Seems like this is the only forum anywhere without a LOTR thread. Well, no more. :p Besides, there needs to be some distraction from the loopiness plaguing the board.
Is there anyone who hasn't seen it yet? Shame on you if you haven't.
Strange thing, at three hours it was too short. Of course, the movie focuses mainly on the action parts, skipping like a stone over the book's surface. Not really a complaint. It could hardly be otherwise. The movie makes an effort to make up for what it skips by putting in subtle references to what gets left out: Merry and Pippin don't find the petrified trolls from The Hobbit, but they can be glimpsed when Arwen comes upon the company; the gift-giving of Galadriel is mostly absent, yet the Fellowship all leave Lorien wearing the leaf-clasps and green cloaks.
The movie, despite focusing on action, is thick with detail. Jackson (the director) even pulls in information from the 'Silmarillion' (broadly defined). That can throw off some people, those not very familiar with Tolkien.
A little humorous trivia: A movie version of LOTR was first seriously proposed in 1958. Since Tolkien was still alive, the film treatment was sent to him for comment and he ripped it to shreds. Among the many screwy things proposed in the treatment, orcs have feathers!
Tolkien complained to Rayner Unwin (son of his publisher and, incidentally, who as a child persuaded his father to publish The Hobbit) that the person behind the treatment had a "complete lack of respect for the original," a deficiency Peter Jackson more than makes up for.
i watched the film last night and i have to say it was amazing! True adventure. Cant wait for the next one. When is the next one due out? are they going to release one a year?
Yeah, they've finished all of them, and the next one (The Two Towers?) will be out same time next year.
Yep, very good movie. It seems like the filmmakers did the very best they could at including as much from the book as possible in a 3-hour movie. I'll be buying the series tomorrow to start reading.
Another convert. :cool:
There was an article in the local paper the week the movie came out, an interview with a retired professor and Tolkien nut (for a recent birthday, his wife had a custom, Middle-earth-themed fireplace installed in their house). He said at one point that the movies were going to hook yet another generation.
If you're not careful, you'll wind up with 47 books by and about Tolkien just like me.
Check out The Tolkien Society (
http://www.tolkiensociety.org/). And The Encyclopedia of Arda (
http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/default.htm).
I absolutely adore The Hobbit, but especially LOTR - I only recently saw the film (where I live is a couple of months behind the rest of the world) but thought it was absolutely excellent. The way they shrunk the Hobbits and other special effects were great, plus they were really sweet, especially Sam!
Can't belive they cut Tom Bombadil though! He's vastly underrated! ;)
Grr, I have to wait until my mom is finished with the first book so I can take it back to the University with me.
Does anyone know if that rumour is true that the LotR DVD will contain a 4 hour film because deleted scenes will be shown?
*please oh please oh please*
actually i think i heard something similar. We may be in luck!!
If that's the case, then there's only one thing to do:
...
*salivates*
i saw lord of the rings a while ago now, thought it was pretty good to actually live up to all the hype on it, also i cant be bothered to check if this has been mentioned before but did anyone see the land rover in the film being driven across one of the landscapes in the background, i didn't see it myself but the people i went with did, i don't know what the point of it was but i know there definately is one.by the way black hawk down rules;)
I'm going to have to go see it again to spot the land rover! :cool:
Wow - now I have the perfect excuse to go and see it again, I'll tell my friends I'm going to see the *landrover*!
Hold it...is that where I parked?
Geez, I really *hate* it when that happens. Still, cruising around middle-earth in a landrover would be somewhat quicker than mooching around on horseback!
im gonna have to look out for this jeep thing the next time i see the film!...i never noticed
Lord of the rings was wicked!!!!! I'm reading the book!
I saw it 3 times and didn't see no jeep!
I'll have to get the DVD to look for the Jeep. I don't know if I would still respect myself if I saw it another time in the theatres :o.
1st time, it was fantastic
2nd time, it was cool!
3rd time, yawn :o
The Fellowship of the Ring has gotten 13 Academy Award nominations, including best picture. But genre films never win anything but technical awards.
I was surprised that I got so many nods. Fantasy movies never get nominated for best picture (well, there was Babe, but I think someone on the committee was bribed).
Given Jackson's appearance, I bet he didn't grease the nominating committee with sex (the WD40 of Hollywood).
13 nominations isn't good! cos apparently if you get loads of nominations you'll hardly win any! :( I hope they do win some cos they do deserve them, it was a great film!
sorry if this has been asked, but wot everyone fav character in LOTR???
Mine is Pipin he was ace, lol!
*cough* Titanic.
I know that's a bad example since it was such an arse of a movie, but it did win a lot of what it got nominated for (undeservingly).
LOTR has to win something, in saw it when it first came out and i was well impressed. I still gotta look for that jeep tho!!
Who is it competing against? Pearl Harbor? I don't think it'll have too much trouble.
now that was a flop...ok so it might have brought in millions but it was a crappy film
Aye, I think the only category where it could stand up to FoTR is in visual effects.
I think the only real competition for best picture is A Beautiful Mind...the sort of Serious Drama that usually wins best picture.
special effects nowadays are used way way too much and ruin films cos there are way too many which creates so much action that you become bored of it, take star wars, i loved the 1st 3, the budget was reall;y low on the 1st one but was fantastic, then comes along episode 1 and 2 with all the hype of the 21st century and get pasted with special effects and a bit of crap acting, lord of the rings was really good for mainstream fantasy but i dont think its gonna turn many heads 20 years down the line.
nah i think LOTR is a great film and i recon it will still turn heads in 20 years cos its an acheivment of epic proportion...(ignore me....i just like big words!)
The Lord of the Rings
is one of those things:
if you like it you do:
if you don't, then you boo!
So said Tolkien back in the '50s. I think it goes for the movies, too.
very poetic, now shut it!...jk:)
as said by vinnie jones in a film i cant remember:)
I for one hope the LOTR aces the BAFTA's! I agree with Tall Guy - it has to win *something* surely.
Hah! I knew they would win *something*! 5 was it? I didn't actually watch, ended up seeing something on ITV instead.
Yes, best picture is something. But I doubt a repeat performance at the Oscars.
nah, it has to win somethin at the oscars...c'mon it wasn't that bad! ;)
i agree, was a pretty good film, fans go mental, im not a fan but was quite entertained, from some of the crap ive seen lately though, aye...anyway i think it deserved best picture, bbut the sequel will be very much anticipated and no offence....probably disappointing as most sequels are, very few films better their originals, obv some exceptions, and ith games its different of course...GF2 hint cough*:)
I actually think that the 2nd and 3rd lotr film will be good, this must be the first film ever where i really think that the sequals will live up to the original