The Lord Of The Rings: Return Of The King

[kotte]

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.

[Gold Trumpet]

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.

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.

[kotte]

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.

[Gamblour.]

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?

[Find Your Magali]

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.

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.

[analogzombie]

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.

[Gold Trumpet]

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.

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.

[Pozer]

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?

[Find Your Magali]

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?

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.

[Jeremy Blackman]

you walked out?!? enough said.

That's all you had to say.

Watch the movie, GT. Watch the movie.

[NEON MERCURY]

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)

[Gold Trumpet]

you 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.

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]

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.

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)

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.

[Jeremy Blackman]

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.

"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.

[Gold Trumpet]

"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.

[kotte]

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.