Lord of the Rings

2456

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 103
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    LotR made $18M on its opening day. That's respectable for any opening, especially a weekday opening, but not spectacular.



    It may have barely enough stamina to break $250M...which is surprising...
  • Reply 22 of 103
    nah, word of mouth will make this movie huge.



    it opened on a wed., always a sign they expect word of mouth to help a lot, not hurt. it will go waaaay over the 250 mil. mark, IMO.



    i think a few people are scared of trying to go see it 'cause they don't want to wait in line for an hour.



    i'm going tomorrow afternoon.
  • Reply 23 of 103
    daverdaver Posts: 496member
    [quote]Originally posted by Eugene:

    <strong>LotR made $18M on its opening day. That's respectable for any opening, especially a weekday opening, but not spectacular.



    It may have barely enough stamina to break $250M...which is surprising...</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Actually, it's the third-largest Wednesday opening in history. The I doubt the movie will make it to the top three, but it's still on track for a very large weekend gross. That's impressive considering its long running time.



    Looks like I'll be catching a matinee tomorrow!
  • Reply 24 of 103
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    I still think most Tolkien fans are over-estimating his reach. We're computer geeks here...



    Word of mouth may be something that can put it over $250M, but I'm not holding my breath. Daver, an example of a movie that did better on a Wednesday premiere? Jurassic Park 3... $181M is where it's stuck at right now.
  • Reply 25 of 103
    sebseb Posts: 676member
    Just saw LOTR last night. I figured it was the best night to see it - not opening night, not a weekend night.



    There are some really badass mother******s in that movie. When Sauron starts slashing into that army - wow! And that was just the beginning.



    It's been about 8 years since I last read all of the Middle Earth books, Hobbit, Silmarillion etc. So I wasn't totally fresh on all the details, and that was okay because as I watched everything came back to me, so they must have stuck fairly close to the storyline. My girlfriend had never read the books and completely enjoyed the movie.



    Can't wait till next December. I"ll go watch LOTR FOTR at least one more time.



    [ 12-21-2001: Message edited by: seb ]</p>
  • Reply 26 of 103
    hmm, i hadn't thought about that, but i suppose a 180 minute movies gets half the showing time as a 90 min movie, so might generate half the revenue if it were in the same number of theatres.



    one thing that helps it out though. (not sure where i heard this, but i'm pretty sure it's true. )



    i thought that movie theatres send over 90% of the revenue a movie generates the first two weeks to the group that made the movie. after two weeks, that percentage drops lower and lower. so theatres have an incentive to keep movies with some longevity around. in the long run, this could help out LOTR more than some others, since



    1. it's worth seeing again

    2. i still think people are scared to try and see it the first week or due to overcrowding fears.



    just my opinion.



    oh yeah, and lets not forget that this movie will also likely be a big hit with adults, who have read the book. they usually aren't the big "opening day" crowd.
  • Reply 27 of 103
    eskimoeskimo Posts: 474member
    [quote]Originally posted by Eugene:

    <strong>I still think most Tolkien fans are over-estimating his reach. We're computer geeks here...



    </strong><hr></blockquote>





    Maybe... I saw it yesterday, i've never read the books but as an overall movie I can say it was pretty damn good. I mean it has a solid story and it is well done through and through, something most movies don't have going for them any more. But remember the money isn't in the box office. This movie is in the hands of AOL-Timewarner, this thing will be marketed down your throat for the next 3 years. I saw talk that to boost numbers for next year AOL-TW might release the next two movies next year 6 months apart.



    I would say this trilogy has a chance at becoming a Star Wars type legacy. The only problem with it is the fantasy aspect, everyone got excited about space and could follow the simple fairy tale plot of Star Wars. This is a bit more complicated to follow however.
  • Reply 28 of 103
    I am surprised there are folk who havnae read the book. I well remember my days on the lobster boat off the Isles where the Skipper made us read the entire trilogy before setting oot each day at dawn. At the end o' each voyage he wid re-enact the pivotal battle scenes o' the epic by mustering teams o' lobsters on deck.



    I mind the last voyage, when - after a heated argument aboot whether or no' the balrog had wings - he flung extra coal intae the boiler, siezed the helm frae Boromir McTavish and ran the boat intae the rocks at full tilt, sort o' like Ar Pharazon the Golden in microcosm.
  • Reply 29 of 103
    In fact.. No one but Sauron, Isildur, Gollum, Bilbo and Frodo (all in turn) ever touches the Ring in the movie, as it should be. Boromir holds the Ring at one point by its chain, but he never touches it.



