Lord of the Rings Trilogy

[halflifeguy]

who thinks its they're the best movies of all time???

 

[KagePrototype]

Not best ever, but still damned brilliant.

 

[halflifeguy]

the music in the ending of "The Return of the King" made me cry.
I hardly ever cry in movies, so the movie has to be a damn good movie to make me cry ;(

 

[NightBlade]

Why don't you start a poll on which one is the best?

 

[halflifeguy]

start a new thread or change the poll?

 

[PoeticRocker]

it was really the ending that made me cry, but really the whole trilogy is the movie so i would pick them all.

 

[Yuri]

It was pretty sweet, but how it strayed from the books bothered me a bit, and it was a bit too Hollywood-ish. Great movies, though.

 

[CR0M]

It was pretty sweet, but how it strayed from the books bothered me a bit, and it was a bit too Hollywood-ish. Great movies, though.

You are kidding, right? the film couldn't have been any closer to the book if it tried. Out of such a massive story only a few elements were changed, and that was just to make the film workable. The only stuff removed was Tom Bombadill, Old man willow, the Barrow Downs, the invasion of Hobbiton and Ghan-buri-Ghan. No great loss. And if it wasn't included it was mentioned or referred to in some way.

The Glorfindel/Arwen switch didn't damage anything either, despite fanatics crying about it.

I read it first about 20 years ago, and again alongside the film as it was released. Compared with any other film translation of a book, I couldn't find one of that magnitude that could possibly be any closer.

And Hollywood? give me a break, hollywood is cheap thrill plastic throw away cheesy tat with captain 'merica at the centre of the universe saving the day. Don't know what cinema you were watching it at but I didn't see any of that. Lord of the rings is stuffed with class acting, casting, settings, props, costumes, effects, music, atmosphere, continuity, attention to detail etc all created from scratch just for that movie. No other film in history has done that, let alone anything from hollywood.

love n kisses,

Peter Jackson xxx

 

[Hazar]

Not best ever, but still damned brilliant.

yep, agreed.

 

[Yuri]

They added that stupid love affair with Arwyn and Aragorn or whatever, and it took up like, half of the second movie. It was done in such a stupid hollywood way and I hated it. The big fire-monster in the first movie was described much differently in the book. The shades were a bit ridiculous in how they chased Frodo and the gang in Fellowship, and how Aragorn magically chased them away. Orlando Bloom was Legolas. Boromir was shot with like a billion arrows, and his death was so corny (wasn't even described in the book) They completely scrapped the ending of The Return of the King. The whole Battle of Helm's Deep was done completely wrong-- Elves and Humans were never meant to join forces in that battle, in fact the Humans kept complaining about how they wish there were elves there to help. The whole plot with Merry and Pippin was hardly touched on. Tom Bombadil was a very important part of the storyline and the fight against Mordor, but he was completely scrapped. Frodo, Merry, Pippin, and Sam didn't all DIE in the first movie like they should have.

That really didn't bother me that much. I still loved the movies quite a lot, the only two things that really bothered me in how they translated from book to movie was how they left out the whole deal at the end of Return of the King, and how they made that crazy romantic story between Arwyn and Aragorn.

All just opinions, though, mate

 

[Adrien C]

They die in the book ?

 

[Yuri]

They die in the book ?

Right after leaving their home, they get killed by various things and this theif guy carries away their bodies, but Tom Bombadil revives them. At least thats how I remember it.

 

[Orgonomist]

I loved the Fellowship the first time I saw it (which wasn't until it came out on DVD), but after the novelty of seeing Moria and the Ringwraiths brought to life for the first time wore off, I felt that there was very little else to appreciate. Jackson did as well as anybody could do while catering for the mainstream audience, but I can't find merit with the trilogy simply on that basis.

It would have been impossible for your average viewer to take Bombadil seriously, and I think that's basically the crux of the problem - the spirit of the story is just too dated, too silly and old-fashioned - take for example the reaction of most people to the relationship between Frodo and Sam, how many people didn't come out of the cinema making fag jokes?

Most of the sentiment in the movies seemed flat, some of the good dialogue from the books was replaced with mediocre dialogue for the film, most of the songs were removed, and several crucial scenes were cut (Bombadil, Barrow Wights, Scouring of the Shire). I'm not even going to say anything about the comedy dwarf sidekick.

I also think Jackson interpreted many scenes from the book far too literally, for instance the scene where Gandalf loses his temper with Bilbo at the beginning, when Galadriel is tempted by the Ring, when Bilbo makes to seize the Ring from Frodo, and the illness of Theoden. They indicate in my mind too much reliance on fancy CG as opposed to camera work and pure acting.

As a result of all of this the story lost its mythic quality to me, and became just another (albeit impressive) fantasy movie.

 

[Warbie]

Fantastic movies

The few changes that were made in translation from book to film are easily forgivable. I loved every second (which is great, cause we almost get 12 hours \o/)

 

[Asuka]

Not the best of all time, but still excellent

 

[doom_duck707]

They die in the book ?

They don't die they get caught in a tree. And captured by the barrow wights. And though the movies were probably the best of all time, they were still a hell of a lot different from the books. Like the Faramir and Frodo bit, the lack of Tom Bombadil, Farmer Maggot who in the book shelters them but in the film chases them etc...
And the end of the Return of the King at Minas Tirith was really good and emotional.
*Discovers the films have warped what he remembers about the books and rushes off to re-read*

 

[CR0M]

I think too many people read into little nit picky detail changes and get hung up on them. Look at the 3 parts of the film as a whole, compare it with the entire book - it's basically the same.

Compare it with any other film that was adapted from a book. Shawshank Redemption or Jaws for example. They were both pretty close to the books but had changes too, quite major ones. In jaws one of the main characters isn't killed off, just to satisfy cinema audiences. Shawshank added to and sensationalised the whole story (from one of a few pages based around a poster of Rita Hayworth) into an epic film. Both great films yes, but because they don't have the same nerdy, anal following that the tolkein books have had for decades, they don't raise as many eyebrows. Imagine an entire film of the Bible, or the Koran, and the criticism that would be generated from fanatics.

The point is - The bigger the story, the more nit pickers pounce on typos.

 

[Asknoone]

Not the best of all time, but still exellent.

 

[Garfield_]

I cant say in words how good it is, but i love starwars. I do not say its better as a movie, its just that i love the story and the whole starwars concept since its unique

 

[Fishlore]

I hate the Lord of the Rings in it's entirety.