Mole Posted December 18, 2003 Report Posted December 18, 2003 Frodo and Sam lying on the rock with lava floating around them (journey ended) is in contrast to the beginning of the film with Smeagol and Deagol in the boat fishing (journey began). Wow, good call. Damn you're good at this shit RRR, same with all of the stuff from Buffy season 5.
The Dames Posted December 18, 2003 Report Posted December 18, 2003 I bet RRR LOVED English lit...comparing and contrasting and all that. Dames
cabbageboy Posted December 18, 2003 Report Posted December 18, 2003 If I'm Peter Jackson I would take the comment that the film seemed rushed at 3 1/2 hours as a compliment. It seemed like to me that the movie was just zooming by. This will also be the one of the three best aided by the EE. In that we'll likely have: Spoiler (Highlight to Read): The cut Saruman scene where Wormtongue turns on him and kills him. The Eowyn/Faramir romance subplot that was all but hacked out of the film (you can see them together at the coronation, but that's about it). Maybe a cut scene with Aragorn and the Army of the Dead capturing the ships from Sauron's mercenary pirate dudes.
Lord of The Curry Posted December 18, 2003 Author Report Posted December 18, 2003 Scenes confirmed for the EE so far are: Spoiler (Highlight to Read): - Saruman/Grima confrontation @ Orthanc. - More Paths of The Dead footage - Eomer finding the body of Eowyn on the Pellenor - Faramir/Eowyn romance - Houses of Healing sequence
The Dames Posted December 18, 2003 Report Posted December 18, 2003 I've got a question for you all... When this scene happened: Spoiler (Highlight to Read): When Aragorn came up with the plan to distract Sauron's eye and everyone chimed in until Legolas came up with his 'Master of the Obvious' comment of "A DIVERSION!" Did your theater laugh as much as mine did? It was probably the dumbest thing he said in three movies. Dames
Kaertos Posted December 18, 2003 Report Posted December 18, 2003 No Dames... they didn't. It didn't seem that silly to me. It was a nice way to show that Legolas realized what was happening and showed his understanding of the suicidal nature of the march.
The Dames Posted December 18, 2003 Report Posted December 18, 2003 My guess as to why it came across so funny is because he was the last one to say anything about it, it was pretty obvious and he said it with SUCH confidence. Dames
kkktookmybabyaway Posted December 18, 2003 Report Posted December 18, 2003 Spoiler (Highlight to Read): When Aragorn came up with the plan to distract Sauron's eye and everyone chimed in until Legolas came up with his 'Master of the Obvious' comment of "A DIVERSION!" He was probably trying to spell it out for some in the audience. I had a real genius sitting next to me...
RavishingRickRudo Posted December 18, 2003 Report Posted December 18, 2003 it is not without its flaws. As mentioned, the opening sequence is pointless, only providing backstory on Gollum’s life as Smeagol that adds nothing to the story. - Dr. Tom's review I totally disagree. In Two Towers it was established that Frodo see's his fate in Gollum. Gollum is who Frodo would eventually become if he possessed the ring long enough. In saving Gollum, Frodo is essentially saving himself. But Gollum could never be saved or cured; and neither could Frodo - which is why he left on the ship. I LOVED the beginning because it showed what Frodo and Sam's relationship would ultimately become. In _seconds_, Smeagol and Deagol were at each others throats over the ring. That is the rings true nature. That is why it must be destroyed; it turns you against those you love. This wasn't so much about Smeagol turning into Gollum and providing a backstory for _that_ character, as it was foreshadowing the split between Sam and Frodo. The split came, but it did not last because Sam is different. In truth, Smeagon and SAM are put in similar places. Deagol had the ring, Frodo had the ring. Smeagol wanted the ring and killed for it, Sam_did_not_. Sam hated Gollum not only because he tried to manipulate Frodo, but because Sam saw someone lusting for the ring; he could easily be in the same position - and for one moment - was. Plus the boat scene did provide backstory on Gollum and how he "forgot the trees" and his name. This was brought up again when Sam was asking Frodo to remember the Shire and Frodo couldn't. I liked watching the physical transformation as well as seeing Andy in a HUMAN role - a nice touch.
Boner Kawanger Posted December 18, 2003 Report Posted December 18, 2003 Another scene I'm guessing will be in the EE: Spoiler (Highlight to Read): I was reading in Entertainment Weekly that the Train Man from The Matrix Revolutions played the Mouth of Sauron .
tpww7 Posted December 18, 2003 Report Posted December 18, 2003 Just saw it for the 2nd time...I could go for a 3rd later tonight..if the theatre chairs didnt make my ass numb after 2 hrs.
ANKLELOCK Posted December 18, 2003 Report Posted December 18, 2003 Just saw it and boy, what a movie. Minas Tirith is a MARVEL of a battle. Viggo Mortensen is probably my fav actor. His emotion in battle and his intense acting are great.
