belle, you will hopefully love the prophecy....love that freaky little movie....yeah, walken chewing the scenery at it's finest....and lucifer scenes are nice too, if too short......g
going with my youngest the 18th or 19th...waiting to see what day is best for her to play hooky....ah the joys of a dad and his nerd daughter.....g
<strong>I've just gone through the Fellowship (It's been over ten years since the last time I read it) and for the first film, I have to say that Jackson made very good choices about what to leave in/out and where to make changes. Some of the dialogue is even an improvement over Tolkien's. Personally, I would have put a bit more into them, 4 hour films don't phase me, but all in all, a very decent adaptation, one of the better book to film transitions in a while.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I have to agree that FOTR was a good adaptation, but it certainly felt like the
real movie didn't get released until this year. The "making of" material on the extended DVD make reference to an original 4-1/2 hour cut. THAT I want to see.
I understand cutting Tom Bombadil and even cutting the scouring of the Shire, but I don't like it. The wonder of Tolkien is in the details. The 3-1/2 hour version doesn't have a bunch of 5 or 10 minute scenes added, but just a minute to two here or there BUT that is what makes the story. Life is in the details and Tolkein was imitating the Creator as a sub-creator and where does it stop? See Tolkein's short story, "A Leaf by Niggle."
And Belle, I am SO envious. Five days in the hospital without children!
I'll go see the second film, but I'm not really that psyched to see it. After all, About Schmidt, Adaptation, Catch Me if You Can, and Gangs of New York are all in at the same time. You can't go wrong this holiday season!
<strong>Belle - did you go to the premiere in NY, the one that the cast and PJ et al. attended?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I did! At the Ziegfeld on West 54th. I wore a sparkly frock, despite the slightly, er, inclement weather. I didn't get to meet any of the stars, though. I saw them close up (Orlando Bloom is hot!), and waved madly at Peter Jackson, who probably assumed I was drunk.
[quote]Originally posted by thegelding:
<strong>going with my youngest the 18th or 19th...waiting to see what day is best for her to play hooky....ah the joys of a dad and his nerd daughter.....</strong><hr></blockquote>
Now that's some quality fathering.
[quote]Originally posted by ShawnPatrickJoyce:
<strong>Actually, I saw "Maid in Manhatten."</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ouch. Did it stink as much as the preview would suggest? I'm not so sure about Gangs Of New York, either. Doesn't look very good at all. Kind of like Titanic with knife fights.
<strong>I did! At the Ziegfeld on West 54th. I wore a sparkly frock, despite the slightly, er, inclement weather. I didn't get to meet any of the stars, though. I saw them close up (Orlando Bloom is hot!), and waved madly at Peter Jackson, who probably assumed I was drunk.
</strong><hr></blockquote>Cool. I've never been a practitioner of frotteurism, but I might of hadto make an exception for Miranda Otto.
[edit]ugh, realized how creepy that sounds. Just kidding Miranda! (hmm, wonder if she'll be coming out to the premiere in Missoula Montana?)
Got back a little while ago from a midnight showing in Minneapolis ... big fun! It's a great flick. There was one liberty Jackson took with the plot that I didn't like (*cough*Osgiliath*cough*) but all in all I liked it. Definitely leaves you wanting more. Bring on ROTK!
also just got back from a midnight showing, currently packing for am flight to cali. just had to say though... i cried for practically half of the entire movie, those movies just really stir up something inside me, even without any love story. i think i cried the most during those great battle scenes... poor jack sitting next to me, having my fingernails digging into his arm...
So, I saw it today a few hours ago. I thought it was good, though cinematically I think I may have enjoyed the first one more. Seemed like they made both Gimli and Gollum a bit too comical for my tastes.
It was OK, but I felt too much was glossed over, this one is definitely waiting for a director's cut. One thing it brought back from the books, was my certain sense that, as much as Tolkien denied it, he was heavily coloured by the "Great Wars" of our own world. The counting contest between Gimli and Legolas practically screams of Billy Bishop and the flying aces of both world wars, as does the "industry" of Saruman echo the wreck of pastoral England, that being not really a result of war -- war itself merely its final product. In the film, engines and fortification have a forboding about them which Tolkien would have approved, I think.
