posted
After watching that Harry Potter film, I was reluctant to see the LOTR film. The former film was disjointed, the characters were lost in the scenary, and I left the theatre feeling that I wasted money seeing this film. From the reviews I am reading of the LOTR, this film is a fantastic adaptation that works seamlessly, the characters are essential to the film, and the reviewers are leaving the theatre shell-shocked. I am truly excited. Will this be the fantasy film of the year?
Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I'd say slightly higher than 50/50 chance. The LOTR fanbase has been around building for over 50 years so they have a head start.
-------------------- It takes 42 muscles in your face to frown. It only takes 4 muscles to extend your arm and smack someone upside the head.
Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged
I really enjoyed Harry Potter. Ok, it was a bit long, but I thought it was very enjoyable. Especially Allan Rickman, but he's just the best British actor this side of ... well, Britain.
My biggest gripe with the film was the game sequence ... I thought the CGI of some of the players falling off their brooms and doing other broom related hijinks looked very obvious.
Still, 'Harry Potter' (and hopefully 'LOTR') will change the trend of films to completely butcher the book on which they're based.
posted
To enjoy a movie, you must set aside all preconceptions, unless you go see a movie thinking "this will be great no matter how shitty it turns out to be."
I have not read anymore than sixteen pages of "Fellowship," and I intend not to read any more. Why? Not because I hate Tolkien. On the contrary, the man had magnificent vision. I just want to watch a movie without desperately wanting it to live up to the book. God knows I'll enjoy it better that way.
-------------------- Move .sig!!
Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
My 50/50 comment was geared towards the fact that being the best fantasy movie in a year when there are only two fantasy movies does not seem, in itself, to be an incredibly difficult task.
Of course, I suppose that depends on how you define fantasy. Amelie is supposed to be pretty good.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I've been eagerly following the LOTR movie progress for a couple of years now, and am truly excited now. But I really do think that all that are interested in seeing the film must read the book first, there is just so much more to it than even a trilogy of 3 hour movies could represent of portray.
-------------------- "To the Enterprise and the Stargazer. Old girlfriends we'll never meet again." - Scotty
posted
I've never read The Lord of the Rings. I know, my public school education was sorely lacking on fine literature. I know that I'm going to see "The Fellowship of the Ring." I have quite a few friends that love Tolkien, and I'm going to see it with them sometime in earlier January. If I hurry, maybe I can get The Hobbit and Fellowship of the Ring read before I see the movie (and I add The Hobbit there because it's been recommended that the events in The Hobbit set up The Trilogy but that it isn't really necessary to read it beforehand).
On a slight tangent, what I do know about The Lord of the Rings comes from high school band. My junior year, the symphonic band played selections from Johan de Meij's Symphony #1: The Lord of the Rings. We performed Movement 1: Gandalf the Wizard as part of our competition repitoire. For our year-end concert, we played that and Movement 5: The Hobbits (we also tried learning Movement 2: Lothlorien the Elvenwood since all three share musical themes, but we ran out of time). The other two movements are 3: Gollum (Smeagol) and 4: Journey into Darkness (Section A: The Mines of Moria and Section B: The Bridge of Kha-whatever-it-was).
It was quite a fun piece, and I encourage all of you to find it and listen to it.
-------------------- The philosopher's stone. Those who possess it are no longer bound by the laws of equivalent exchange in alchemy. They gain without sacrifice and create without equal exchange. We searched for it, and we found it.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
The Bridge of Khazad-d�m, a truly terrifying moment in the book. I've seen some of the trailers from the Moria sequence, and it looks suitably stunning.
-------------------- "To the Enterprise and the Stargazer. Old girlfriends we'll never meet again." - Scotty
posted
The Bridge of Khazad-d�m! That's it! Sorry, but I keep getting that bridge's name mixed up with the Shadow planet Za-whatever-the-heck-it-is-but-sounds-a-lot-like-and-rhymes-with-Khazad-d�m from Babylon 5.
-------------------- The philosopher's stone. Those who possess it are no longer bound by the laws of equivalent exchange in alchemy. They gain without sacrifice and create without equal exchange. We searched for it, and we found it.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
-------------------- The philosopher's stone. Those who possess it are no longer bound by the laws of equivalent exchange in alchemy. They gain without sacrifice and create without equal exchange. We searched for it, and we found it.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
As a fan of the Harry Potter series I truly enjoyed the movie. I really enjoyed Robbie Coltrane's performance as Hagrid ( the tall guy). I believe the two and a half hours was worth it. On the subject of LOTR, I've tried to read the first book several times but can't get intrested in the story. The whole business about the birthday party was boring. I think I'll enjoy the film more.
-------------------- President Josiah Bartlet: Congratulations. So, who is da man on this one?
Communications Director Toby Ziegler: I think this time we're all collectively da man, sir.
Deputy Communications Director Sam Seaborn: I accidentally slept with a call girl.
Communications Director Toby Ziegler: Accidentally? Did you trip over something? ----------------- The West Wing
Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic
