiny Feature
- Minas Tirith Feature
- Battle of Pelennor Fields Feature
- Samwise the Brave Feature
- Eowyn White Lady of Rohan Feature
- Digital Horses Feature
Original Theatrical Trailers and TV Spots
Lord of the Rings Trilogy Super Trailer
Closer Look at Electronic Arts Video Games
DVD-ROM: Lord of the Rings Weblink
English, Spanish Subtitles
am i the only who's surprised that it'll be released in may?
i still havn't seen it.
I enjoyed Return of the King the most out of the three films. Even though it was not as Tolkein wrote it... But, then I'd just start ranting about how Shelob was supposed to be in the end of The Two Towers.
However, I found the movie, the most touching (if somewhat homoerotic)and emotional theatre experiences of last year. And wasn't it a surprise to anyone else that is managed to win best picture?
Quote from: mogwaiam i the only who's surprised that it'll be released in may?
Well, they'll want to capitalize on the Oscars as quickly as possible, so May isn't a surprise for ths version.
The surprise was that the original rumor was that the 4-disc version was coming out in September. But now, apparently, they've come to their senses and pushed that back to November or December. I'll be getting both, anyway. I don't feel I've given enough money to Lord PJ yet.
Quote from: MacGuffinNew Line Home Entertainment have sent exclusive first details for the Oscar winning Return of the King which stars Elijah Wood and Ian McKellen. This two disc set will be available to own from the 25th May in both widescreen and full screen editions. Each should set you back somewhere in the region of $29.95. The full disc specs:
2.40:1 Anamorphic Widescreen Transfer
English Dolby Digital 5.1 EX Track
English Dolby Surround 2.0 Track
A Journey Completed: A Director's Vision
A Filmmaker's Journey: Making The Return of the King
The National Geographic Special Feature
Multiple Lordoftherings.net Featurettes
- Aragorn's Destiny Feature
- Minas Tirith Feature
- Battle of Pelennor Fields Feature
- Samwise the Brave Feature
- Eowyn White Lady of Rohan Feature
- Digital Horses Feature
Original Theatrical Trailers and TV Spots
Lord of the Rings Trilogy Super Trailer
Closer Look at Electronic Arts Video Games
DVD-ROM: Lord of the Rings Weblink
English, Spanish Subtitles
No Extended Edition Preview?
I guess no showcaseable shots are done for the EE, yet. I read in a post Oscar article that PJ had only just handed the final cut over to WETA.
New Line Home Entertainment have kindly sent over artwork for the Lord of the Rings Trilogy boxset which will be arriving in shops from the 25th May alongside Return of the King. It will retail at around $89.98. I should point out that this isn't the all singing, all dancing boxset that is rumoured for a release next year and/or beyond. It is instead a simple repackaging of the existing two disc theatrical editions. No new extra material will be included. It may however, work out a little cheaper than buying the discs seperately, if of course, you don't already own them. The official package artwork is attached below:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.angelfire.com%2Ffilm%2Fmacguffin0%2Flordofringsbox.jpg&hash=1f8a50b88b9c3093d527a239a8a14be197ad1063)
Quote from: MacGuffinNew Line Home Entertainment have kindly sent over artwork...
Heh, you make it sound like New Line has started sending Xixax stuff.
they are. "hit the dvd-addicts where they are vulnerable."
Exclusive Interview with Matt Lasorsa, New Line Home Entertainment’s Senior Vice President of Marketing Source: TheOneRing.net
Since the announcement of The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King’s May 25 DVD release date, fans have been speculating about details of the content, the packaging and when the Special Extended Edition will hit shelves. Matt Lasorsa, New Line Home Entertainment’s senior vice president of marketing, offers some insight into the much anticipated home video release in an informative Q&A.
Q: Why May?
A: There is no reason to wait this year. The DVD release dates of The Fellowship of the Ring and The Two Towers were dependent on completing the 10-minute look at the next film, which made it impossible to release before August. Without another film to preview, we can release it much earlier.
Q: We’ve heard rumors of a slipcase that will hold all 3 DVDs. How can we get it?
A: We have created a “3-pack” with the theatrical version DVDs of The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers and The Return of the King – packaged in a slipcase – but the slipcase itself is not sold separately. The “3-pack” does not have any new or exclusive content and will be available at retail stores nationwide.