    Galadriel, Gandalf, Boromir, Aragorn and the Witch King of Angmar is all very close, but neither gets so close as to actually touching it.

    Gimli breaks his ax over it too.. something he didn't do in the book. He wasn't even present at the council of Elrond in Rivendell.
  • Reply 30 of 103
    daverdaver Posts: 496member
    Finally saw it this afternoon. What an amazing movie! Full of amazing sights and neat stuff. I really enjoyed it.
  • Reply 31 of 103
    [quote]Originally posted by Henriok:

    <strong>In fact.. No one but Sauron, Isildur, Gollum, Bilbo and Frodo</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Deleted so as not to spoil the movie or the book.



    [ 12-21-2001: Message edited by: Scott H. ]</p>
  • Reply 32 of 103
    Sam never touches it in the movie nor in the Fellowship of the Rings book, you must see the movie again I think.



    [edited so not to spoil anyone]



    [ 12-21-2001: Message edited by: Henriok ]</p>
  • Reply 33 of 103
    [quote]Originally posted by Henriok:

    <strong>Sam never touches it in _this_ movie, do he?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Yes. Edit so as not to spoil it for the book or movie.



    [ 12-21-2001: Message edited by: Scott H. ]</p>
  • Reply 34 of 103
    I read it when I was in HS. I want to see the movie soon, but when I watch a movie based on a book I have read I am invariably disappointed; I hope this will be the exception!
  • Reply 35 of 103
    Well.. I've done my part. Now.. edit your reply so you don't cite my unedited reply



    *This is kinda fun*
  • Reply 36 of 103
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    Impressive movie. I really got absorbed into the story. Didn't feel like 3 hours at all. Next one comes out next Christmas, or two years from now? I wonder if this movie's DVD will come out next Christmas season. That would be great.



    One thing that pisses me off is the theatre always overdoes the bass response to the point where the plastic lighting fixtures in the ceiling rattle everytime there's a deep bass sound playing. Distracting as hell. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
  • Reply 37 of 103
    pscatespscates Posts: 5,847member
    Do you have to be a huge fan or have read the book(s) to enjoy or "get" this movie?



    It looks really interesting and fun, but I know NOTHING about the story or anything (and, to be honest, am not particularly interested in doing so at this particular point).



    Could I simply enjoy it as a standalone movie, not knowing the whole backstory/mythology/history of it all?



    Movies like this (and the Trek stuff) always give me pause because I feel like I'm missing out or won't get it or be left out or whatever.



    Can I dig it just as a cool, visually-enticing, adventuresome movie?
  • Reply 38 of 103
    alcimedesalcimedes Posts: 5,486member
    this movie is the second book in a trilogy, but the first book is entirely self-contained. it probives some background for the second and third books, but that is easily covered.



    i've read the books, my fiancee hasn't. we both saw the movie this afternoon and loved it. i don't think you need to read the books to enjoy the film.
  • Reply 39 of 103
    [quote]i don't think you need to read the books to enjoy the film.<hr></blockquote>



    Yes, but you should know beforehand that the ending can be a bit frustrating if you don't know what's going to happen afterwards. I still think it's more like one huge story than several self-contained stories (especially seems like this in the movie), and so it can feel like you don't get the closure you want at the end.



    I decline from commenting further, since it'll require spoilers.
  • Reply 40 of 103
    I think that if you read the books first you will understand more, but enjoy less. Kinda a trade off.



    this movie is the second book in a trilogy, but the first book is entirely self-contained. it probives some background for the second and third books, but that is easily covered.

    Ummm.... no... its the first book in the trilogy, the book before it is a prequel (the Hobbit).

    The Hobbit (prequel)

    The Fellowship of the Ring

    The Two Towers

    Return of the King



    Of course when thats often split into 6 books (or is it 9? cant remember).



    Also, Gandalf touches it, but just breifly (seeing the big eye then pulling back). I dont remember Isildur (sp?) touching it, but...

    Also Boromir touches the chain, but not the ring its self.



    What I want to know is what the fcuk happened to the "I am Sauromon of many colors!" speech? That was KEY to the book, but cut out of the movie.
Sign In or Register to comment.