Cut out the personal attacks, guys, even the sarcastic/ironic ones...
Well, I may as well throw my hat into this ring...
Yes, the title is not 100% appropriate but then The Two Towers was never fantastically relevant, even less so in the film. Only the first book really has a greatly appropriate title... and even then only to the second half of it. In any case, there was no chance that was going to be any different. There was no apparently struggle in Aragorn becoming King and making one would have been unhelpful.
"How much better would that scene, where Sam has trouble giving back the ring, if we knew the whole time Frodo was captured Sam had it"
The answer is none, we already knew he had it by then and if he had used it people would ask why yhe Eye did not sense it.
Turning that around- how much WORSE would the Frodo as a captive scene have been if we knew he did not have the Ring? All the tension would have gone.
"Also, cinematically it was the wrong choice to put all your eggs into the first war at the walls of Gondor. For the last two movies you have been featuring the three main characters as Aragorn, Legolas and Gamling, and than you focus on that war where they are not even a part of it until the very end? And their part in that war is over with in a minute. And so you have this huge battle with out your three main guys, in the middle of your film and you still have one major battle to go. And for that last battle you give it a tenth of the time you give the first."
Gamling?
Anyway, this is again a derivative of the source material in that ROTK is not a well-paced book. The fact is that Pelennor Fields is an enormous battle that every fan knows well and as it happened Aragorn and co do NOT turn up until the end. PJ is only going to go so far to change these things. Legolas and Gimli had little to do in ROTK other than Legolas moaning about the sea and Gimli going on about how beautiful Galadriel is, but that is how it was and PJ had no time to change that, instead focussing on the Hobbits who are, as already pointed out, the real main characters.
"Can Sam and Frodo be any more in love with each other? I know there not but the way they acted and the way it was shot tell a different story. A better example than ROTK of male bonding after a life long journey of hardship is “The Shawshank Redemption”. "
It;s not meant to be hardcore character drama but OI though the friendship shown was touching enough.
"Opening scene: We don’t need to know how
Gollum got the ring in the third movie that would have been better in the first.(He should of added more about what happened to Sarumon(sp?), since he was the villain for the first 2 movies.)"
To a book fan, yes. To a 'lay' fanb, this works far better into the creeping insight he gives into Gollum's chaarcter, from the sympathy for most of TTT to the revulsion at the end of ROTK. PJ set up that scene with the quick 'Murderer' reference in TTT< they had kept quiet about the whole Gollum backstory for the whole rest of the time. It was dramatically better this way, it just jars with how people remember it from the book.
"Cut any shots of the conflict with of the Stewart and his son’s conflict. Don’t need that side story this late in the movies. All we needed to know was the Steward was week and didn’t want to give up the throne. "
He had to cut out enough of it as it was, like the explanation (PJ really hates that family, judging by how harsh Faramir looked without the backscenes with him and Boromir from TTT, and now he did over their father as well!). But Faramir was in, had to be in because of TTT and had to carry on with his plot of father conflict in ROTK. Faramir is a mis-used character in the books but again that is how it is.
"Take a risk, end the movie with Frodo and Sam on the mountainside. Those of us that know what happens still know, those that don’t can feel there sacrifice more. Ok if you don’t want to do that, than don’t fake end it. That just doesn’t make scene. I have never seen that before. Fade to black for 8 secs and come back to the same exact scene. It had no purpose or meaning at all"
(and the rest of what you said there)
It is debatable whether the end was too long or not but I think just leaving things unanswered is NOT the LOTR way. Unlike the Matrix, LOTR should end with an absolute sense of finality.
Originally posted by The Omega
How can you claim to’ve read the book, and be in doubt about how Gollum dies???
Should I even try to answer this? I guess i will. Im sorry, I honestly didnt remember that does not make me any less of fan than you. I dont go to sleep with book under my pillow, that doesnt make me and less of a fan than you. I said dont take my opinion personal, but apparently you have.
Originally posted by The Omega
Legolas, Gimli and Aragorn are NOT the leading characters of the first three movies.
Your right, I said they are the main characters of the first two, thats why i was upset they were not in the third more
Originally posted by The Omega
Master Samwise choices: But you DID know that, didn’t you? You read the book. And what surprise ARE YOU talking about?
Like I said before I thought that it would of be better to know that SAM had the Ring. Its Surprise vs Suspense. I like suspense.