Q: What extras are on the DVD?
A: Like the last two The Lord of the Rings DVDs, The Return of the King film will be presented on one disc with the highest picture and sound quality possible. In addition to the movie disc, a second disc will include many behind-the-scenes specials, featurettes from lordoftherings.net, TV spots and trailers that debuted during the theatrical release of the film. Also, there will be a preview of the next Electronic Arts video game.
Q: Why isn’t there a preview for the Special Extended Edition?
A: There simply wasn’t enough time to complete it for the May release, and we didn’t believe it would be beneficial to postpone the release date.
Q: When is the Special Extended Edition coming out?
A: It is scheduled to release just before Christmas 2004.
Q: Why isn’t the Special Extended Edition hitting stores earlier, since the theatrical DVD is releasing sooner?
A: Logically, it would seem that it could be done sooner, especially without another Lord of the Rings film to finish; however, that hasn’t been the case. Peter Jackson was quite busy with many commitments during the awards season. Since he was away from New Zealand, he could not cut an extended version of the film. Traditionally, after he cuts the film, there are months and months of work to do to complete the cut – including Howard Shore’s additional score and Weta Digital’s new special effects.
For the special features, many of the interviews with the cast and crew were completed during pickups for the next film, as everyone was in the same place (New Zealand). Now that all filming is complete, everyone is scattered across the world – making it more difficult to get the interviews to create bonus materials.
It would have been ideal to release it sooner, but we didn’t want to compromise the quality of the DVD to get the product in stores earlier.
Q: How long is the Extended version of The Return of the King?
A: It looks like the running time will be over four hours long.
Q: What additional scenes were added?
A: Like The Two Towers extended version, the story of Faramir is shown in greater detail. There are returning characters and new characters, such as Saruman after the flooding of Isengard and the Mouth of Sauron at the Black Gate. Much of the new footage contains extra dialogue and action to further elaborate on each character’s personal journey.
Q: Will there be a Gift Set this year, and what will be included?
A: Yes, a gift set is in the works, and the content of it is still taking shape. We do believe that the fans will be pleased with the Sideshow Weta sculpture – the artists at Weta have really outdone themselves. Look for us to reveal it in July.
Q: Will there be a money-back offer – similar to years past – if you buy both DVDs?
A: Yes. We will be extending the same mail-in rebate offer as we have for The Fellowship of the Ring and The Two Towers – fans who choose to buy both the Theatrical DVD in May and the Extended DVD later this year can receive $5 back by mail (or $10 if they buy the Gift Set). We aren’t requiring cash register receipts for the theatrical DVD, but proofs-of-purchase and receipts for the Special Extended Edition will be required.
Q: Finally, there are many rumors about a mega-special edition “Trilogy Box.” Is there any truth to the rumor?
A: It is certainly something that we talk about creating in the future, but right now we are just concentrating on releasing The Return of the King Theatrical DVD and Extended DVD versions this year. If we do release a “Trilogy Box,” it is at least 2 years away – 2006 or beyond. We would want to have Peter Jackson’s participation, and he will be busy with other projects for at least a year or more. We also would want to make it really special, with never-before-seen content, and, until The Return of the King extended DVD is finished, we won’t be in a position to evaluate what materials are still available.
Quote from: MacGuffinQ: Finally, there are many rumors about a mega-special edition "Trilogy Box." Is there any truth to the rumor?
A: It is certainly something that we talk about creating in the future, but right now we are just concentrating on releasing The Return of the King Theatrical DVD and Extended DVD versions this year. If we do release a "Trilogy Box," it is at least 2 years away – 2006 or beyond. We would want to have Peter Jackson's participation, and he will be busy with other projects for at least a year or more. We also would want to make it really special, with never-before-seen content, and, until The Return of the King extended DVD is finished, we won't be in a position to evaluate what materials are still available.
Hopefully that means new scenes, rather than even more documentaries.
Wow, long ass thread... great movie though
Glad someone knows how to wrap up a trilogy unlike the Wachoski brothers...
Quote from: sciphexWow, long ass thread... great movie though
Guess you haven't been to Quentin Tarantino's thread yet..
Welcome, though..
Quote from: sciphexGlad someone knows how to wrap up a trilogy unlike the Wachoski brothers...