The Dames Posted December 19, 2003 Report Posted December 19, 2003 it is not without its flaws. As mentioned, the opening sequence is pointless, only providing backstory on Gollum’s life as Smeagol that adds nothing to the story. - Dr. Tom's review I totally disagree. In Two Towers it was established that Frodo see's his fate in Gollum. Gollum is who Frodo would eventually become if he possessed the ring long enough. In saving Gollum, Frodo is essentially saving himself. But Gollum could never be saved or cured; and neither could Frodo - which is why he left on the ship. I LOVED the beginning because it showed what Frodo and Sam's relationship would ultimately become. In _seconds_, Smeagol and Deagol were at each others throats over the ring. That is the rings true nature. That is why it must be destroyed; it turns you against those you love. This wasn't so much about Smeagol turning into Gollum and providing a backstory for _that_ character, as it was foreshadowing the split between Sam and Frodo. The split came, but it did not last because Sam is different. In truth, Smeagon and SAM are put in similar places. Deagol had the ring, Frodo had the ring. Smeagol wanted the ring and killed for it, Sam_did_not_. Sam hated Gollum not only because he tried to manipulate Frodo, but because Sam saw someone lusting for the ring; he could easily be in the same position - and for one moment - was. Plus the boat scene did provide backstory on Gollum and how he "forgot the trees" and his name. This was brought up again when Sam was asking Frodo to remember the Shire and Frodo couldn't. I liked watching the physical transformation as well as seeing Andy in a HUMAN role - a nice touch. That's what I tried to explain to Tom online, but I'm not as great at comparing and contrasting material as you are. You must have been one hell of a student in English lit class. Dames
RavishingRickRudo Posted December 19, 2003 Report Posted December 19, 2003 *big laugh* "You may want to take this in Summer School" - Ms. Mang, OAC (Grade 13) English Teacher, Last Day of Class.
RavishingRickRudo Posted December 19, 2003 Report Posted December 19, 2003 Does anyone else _still_ have "the feeling"? I don't know how to really describe it; it's almost a sublime calm - if that makes any sense. I said ROTK was the most satisfying movie I've seen and a day later I am still satisfied. I don't really want to see any other movie this year, cause I've already seen "it". I'm not hungry. It's a strange feeling, cause usually I end up wanting more and more from, well, anything... everything. Usually, I want to see this character in this situation and see what happens - or what if this happened... I don't want to see more Lord of the Rings - I don't want to read the books to find out more about these characters - I don't really care about an extended edition, even though I really liked the Two Towers additions. The journey is truly over. That's why I didn't really feel emotional when watching Frodo go away, or Aragon being crowned King, or Gandalf saying goodbye... there's nothing more I want to see, so I'm not sad to see them go... there was nothing left for them to do but sail away.
LaParkaYourCar Posted December 19, 2003 Report Posted December 19, 2003 I thought it was good but the worst of the 3 movies (I think the 1st one was the best). I don't really feel like using spoiler tags so I'm not going to bother going over it in detail, at least for a few weeks, and I'll just mention stuff generally or what you can get from the trailers. The big battle, while very good, felt "Matrix Reloadedish" in the sense that it was just like the one from the 2nd movie only bigger, none of the shots were particularly interesting or innovative. The editing was mediocre and could have been done much better. On the plus side, the scenery was excellent, with both Minas Titith and Minas Morgul very well done. Ok I lied I'm going to use the spoiler tag for one thing: Spoiler (Highlight to Read): My favorite thing in the movie was probably the army of the dead. I thought they were rendered beautifully, and I loved the way they moved and fought, like some sort of a flood. I think if I watch it again later I'll enjoy it a bit more, maybe more than the second one, although I still don't think I'll like it as much as the first movie. The thing that annoyed me the most while watching it wasn't the movie itself, but the theatre which was sweltering hot, and most of all the crowd which was a seething mass of stupidity, laughing at the most cliched jokes in the whole movie (which I was silently calling out to the word before they were even being spoken - like Gandalf's "perhaps it's best if you don't speak at all" one), laughing every time Gollum spoke, cheering and aplauding (I hate this more than anything - it's a fucking movie you assholes), and generally acting like a couple hundred people with ADD. Some people have a very low threshold for what they find humorous. And one more thing, that someone who has read the book more recently than me can probably answer: I found it very strange that the humans in Gondor were calling Gandalf "Mithrandir" (his elven name) and yet everyone else through the first two films, humans, elves, and so on, calls him Gandalf. I know that it isn't this way in the Silmarillion where he is refered to as Mithrandir because in that book almost all the names used are the elven forms (Curunir for Saruman, for instance). Is the Return of the King actually written in this way? What?? I love when fans in the theater react. It makes the experience so much better. Good...laugh at the jokes, applaud the action. Jason X was bad movie, but seeing it in a theater full of screaming insane fans made it worth the money because the atmosphere was great! And to answer the question above I had that feeling of closure for a day after watching it. First time I've been so satisfied with a movie in a long time.
LaParkaYourCar Posted December 19, 2003 Report Posted December 19, 2003 Basically the only thing we can really complain about Arwen is her saving Frodo in the first movie. Everything else was basically in the Apendix at the end of the book anyway.
