Cool News
Hotdog! The First Review of THE TWO TOWERS! Prepare to Lose Your Mind!
Hey folks, Harry here... You've been dying to read the first full-fledged review of THE TWO TOWERS - and folks it doesn't disappoint. If ever there was a review written to whet your appetite and make your final long stretch of waiting seem excruciating... it's this one written by 'The Insider' for HOTDOG. It's a 5 star review - and well...
To read everything that HOTDOG printed check out the jpgs of the scanned story at WarOfTheRing.Net or to go directly to the review, Click here for part one! and Here for part two!
In case the pics at WarOfTheRing.Net gets overloaded... let me type out a few sequences of pure EVIL that this review unleashes.
To describe Gollum - "It's the most impressive use of CGI characterisation ever seen."
To describe Helm's Deep - "Forty-five minutes of monumental action, staggering in every way, from the stunt work to the sheer scale and audacity of what's been attempted."
To describe the whole film - "THE TWO TOWERS supasses all levels of expectation, and in the process it makes everything that THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING achieved look tame by comparison."
"Get ready to witness the War of the Ring, because nothing you've ever seen before compares to it. It might be worth ensuring that there are no unpleasant sticky substances on the cinema carpet by your feet, because that's where your jaw is going to be ending up when you get to the siege of Helm's Deep..."
"It's an all-out frontal assault on audiences, leaving them reeling with disbelief at what they're witnessing."
"A major advantage throughout the film is that we're already familiar with the leads, so Jackson and Fran Walsh's script (HARRY NOTE: DON'T FORGET PHILLIPA BOYENS!!!) wastes no time with reintroducing them and just rockets forward, firing on all cylinders with no shred of material you could accuse of being superflouous, let alone boring, on screen."
"...but this is the kind of moment when you wonder how long it will take before there's a Best CGI Supporting Acctor Category at the Oscars. To misquote Bela Lugosi's thoughts on Boris Karloff in ED WOOD, "Jar Jar Binks isn't worthy enough to sniff Gollum's shit."
"Tolkien purists will moan in some quarters - vital bits are missing, sections have been left out for inclusion in the third film. Still, none of this really matters when it comes down to the fact that THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE TWO TOWERS is a certifiable epic."
Sigh... Harry here again - time does not move fast enough my friends. Nowhere near fast enough. This is going to be rough...
"It's an all-out frontal assault on audiences, leaving them reeling with disbelief at what they're witnessing."
"A major advantage throughout the film is that we're already familiar with the leads, so Jackson and Fran Walsh's script (HARRY NOTE: DON'T FORGET PHILLIPA BOYENS!!!) wastes no time with reintroducing them and just rockets forward, firing on all cylinders with no shred of material you could accuse of being superflouous, let alone boring, on screen."
"...but this is the kind of moment when you wonder how long it will take before there's a Best CGI Supporting Acctor Category at the Oscars. To misquote Bela Lugosi's thoughts on Boris Karloff in ED WOOD, "Jar Jar Binks isn't worthy enough to sniff Gollum's shit."
"Tolkien purists will moan in some quarters - vital bits are missing, sections have been left out for inclusion in the third film. Still, none of this really matters when it comes down to the fact that THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE TWO TOWERS is a certifiable epic."
-
+ Expand All
-
Forget being first... i dont give a flying fcuk...I want to see this film! and yet..
I dont want to read anymore!! i havent read the books, i dont want to know anything!! and yet... i cant close my eyes when watching the trailer. shit.. catch-22 or what?
I want to see this film! -
Damn, it still isn't here yet? I thought that Helm's Deep wasn't going to be that long after all. I hope it is, but I heard that that was just a rumor.
-
... but this film seems like it could do the series justice. Only thing is, it could rise and fall on how good the Ents look, but if they have Gollum right, anything is possible... wow. Can't wait.
-
Nov 26, 2002 6:16:30 AM CST
Can anybody borrow me a time machine so I can leap to December 1
by spam gamgee
I would appreciate it very much because I simply cannot wait any longer.
-
WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW!!!
-
Nov 26, 2002 6:18:51 AM CST
Harry it's only the cover story on the new issue of Time magazin
by regis travolta
It'll also be the cover story on Entertainment Weekly and probably Newsweek too in a few weeks. Why does Frodo have such BIG FEET? Was Bigfoot a Hobbit? Those BIG FEET are just plain odd don't you think?
