The Lord of the Rings gushing thread

[Ariela]

OK, LOTR comes out tomorrow and EVERYONE has to go see it. And then they have to come back here and post.  

Almost every review I've seen has been gushing. I CAN'T WAIT!

[Ariela]

Too tired to write a lot, but all I've gotta say is......

WOW

More later, I promise.

[luceluna]

boxing day for us..... although, i must confess, i read the Hobbit and found it (brace yourselves) boring as shit.

::ducks as dana charges at him::

[luceluna]

okay, i've seen it, prepare for some insults

first off, i thought it was SOOOOOOOOO CORNY! i know it's part of the whole LOTR universe, and the books were just as bad, but i really think the film suffered in place because of it.

there was a lot of potential for a grittier film that i think wasn't developed. for example, when Frodo and his friends are in the forest and are fleeing from the Dark Rider guys..... that terrified me! i was jumping outta my seat! i think the most entertaining bits of the film for me were the darker moments.

another problem was the lack of pacing. i know a lot of people will disagree, but i really felt the film dragged. sure, it was entertaining enough for 3 hours (a feat in itself), but it was not tightly structured, and i had no sense of "growing" or "progressing" with the film or its characters.

some things i liked:

- the acting. the casting was spot on.
- the enya song at the end
- the begining in Hobbitville (or whatever it's called ). in fact, for the first hour, i thought it was the best film i'd ever seen.

i also dug all the New Zealand scenery, and it reminded me of how much i love the country.

in conclusion: LOTR is impressive and entertaining, but suffers from syrupy melodrama and a lack of structure.

6.5/10

;D

[just a girl]

okay i'm going to have to side with dan here...
there is no way i will go into as much detail as he did. I agree with him when he says that the film dragged but disagree with his comment : 'it was entertaining enough for 3 hours ' as i spent most of the time working out how much longer i had to sit there for...  
i will admit however it was good in parts, and i will be going to see the next one, whatever its called...  

[ScaryDan]

Okay I'm just going to hoe into Dan's comments because I have already in an email to him hahaha.
Personally, I think this is the greatest film I have ever seen. Better than Elizabeth even! [and both of them have Cate Blanchett in them...hmmm...]

first off, i thought it was SOOOOOOOOO CORNY! i know it's part of the whole LOTR universe, and the books were just as bad, but i really think the film suffered in place because of it.

Yeah the books have all the syrup in there too (you'll DIE if a certain scene from "Two Towers" ends up in the film, I know) but then you also have to keep in mind that-
a) it was over 50 years ago when Tolkien (sorry if i spelt it wrong) wrote them, and different social attitudes and stuff
b) these (apart from Aragorn and Boromir) are NOT human beings and are in a different world with different values and stuff.
but i will agree that yes it was 'corny' but i don't think the film suffered because of it.

there was a lot of potential for a grittier film that i think wasn't developed.

yes, agree but PJ was restricted by keeping true to the books. but in contrast to my agreeing, i think if it did solely focus on the 'gritty' moments leaving out all the other bits, it would degenerate into a fantasy-world action film which, in my opinion, would just be crap. tolkien's world is so rich in lore and history that you can't really just focus on the grit without the history and story behind why the grit is there.

it was entertaining enough for 3 hours (a feat in itself), but it was not tightly structured, and i had no sense of "growing" or "progressing" with the film or its characters

if you'd read the book, you would see that the film is AMAZINGLY tightly structured - and even better than the book in some stages (eg - crossing Caradhras). i agree that the characterisation was left out quite a bit now that i think of it, but then i read the books heaps so knew what was expected and so on. and i think they are all quite true to their novel counterparts. but i think the 'smaller' bits of story and character were lost in the 'tightening' but all the important defining moments were there. also, keep in mind that the characters are fully fleshed in the lengthy introduction to the book, and expanded upon in the appendices (a whole volume in itself) and also that the characters are being developed across the whole three movies and not just one of them.

some things i liked:
- the acting. the casting was spot on.
- the enya song at the end
- the begining in Hobbitville (or whatever it's called ). in fact, for the first hour, i thought it was the best film i'd ever seen.

yes. never have i seen a better cast movie.
its an enya song *grin*
its called THE SHIRE which is a locale withing greater HOBBITON. read the books dan, read the books! (samois indeed lol)

rather than point out things i like (because that would take years) i'll point out (largely nitpicky) things that i disliked.
- at no stage in the movie does legolas say "yrch!" (which is elvish for orcs)
- arwen wasn't in it enough (but then that might just be me wanting to look at liv tyler some more)
- amon sul was a little disappointing visually
- no lobelia sackville-baggins!!!
- aragorn's last line...he TOTALLY drops out of character when he says "lets hunt some orc". total cringe moment.
- sam's "drowning" scene. a little too ott. (over the top)
- sam didn't get to look into galadriel's mirror!!!! this was the bit i was HUGELY disappointed that it didn't happen. it is a major character defining moment for sam, in my opinion. apparently a lot of lorien scenes filmed were cut but may appear in the DVD (although sam's i'm sure won't be a part of it).

wheee!
i've seen it twice...need to see it again!
cheers,
dan

[Flashpoint]

 First things first...  I think this is the longest movie that ever made me think "can we go again?".  And I meant that very minute.  <br>
 Read the books... I think you'll have a newfound appreciation for the script and its execution.  The dialog in the books is very flowery, grandiose, and uncomfortable.  Deliberately so.  As stated before, this was written 50 years ago - and it seems to harken back to a time prior still.

 Grit... just wait.  There's plenty of opportunity for it later. You might have enjoyed the journey to Bree had it been in there. (the Barrow Downs, Tom Bombadil, ect.)  I'd sort have liked to see Tom included, but I think his character would have taken up too much time to be worthwhile/good.

 Speaking of the Barrow Downs.. how are they going to deal with the hobbits NOT having the swords they found there?  One in particular plays a rather important role in the fields near Minas Tirith.   <br>
 The pacing really was masterful.  Again, read the books - you'll see what we mean.  <br>
 I agree that the visit to Lorien was a little rushed, especially considering that it had quite an impact on much of the fellowship.  Sam, Frodo, and Gimli in particular.  Oh well, the movie was rumored to be edited down from 5 hours to 3 - BRING ON THE DVD BABY!

--Matt



 <br>