You mean J.R.R. Tolkien, right?
Quote from: MacGuffinQuote from: sciphexGlad someone knows how to wrap up a trilogy unlike the Wachoski brothers...
You mean J.R.R. Tolkien, right?
Yeah, he wrapped it up wonderfully
Quote from: MacGuffinYou mean J.R.R. Tolkien, right?
'Cause Jackson can't end nothin'.
http://www.dvdfile.com/news/special_report/in_the_round/lordoftherings/returnoftheking/index.html
So who's up for a long, 9 1/2 hr marathon viewing of LotR?
i am so there.
Quote from: ranemaka13So who's up for a long, 9 1/2 hr marathon viewing of LotR?
9? More like 11 :-D
Quote from: WithnailQuote from: ranemaka13So who's up for a long, 9 1/2 hr marathon viewing of LotR?
9? More like 11 :-D
I was referring to the Theatrical cuts. I thought about the extended, and I think it's closer to 12 hrs.
The more the merrier :) Looking forward to spending a whole day in Middle-Earth come November.
Return of the King Extended Edition DVD in December
Source: Video Business
Video Business reports that New Line Home Entertainment will release the extended edition DVD of The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King in December.
That falls outside of the holiday shopping primetime of mid-November--when the past two extended versions of the series, "The Fellowship of the Ring" and "The Two Towers," hit stores.
Still, the switch is not expected to hurt sales. Consumers have been aware for months about an upcoming extended take on "Return of the King," given the releases of ones for "Fellowship of the Ring" and "The Two Towers".
The trade adds that the extended edition took longer to produce because cast members, now filming new projects, had to be rounded up from all over to complete their commentaries.
Quote from: WithnailThe more the merrier :) Looking forward to spending a whole day in Middle-Earth come November.
There should be a contest to see who can watch all the extended cuts, commentaries, and extras in the shortest amount of time. Sponsored by Red Bull.
Here's a link for a video that somehow got in&out of Comi-Con, showing the trailer for the extended cut:
http://elflady.com/legolasgreenleaf/multimedia/lotrclips.htm#rotk
Quote from: thedigitalbits.comMany of you have been asking us when New Line is FINALLY going to officially announce The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King - Special Extended DVD Edition. The answer is soon - probably in the next few weeks. A number of retail sources now are telling us to expect a 12/14 street date. We'll confirm that as soon as we can.
New Line has confirmed that the four-disc extended edition of Return of the King will arrive on the 14th December. The set will include around fifty-minutes of additional footage, including the highly anticipated confrontation with Saruman. Stacks of extra material will also be featured, including cast and crew audio commentaries and multiple behind the scenes documentaries and featurettes. The SRP will be around $39.99. Also arriving on the 14th will be a collector's giftset which includes the aforementioned four-disc extended edition, along with a Sideshow/Weta statue of Minas Tirith and a Howard Shore Creating the Lord of the Rings Symphony DVD. The retail price for this will be set at around $79.92.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedigitalbits.com%2Farticles%2Fmiscgfx%2Fcovers4%2Freturnofthekingdvd.jpg&hash=fec647753605992c88edf720d50e709f20e8f3eb)
New Line has just finally, officially announced the DVD release of the 4-disc The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King - Special Extended DVD Edition. As we expected, the DVD will street on 12/14, featuring a 250 minute version of the film with over 50 minutes of new footage and scenes. The film will be presented in anamorphic widescreen video (2.35:1) with audio in both Dolby Digital 5.1 EX and DTS 6.1 ES surround sound. The film will be presented on Discs One & Two, complete with four newly-recorded audio commentaries by the director and writers, the design team, the production team and the cast. These will feature more than 30 participants (including Peter Jackson, Elijah Wood, Sean Astin, Orlando Bloom, Richard Taylor, Howard Shore and many more). The cast commentary will also feature a dialogue between split-personality characters Gollum and Smeagol (Andy Serkis).