-
I just finished watching the 3hr and 30 min long Extended edition of LOTR and wow its pretty damn good. Makes the characters more human. Lot of things cut out. Some things definitely should have stayed in the film but i am very glad i watched this film.
Highly recommended for people to watch this extended edition (or dload from the web ;p) -
They miss out on MOST of the Christmas Shoppers, luring them to the film would be great for the box office and we could have seen this baby! Instead we must rush out in the cold, icey roads. Bleh!
-
Why Ron Howard should win for Beautiful Mind for best director is beyond me since Ron's career is laced with Tripod-like directing material. Jackson didnt a superior job in the first LOTR film and a lot of up-and-comers should use his work on learning to become quite skilled in this nifty craft.
Great story. And Liv Tyler ... i swear to god she must be part Elf ... loves those lips too.
-
that the guy at Hotdog has actually seen the film? So far, and with all the background information already available, I could have written this "exclusive" review too.
-
There's nothing in this "review" that says that the guy has seen the film. Yes Gollum will be great, yes Helms Deep and Treebeard are fantastic. I can tell all of that by looking at the new Two Towers books that have just come up. The fact that the review does not quote *one word* of dialogue from the movie, or gives us *one new bit of information* must surely make it a sham to shore up sales for the notoriously poor-selling Hotdog magazine? If it's a not a sham, it's the worst review of a major motion picture I've ever read.
-
All you LOTR haters are gonna be seriously pissed come December 18. Calling this a 'review' should be done advisedly though. This could have been written simply by watching the last Trailer. Cheers,
-
Wow, we have skeptics posting that the SCANNED review is already a fake? How pathetic.
-
Didn't Jackson say that was only an internet rumour? My understanding was that there's about 15 minutes of battle mingled with some Mordor scenes. If that's true, this is most probably a fake review.
-
Haven't read the full review yet, but it has some good articles about "Scum", "JFK" and Mr Pink from "Resevoir Dogs". Also go to www.itsallaboutlovethemovie.com to see one of the most moving and gorgeous trailers on the internet. I can't believe Harry hasn't posted anything up yet. Oh well might as well go to Dark Horizons or Counting Down, or any where else that appreciates good movies that star Claire Danes.
-
Know that down here, in Brazil, we have to wait till January 1st to see the movie. GAAAAHHHHHHHHH!!! THE ANTECIPATION IS GONNA KILL MEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!
-
Ummmmm.....I think you may be missing the point buddy. No one is disputing whether or not this is an actual piece of print journalism - people are merely expressing suspicion as to whether the reviewer has actually SEEN the film. Whereas I would LOVE this to be the first official review, and would equally LOVE every word he says to be true, I can't help but be a little skeptical. He mentions nothing the majority of us don't know already - ie, he could have assembled this review from the various tidbits we have ALL seen (the trailers, the scoops, the photos etc). I'm not out and out stating that this is a fake, but deep down, I suspect it may be. However, I have absolutely NO DOUBT that come December 18th, we will be echoing its sentiments and then some.
-
My point wasn't whether it was a real piece of journalism either. I just think it would be interesting to not say something that pops up out of nowhere is just another bullshit review. Of course people have a right to be skeptical but I mean over something like this I just find somewhat silly. But hey, I mean we are all eager fans (some of us). However all this review did for me was give me more of a reason to get in line and buy tickets.
-
This guy just finished the Two Towers on PS2. I have played that game and it gives alway the whole movie.
Still no brothers in this one, don't get me started again that there ain't no afro sporting muther fu*kers in hobbition or anywhere in this flick.
-
But somehow I can't. There's nothing in here that couldn't have been deduced from the trailers. The review itself is pure sycophancy that tells us NOTHING about the movie as a whole, merely as the sum of its parts - the pre-publicised parts. And I thought the 45 minutes of Helm's Deep (did the reviewer time it?) was also fishy. If a real person had seen it, surely in a print magazine as opposed to the bullshit seas of internet, we'd've have been treated to their real name.
-
...it's about as credible as a sighting of Elvis working as a petrol pump attendant. This is pure hype and doesn't do any favours at all to the real movie - which can't possibly live up this kind of hysteria.
-
I can't believe its almost time for TTT i remember right after the fellowship feeling annoyed that i'd have to wait so long...but god its almost here!!!This movie will go down in history baby and will set new standards for movies everywhere*kisses her pre order ticket thing* ahhh my precious!