I'm getting the sense now, that as much as Peter Jackson in his turn would like to say otherwise, we will not see a proper "Lord of the Rings" untill all three movies are subject to a final unifying director's cut, something easily over 10 hours, probably over 11, possibly kissing 12 hours, with some significant scene re-arrangement along the way.
went to an earlier show with my youngest daughter and one of her friends....signed them out of school as, "Field Trip to Middle Earth"....but the front desk human at her school didn't even look, so it was a geeky moment for me only...though i made my daughter look before we left...we both enjoyed it, she liked it better than the first (which she has watched a few dozen times)...i too am looking forward to the extented director's version...could see where some scenes needed expanding....and would love to see the trees digging in their roots/toes when the water came....nice job all and all...once again the movie ended after three hours, yet didn't seem long at all...liked how it started too.....g
oh, my daughter's friend like it better than the first also...but she has a huge crush on orlando bloom and his part was expanded more here than the first, so take her thoughts with a grain of salt....g
ps...my wife and eldest daughter laughed their asses off about how i signed the kids out of school....pointing and laugh and calling me a nerd and geek...sigh, all respect (if i ever had any) is long gone now....
<strong>oh, my daughter's friend like it better than the first also...but she has a huge crush on orlando bloom and his part was expanded more here than the first, so take her thoughts with a grain of salt....</strong><hr></blockquote>
And what self-respecting woman wouldn't like Orlando in his blond wig and pointy ears, running about firing multiple arrows into the evil hordes?
[quote]<strong>ps...my wife and eldest daughter laughed their asses off about how i signed the kids out of school....pointing and laugh and calling me a nerd and geek...sigh, all respect (if i ever had any) is long gone now....</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, thegelding, I think I can safely say you have the respect of everyone here... aaaaaand... it's done. Did you enjoy it while it lasted, pooface?
[quote] Did you enjoy it while it lasted, pooface? <hr></blockquote>
yes...yes i did, "she who lives with many cats and has hairy feet"
what is funny is i'm not really a geek or nerd (never once played D&D)...but then you don't really want to hear about my life (hell, i don't what to hear about my life)...g
ps hope you are feeling well and get to see the movie many times....my youngest and i loved when the flaming tree guy runs up and dips him "head" in the on-coming water...nice little touches like that really fill the screen...other directors would leave blank or lifeless spaces)
Perhaps you're right, but in denying a very precise sense of allegory I think he was also making a case that LotR would have been the story it became, wars or not. And that's not entirely honest. He did not want people saying, "Well, obviously Sauron represents Hitler!" or something stupid like that, I think. And yet particular qualities are embodied by characters and races in a highly allegorical way. Did he disguise one objection for another? I think maybe he did. Perhaps I mis-spoke nonetheless, for Tolkien has something very specific in mind when he rejects allegory (to program the story explicitly to communicate a moral/morals through representative symbols?) and perhaps does not mean to give the impression that he also denies the effects of the great wars on him/his work, when he only really claimed it was not "representative of X", not that X hadn't influenced him/coloured his work.
Comments
going with my youngest the 18th or 19th...waiting to see what day is best for her to play hooky....ah the joys of a dad and his nerd daughter.....g
<strong>I've just gone through the Fellowship (It's been over ten years since the last time I read it) and for the first film, I have to say that Jackson made very good choices about what to leave in/out and where to make changes. Some of the dialogue is even an improvement over Tolkien's. Personally, I would have put a bit more into them, 4 hour films don't phase me, but all in all, a very decent adaptation, one of the better book to film transitions in a while.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I have to agree that FOTR was a good adaptation, but it certainly felt like the
real movie didn't get released until this year. The "making of" material on the extended DVD make reference to an original 4-1/2 hour cut. THAT I want to see.
I understand cutting Tom Bombadil and even cutting the scouring of the Shire, but I don't like it. The wonder of Tolkien is in the details. The 3-1/2 hour version doesn't have a bunch of 5 or 10 minute scenes added, but just a minute to two here or there BUT that is what makes the story. Life is in the details and Tolkein was imitating the Creator as a sub-creator and where does it stop? See Tolkein's short story, "A Leaf by Niggle."
And Belle, I am SO envious. Five days in the hospital without children!
Anyone else not such a fan?