Discs Three & Four (The Appendices) will include the usual in-depth documentaries and other features. Disc Three (The War of the Ring) will include a video introduction by Peter Jackson, the final part of the J.R.R. Tolkien: The Legacy of Middle-earth documentary, the From Book to Script: Forging the Final Chapter documentary, an abandoned concept featurette: Aragorn Battles Sauron, the final parts of the Designing Middle-earth, Big-atures, Weta Workshop and Costume Design documentaries, design galleries with more than 2,100 images (divided into The Peoples of Middle-earth, The Realms of Middle-earth and Miniatures), the Home of the Horse Lords documentary, and more interactive Middle-earth Atlas: Tracing the Journeys of the Fellowship and New Zealand as Middle-earth interactive maps (with production footage).
Disc Four (The Passing of an Age) will include a video introduction by Elijah Wood, Sean Astin, Billy Boyd and Dominic Monaghan, the final part of the Cameras in Middle-earth documentary on the making of the film, a production photo gallery with more than 60 images, the last part of the Weta Digital visual effects documentary, a multi-angle The Mumakil Battle interactive demonstration, the Editorial: Completing the Trilogy, Music for Middle-earth, The Soundscapes of Middle-earth and The End of All Things documentaries, The Passing of an Age documentary, the Cameron Duncan: The Inspiration for Into the West documentary, the DFK6498 and Strike Zone short films and finally the usual DVD-ROM content on all discs.
Link to a trailer for the EE here:
http://www.davestrailerpage.co.uk/
9MB
yeah, that's gonna be fucking awesome
Lord of the Rings' Gollum Gets Health Check
Gollum, the creepy character in "Lord of the Rings" with the dual personality and eerie voice, suffered from a schizoid personality disorder, according to a group of medical students.
Thirty students at University College London were asked to explain the odd behavior the character displayed in the films based on the J.R.R. Tolkien trilogy.
The students noted his solitary habits, spiteful behavior, odd interests, difficulty in forming friendships, emotional changeability, nervousness and paranoia.
"He fulfils seven of the nine criteria for schizoid personality disorder, and, if we must label Gollum's problems, we believe this is the most likely diagnosis," Dr Elizabeth Sampson, who headed the research team, said in the British Medical Journal on Friday.
His two personalities -- Gollum and Smeagol -- convinced some students it was a case of schizophrenia or multiple personality disorder.
But schizophrenia was ruled out because delusions were not in keeping with Gollum's culture. The interaction between the two personalities shows Gollum is aware of both Smeagol and Gollum at the same time, which is inconsistent with multiple personality disorder, in which one is usually suppressed.
His bulging eyes and weight loss also suggests a thyroid problem, they added.
I thought the Extended Cut fixed all the problems and issues I found in the theatrical release. For example: the climax of the EE feels like the destruction the ring. Watching the Theatrical Cut it felt to me that the victory at Minas Tirith was the climax, even though I knew the plot focus was on the ring. All in all every shot, except the drinking game, was an improvement over the theatrical version.
there's a very funny easter egg on the first disc. if you go to the last chapter and press down there's a ring, you press enter and you'll see something very funny.
I was in tears at the end of the appendices. It was actually more emotional than the film itself.
After watching "The End Of All Things" about how they were really really cramped for time and got the film out only a few days before the World Premiere, I'm convinced that the visual effects would've been significantly better if the digital effects people had been given more time. That said, the movie looks pretty good, although it's a lot more "glowy" than the other two.
Quote from: matt35mmalthough it's a lot more "glowy" than the other two.
Were the bad guys mean and yelly, too?
finally got around to watching the extended version, and man was i blown away. that scene when gandalf and pippin are riding to stop the steward from burning faramir and the nazgul lands in front. fucking hell, that was tense.
Quote from: mogwaithere's a very funny easter egg on the first disc. if you go to the last chapter and press down there's a ring, you press enter and you'll see something very funny.
"Do you kick balls?" :lol:
Quote from: El Smeagolinothat scene when gandalf and pippin are riding to stop the steward from burning faramir and the nazgul lands in front. fucking hell, that was tense.
It was the Witch King! (I feel like such a nerd knowing all this stuff--hell, I still haven't read the books; I've just studied the DVDs like mad crazy)
But after you hear Jackson's explanation on why it was cut, it hits you that it actually isn't that tense (which is pretty much why it was cut--for not being tense enough). It IS tense for a moment, but ultimately he just lands, says "I'mma gonna kill you!" and then flies away.
The shot of the Witch King revving up his sword was awesome, though.
Quote from: matt35mm
The shot of the Witch King revving up his sword was awesome, though.
someone's gonna cap it.