Originally posted by The Omega
Your delusion about love between Sam and Frodo: Why should I watch another movie? If something is not IN rotk it’s not in there.
“I know for a fact if that shoot went on for 5 more seconds thier kissing”
Prove that. You say you know for a fact, fine, show me the facts as they are not in the book, nor in the movie.
I’m waiting.
It was a joke. I was trying to make a point. Im sorry if i offended your family.
Originally posted by The Omega
“just cause they sing in the books doesnt mean it has to be in the movie.”
Ehrm, excuse me? You are telling me the movies should not try to copy the books? Why not? It’s an adaptation of the “lord of the rings.”“Than it should of been shown in 1 or 2.”
You seem to also be a fan of the matrix. What if Neo started singing in the third movie? How out of place is that? Who cares if they sing in the books, if they dont sing in the first two movies dont have Strider sing in this one.
Originally posted by The Omega
You’re not answering my question. Why should the movie have a different ending than the books.
What are you talking about the ending was different than the books.
Originally posted by The Omega
” Your wrong he did cause he want to get a cheap thrill out of making ppl think it was over witch just takes you out of the story and say WTF?”And you know this because??? [/B]
I know this because its my opinion. PJ as you all like to call him, the MJ of film I guess, true talent will be shown on "KING KONG", if that works out for him than he wont just be a B-Movie director that got handed a gift of Tolkien.
And remember "PJ" was the same guy that said "Cabin Fever" was the greatest horror film of all time.
Also John Matrix when you commented on the whole beginning of Smeagol/Gollum at the start of the movie - I got taught this at school that you cannot just dive straight into the main plot, you have to give people time to sit down and get into the movie before you do that.
Also the fact that in the TT it was Aragon,Legolas & Gimli in the battle of helms deep and also the battle with the Urik-Hai (in the FOTR) - Gandalf did not take-part in anyof these fights, so it was his turn to lead the men of Gondor against the army of 200,000 so in my view it was Gandalfs time to shine at a battle
Originally posted by The_Inevitable
John Matrix you are definitely a very pathetic imbecile and you should have your eyes gouged out, your nose smashed, eyelids sewed shut, fingers cut off, kidneys stabbed, ears cut off, elbows and knee caps hit with a sledge hammer, Head set on fire, and your soul taken away by me personally.Burn in Hell you hopeless maggot.
😈
First off, the name is JohnMatrix. Second, post when your off the pipe. 😉
Originally posted by Discos
Also John Matrix when you commented on the whole beginning of Smeagol/Gollum at the start of the movie - I got taught this at school that you cannot just dive straight into the main plot, you have to give people time to sit down and get into the movie before you do that.
Than for me spend that time on the rap up of helms and Sarmon(sp?)
Originally posted by Discos
Also the fact that in the TT it was Aragon,Legolas & Gimli in the battle of helms deep and also the battle with the Urik-Hai (in the FOTR) - Gandalf did not take-part in anyof these fights, so it was his turn to lead the men of Gondor against the army of 200,000 so in my view it was Gandalfs time to shine at a battle [/B]
That is a very good point.
Originally posted by ElvenQueen
I see everyone is attacking you and I dont wanna yell at you for having an opinionBut the changes in ROTK werent that major...You said you like TTT...That one is changed so much more from the book than return of the king is...
So why do you like TTT and not RotK?
PPl think I dont like the changes in the Movie from the book its not that it, there werent that many big changes. For me it was more about cutting this monster down.
Do what they did on all the other ones. go 2.30hours and save the rest for the EX DVD.
I think if they did that I would of really liked it.
I think some people here need to calm down. Good lord, it amazes me how some people have such a blind allegiance to these films. Sure, I like them too but you don't have to take it personally when someone points out what they think is a flaw. Hollywood has yet to turn out a perfect film. Just because you like a movie doesn't mean you have to defend it to the death and turn to personal insults when someone doesn't like it as much as you do.
Originally posted by enya
i dont agree with you johnmatrix but you are entilled to ur opinion and at least you still stick up for yourself when alot of people are disagreein with you- and nice come back
Thank you very much. Like I said before this is not to offend anyone. But not ever one loved this movie. And it does not make me any less of a fan for not liking it.
I wouldnt of minded if RotK went on for another hour...but im sure the girl sitting behind me would've.
If they made it shorter...It would of seen to cut and choppy. Which some people are already complaining about...
I think they made the right choices and I hope JohnMatrix that you'll atleast like the extended version.