....So if I didn't go wrong there, I certainly didn't go right either.
<strong>Belle - did you go to the premiere in NY, the one that the cast and PJ et al. attended?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I did! At the Ziegfeld on West 54th. I wore a sparkly frock, despite the slightly, er, inclement weather. I didn't get to meet any of the stars, though. I saw them close up (Orlando Bloom is hot!), and waved madly at Peter Jackson, who probably assumed I was drunk.
[quote]Originally posted by thegelding:
<strong>going with my youngest the 18th or 19th...waiting to see what day is best for her to play hooky....ah the joys of a dad and his nerd daughter.....</strong><hr></blockquote>
Now that's some quality fathering.
[quote]Originally posted by ShawnPatrickJoyce:
<strong>Actually, I saw "Maid in Manhatten."</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ouch. Did it stink as much as the preview would suggest? I'm not so sure about Gangs Of New York, either. Doesn't look very good at all. Kind of like Titanic with knife fights.
<strong>I did! At the Ziegfeld on West 54th. I wore a sparkly frock, despite the slightly, er, inclement weather. I didn't get to meet any of the stars, though. I saw them close up (Orlando Bloom is hot!), and waved madly at Peter Jackson, who probably assumed I was drunk.
</strong><hr></blockquote>Cool. I've never been a practitioner of frotteurism, but I might of hadto make an exception for Miranda Otto.
[edit]ugh, realized how creepy that sounds. Just kidding Miranda! (hmm, wonder if she'll be coming out to the premiere in Missoula Montana?)
[ 12-16-2002: Message edited by: BRussell ]</p>
<strong>Cool. I've never been a practitioner of frotteurism, but I might of hadto make an exception for Miranda Otto.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thanks for sharing.
Security was really tight, so if you'd tried it, you'd probably have been well and truly, er, frotteured, by a couple of burly guards.
I was personally quite hopeful that someone may attempt to assassinate Yoko Ono. Sadly, it didn't happen.
<strong>
So if it's been a while since you last saw Fellowship, dig out your DVD.
Or you can just <a href="http://www.sanmothy.com/aicommunity/pics/Fellowship.jpg"; target="_blank">click here</a>. (okay, that was a lame joke. I admit it.
I'm getting the sense now, that as much as Peter Jackson in his turn would like to say otherwise, we will not see a proper "Lord of the Rings" untill all three movies are subject to a final unifying director's cut, something easily over 10 hours, probably over 11, possibly kissing 12 hours, with some significant scene re-arrangement along the way.
We'll have to wait 2 years for it, though
ps...my wife and eldest daughter laughed their asses off about how i signed the kids out of school....pointing and laugh and calling me a nerd and geek...sigh, all respect (if i ever had any) is long gone now....
<strong>oh, my daughter's friend like it better than the first also...but she has a huge crush on orlando bloom and his part was expanded more here than the first, so take her thoughts with a grain of salt....</strong><hr></blockquote>
And what self-respecting woman wouldn't like Orlando in his blond wig and pointy ears, running about firing multiple arrows into the evil hordes?
[quote]<strong>ps...my wife and eldest daughter laughed their asses off about how i signed the kids out of school....pointing and laugh and calling me a nerd and geek...sigh, all respect (if i ever had any) is long gone now....</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, thegelding, I think I can safely say you have the respect of everyone here... aaaaaand... it's done. Did you enjoy it while it lasted, pooface?
<strong>... as much as Tolkien denied it, he was heavily coloured by the "Great Wars" of our own world. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Where does he deny this? The man was in WWI, and lost most of his friends there. Of course it would affect him.
As he was constantly saying, it wasn't allegorical.
Anyway, still waiting for Dec 26, so I can finally see it.
yes...yes i did, "she who lives with many cats and has hairy feet"
what is funny is i'm not really a geek or nerd (never once played D&D)...but then you don't really want to hear about my life (hell, i don't what to hear about my life)...g
ps hope you are feeling well and get to see the movie many times....my youngest and i loved when the flaming tree guy runs up and dips him "head" in the on-coming water...nice little touches like that really fill the screen...other directors would leave blank or lifeless spaces)
hmmm... Tolkien geeks? Answers?
[ 12-20-2002: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>