Guest Eric the Eagle Posted December 19, 2003 Report Posted December 19, 2003 Personally, I think replacing Glorfindel with Arwen was a good move. After all, , you could pretty much take any Elf name out of a hat and replace it with "Glorfindel", the way it's written in the book (unless you're a nut like me and spend as much time with the appendixes as the book itself...). This way, it introduces Arwen in a meaningful way, and actually gives her something to do rather than just... you know... sit around looking pretty during a council meeting, and then show up to get married just as the last book ends...
Guest wrestlingbs Posted December 19, 2003 Report Posted December 19, 2003 Did anyone else think during the movie: Spoiler (Highlight to Read): That the ugly pink troll was the mouth of Suaron? He looks like a human that's lived with trolls.
DMann2003 Posted December 19, 2003 Report Posted December 19, 2003 Does anyone else _still_ have "the feeling"? I don't know how to really describe it; it's almost a sublime calm - if that makes any sense. I said ROTK was the most satisfying movie I've seen and a day later I am still satisfied. I don't really want to see any other movie this year, cause I've already seen "it". I'm not hungry. It's a strange feeling, cause usually I end up wanting more and more from, well, anything... everything. Usually, I want to see this character in this situation and see what happens - or what if this happened... I don't want to see more Lord of the Rings - I don't want to read the books to find out more about these characters - I don't really care about an extended edition, even though I really liked the Two Towers additions. The journey is truly over. That's why I didn't really feel emotional when watching Frodo go away, or Aragon being crowned King, or Gandalf saying goodbye... there's nothing more I want to see, so I'm not sad to see them go... there was nothing left for them to do but sail away. I still want to see "Big Fish", maybe "Cold Mountain", and catch "Master and Commander" and "The Last Samurai", and "In America"
RavishingRickRudo Posted December 19, 2003 Report Posted December 19, 2003 Good for you. I'd rather hang myself with my own testicles than watch Master and Commander.
DMann2003 Posted December 19, 2003 Report Posted December 19, 2003 ^^^Got a problem with Russell Crowe? Cause it Damn sure better not be that you've got a problem with Peter Weir!
the max Posted December 19, 2003 Report Posted December 19, 2003 Add me in for the same treatment at the offer of Cold Mountain. My testicles. Not yours.
DMann2003 Posted December 19, 2003 Report Posted December 19, 2003 ^^^^This better not be a problem with Anthony Minghella!
RavishingRickRudo Posted December 19, 2003 Report Posted December 19, 2003 I like Russell Crowe - I couldn't give a damn about movies of the high sea variety. RRR: Born on an Island... HATES nautical movies. FUCK Titanic.
DMann2003 Posted December 19, 2003 Report Posted December 19, 2003 ^^^Guess recommending Pirates of the Carribean to you would be a bad idea
Dr. Tom Posted December 19, 2003 Report Posted December 19, 2003 it is not without its flaws. As mentioned, the opening sequence is pointless, only providing backstory on Gollum’s life as Smeagol that adds nothing to the story. - Dr. Tom's review I totally disagree. In Two Towers it was established that Frodo see's his fate in Gollum. Gollum is who Frodo would eventually become if he possessed the ring long enough. In saving Gollum, Frodo is essentially saving himself. But Gollum could never be saved or cured; and neither could Frodo - which is why he left on the ship. I LOVED the beginning because it showed what Frodo and Sam's relationship would ultimately become. In _seconds_, Smeagol and Deagol were at each others throats over the ring. That is the rings true nature. That is why it must be destroyed; it turns you against those you love. This wasn't so much about Smeagol turning into Gollum and providing a backstory for _that_ character, as it was foreshadowing the split between Sam and Frodo. The split came, but it did not last because Sam is different. In truth, Smeagon and SAM are put in similar places. Deagol had the ring, Frodo had the ring. Smeagol wanted the ring and killed for it, Sam_did_not_. Sam hated Gollum not only because he tried to manipulate Frodo, but because Sam saw someone lusting for the ring; he could easily be in the same position - and for one moment - was. Plus the boat scene did provide backstory on Gollum and how he "forgot the trees" and his name. This was brought up again when Sam was asking Frodo to remember the Shire and Frodo couldn't. I liked watching the physical transformation as well as seeing Andy in a HUMAN role - a nice touch. We're going to have to agree to disagree. I thought the scene would be wonderful for an Extended Edition DVD release, and probably would have worked somewhere else in the movie. It just didn't feel right as the opening scene. It's nice to make the comparison -- we already knew the generals, not the specifics -- but it just felt like a slow opener to a movie that really needed to start in medias res. And the link to the review, for those foolish enough not to have discovered it yet: ROTK Review
The Dames Posted December 19, 2003 Report Posted December 19, 2003 This is going to sound VERY silly, but sadly, wrestling has warped my mind. Spoiler (Highlight to Read): When Sam picked up Frodo on the way to Mount Doom in that great moment and put him in a fireman's carry Did anyone else think... F5! No? Just me then. Dames
Lord of The Curry Posted December 19, 2003 Author Report Posted December 19, 2003 No, but I DID mark out when that orc dropkicked that other orc out the window in the tower of Cirith Ungol. It was about a .6 Hardcore Holly.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now