Where are the easter eggs on the first two dvds?
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages8.fotki.com%2Fv145%2Fphotos%2F2%2F23376%2F93737%2Fmordor-vi.gif&hash=4a68cd6b93f00e08845e4ad3101a2633545751d2)
Nice, BUT! That should go in The Fellowship of the Ring thread. It's not from Return.
'The Lord of the Rings' Coming to Stage
A much-anticipated musical based on "The Lord of the Rings" will have its world premiere in Toronto next year, the show's producers announced Tuesday.
The $22 million show will open in March 2006 at the Princess of Wales Theatre with a largely Canadian cast, producer Kevin Wallace said.
Wallace had hoped to open the show in London in the fall, but no theater large enough to accommodate the technically complex production was available. The musical is now slated to open in London in autumn 2006.
Published 50 years ago, J.R.R. Tolkien's mystical adventure trilogy has been discovered by a new generation through Peter Jackson's Academy Award-winning trio of films, which have grossed more than $3 billion around the world.
The three-hour stage adaptation will feature book and lyrics by Shaun McKenna ("Lautrec," "Maddie") and Matthew Warchus (Tony nominated director of "Art" and "True West"), and music by A.R. Rahman ("Bombay Dreams") and Finnish group Varttina with Christopher Nightingale.
Warchus said the show, which has a cast of 50, would combine words, music, physical theater and spectacle to create a production in which the audience is "actually plunged into the events as they happen."
"We have not attempted to pull the novel towards the standard conventions of musical theater, but rather to expand those conventions so that they will accommodate Tolkien's material," he said.
I hope they manage to work Tom Bombadil into the stage production. I think that portion of the book (left out of the film) would be outstanding stuff on stage.
UNUSED
AUDIO COMMENTARY
BY HOWARD ZINN
AND NOAM CHOMSKY, RECORDED FOR THE RETURN OF THE KING (PLATINUM SERIES EXTENDED EDITION)
DVD, PART ONE
OF FOUR.
http://www.mcsweeneys.net/2005/3/18ring.html
I guess this goes here. BTW, A.R. Rahman, who is doing the music for the stage version, is AWESOME.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4197640.stm
Filmmaker 'earns £94m from Rings'
A movie producer earned $168m (£94m) from The Lord of the Rings films even though he did not work on the trilogy, trade paper Variety has reported.
Saul Zaentz got the payout from film studio New Line because he bought the rights to JRR Tolkien's books in 1976.
The windfall is revealed in court papers after New Line settled a legal wrangle with Mr Zaentz, Variety said.
He sued New Line for a further $20m (£11m), saying they miscalculated the box office royalties he was owed.
The three Lord of the Rings films made more than $2.9bn (£1.6bn) at box offices around the world and the final instalment won 11 Oscars.
Mr Zaentz, 84, produced One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Amadeus and The English Patient.
He retained the rights to The Lord of the Rings after making an animated adventure in 1978.
Variety said neither side would reveal how much New Line paid Mr Zaentz to settle the legal action.
Mr Zaentz claimed New Line based his share of royalties from foreign distributors on net income but said it should have been worked out from the gross profits.
New Line still faces a legal challenge from the trilogy's director Peter Jackson, who says the company withheld his share of profits from the first film.
http://www.dvdactive.com/news/releases/lord-of-the-rings6.html
Title: Lord of the Rings
Starring: Elijah Wood
Released: 29th August 2006
SRP: $28.98 Each
Further Details:
The folks over at Home Media Retailing have received details on new releases of Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings trilogy. The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers and The Return of the King will each arrive in newly packaged two-disc "Limited Edition" sets, along with an exclusive new behind-the scenes documentary. Each set will carry both the theatrical and extended versions of the film (via seamless branching), while disc two features an intimate, never-before-seen documentary created by Costa Botes. The feature-length documentaries, with more than 300 minutes of never-before-available footage, focus on a number of complexities and circumstances and affected the making of the movies. The discs will be available to own from the 29th August, priced at around $28.98 a piece. Stay tuned for further details.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dvdactive.com%2Fimages%2Fnews%2Fscreenshot%2F2006%2F6%2Flordofringstrilogyagainfoot.jpg&hash=16d8ce9e4b9ea82770b244ef3d52b974c5797967)