Hi Just watched for 6th time. 2nd at full unedited. on production 1.Editors are fools.. and this one was the biggest. on movie 1. Bilbo is a flake. [only fault i can find] otherwise a triptych that surpasses all others.. yet to find one 'b' scene or poor acting.. [and tyler makes her mark in history] The best fantasy movie [and maybe the best ever] movie made. even cassablanca and shawshank cant hold a candle to LotR in the realm of EPIC. But then they are not epics. occam
I love the trilogy to no end, but I disagree about the editing. I've only seen the long version of the first 2, but at least in those I thought most of the extra scenes seemed just that, extra. They filled in bits of the story and background from the books, which was nice if you've read the books and/or seen the movies before, but they really broke up the pace and didn't add much to the more focused story that movies have to have.
As a stand alone movie Peter Jackson's flick is a good piece of work. As an interpretation of Tolkein's work, I have several objections with it. Any movie from the book would have to change some things. But I am annoyed that Jackson's changes demeaned so many characters. In the movie, Merry and Pippin are comic releif. In the Shire, they act like buffoons. Never mind that in reality, Merry was trusted to buy the house in Crickhollow. Never mind that the Conspiricy gathered the materials for and excicuted the escape from the Shire. The movie needed comic relief, so Jackson turned two fine young hobbits into Laurel and Hardy. More disturbing is what he did to Theoden. When Gandalf cured Theoden, Theoden takes both heart and arms against Saruman. The battle of Helms Deep was fought by two armies advancing to attack each other. In Jackson's version, Theoden runs from Saruman. I see no narrative nesesity for Jackson to turn Theoden into a coward. Faramir is turned from a wise guardian into a grasping thief, bent on stealing the Ring. I could go on, but my rant is finished for now.
I agree about the changes to the books, and missing pretty large portions out (I haven't seen the extended versions). For example they completely missed out the bit about Tom Bombadil and the Barrow Downs. But overall, seeing it as a movie with out thinking about the books, it is an epic. Even thinking about the books, Jackson has done incredibly well at brining some of the creatures to life and the scale of the battles. Examples being the Mumakil and the Ents Also, Minas Tirith in the movies looked incredible.
MikeE You know he books far better than i.. i read them 2 decades back. Your comments on theoden and faramir inspire me to read all again... [a clearer picture of faramir would be nice] but, i have 10 books in stack for reading..lol. 5 lifetimes of things to do and so short a time to do them. occam
Making the LotR movies is a rough task. I consider myself kinda a purist when it comes to books vs their movies, but for an epic project like this I'll let a few changes slip. I mean after all, they are movies.
I am so glad that Jackson didn't touch Bombadil. It was a smart decision. 1) The movie was long enough already. Bombadil and the Barrow Downs did not advance the plot. 2) He knew that no one could get Bombadil right, so he didn't try.
my onli major gripe with this series is the bit at the end of the last battle (whose name escapes me) when the ghosts arrive. after the really brutal, and striking visuals of the battle so far, it really looked a bit rubbish that this lime-green tide just washes everything away, it was somehow really insubstantial. apart from that, great films