P.S The hotdog review just kinda reads like those things you get in the front of DVD boxes e.g MAGNIFICENT, BREATHTAKING!...nothing rock solid here but what the hey sounds cool anyways -
A movie is a story, right? Most reviews tend to follow the story of the film - does the story work, are the actors credible while carrying it, was the movie purdy, did it make sense, do you feel involved? This review does NONE of that, merely talking about FX. There's nothing about the story, merely character and setpiece description, all written in uberhyperbole that is actually embarassing to read. It sounds like publicity blurb, dumbed down to sound fanboylike, Shakespearean references aside. No. I'm not convinced, Harry. Bring me more.
-
even if the reviewer called this the worst piece of crap in history id still go see it so who cares.....wouldnt mind that tt game though, wish i could afford it... i spent all my money on crack
-
First fsking page. "Sauron's army of Uruk-hai". Considering the importance of SARUMAN and his army to the story, there's no way that someone can make that name mistake for this film (maybe for FOTR, but not TTT). Add this to the fact that nothing in this hasn't been discussed or shown before in trailers/etc., and you're left with a bunch of crap from a failing magazine.
Sorry folks, nothing to see here. :( -
I'm with everyone else here. As much as I'd love to believe this, it's extremely hard for me to believe that the magazine that break's the news, that gets the first peak at the years biggest movie is Hotdog magazine... I remain hopeful, but I'll wait to see the next few that surface before I get overly excited (and I intend to). Probably it'll be Dec. 5th when legitimate reviews will start hitting. I read somewhere that there will be a Dec. 5th showing. I'm expecting the advanced press showing to happen around that time as well; that's about when it happened last year.
-
This movies gonna rock!
Hello.
-
Haha...nice detective work Sherlock. That fucker should watch his slip-ups more carefully next time. I mean who on earth could possible get "Sauron" and "Saruman" mixed up? They are two polar-opposite names. He obviously has never seen the movie.
-
First of all, the Best Director Oscar isn't all about what the camera does. It's about getting the best out of the actors. Jackson did _very_ well, but compared to the performances in A BEAUTIFUL MIND, the acting in FOTR was on the surface level. Second, this goddamn Extended Edition. I _refuse_ to believe Tolkien fans wanted this. Let me describe the scene that blew it all to hell for me. The scene after FRodo is stabbed, under the stone trolls. In the theatrical cut, this is an incredibly cool detail that sneaks at you and makes Middle Earth feel real. In the Extended Edition, we get Sam _looking directly into the camera_ and pointing the trolls out. BAM! Reality is shot because now Jackson is _pointing out_ all the detail. No one does this in reality. Why the scene in the mines going over Mithril _again?_ We learned all we need to know from Bilbo when he gave Frodo the shirt. The new opening is nice, but tells us _nothing_ that we aren't _shown_ later. (I tempt fate with the following comment, but I feel I need to say that this is _exactly_ the criticism thrown at Lucas repeatedly with the Prequels, which I agree are a bit talky.) The additions are favorable in one matter, Boromir, who seriously got shafted in the theatrical cut. He was no more than "the weak one," there. Now his character is fleshed out considerably. Now, before you start shooting arrows at me. I _love_ this film, and really enjoyed the extended edition, but it is a weaker version of the story than what was presented in theatres.
-
Why are you defending this review so vehemently? Why can't you pull the wool back from your eyes? Your first post read "Wow, we have skeptics posting that the SCANNED review is already a fake?" and when I challenged you on the fact that that wasn't the point, you reply with "My point wasn't whether it was a real piece of journalism either." Ummmm....what? Try reading WHAT YOU WROTE in your first post. You're completely contradicting yourself. I agree with the poster who calls up the Sauron mix-up. Pre-FOTR, I could see that people might get confused. But now? I don't think so - particularly from a reviewer who is clearly (or at least purports to be) an enthusiast. This is not a flame Other Man, genuinely - I'm just bewildered as to why you are passionatley defending a review which stinks to high heaven in a variety of ways. As I said earlier, I am looking forward to Two Towers as much as I was to The Phantom Man-Ass in '99 - I cannot WAIT to see it - but lets be honest, this review is fishy however you look at it.
-
Just caught your post. I couldn't disagree with you more if I tried. The extended edition makes a nigh-on-perfect film even better, in just about every way. In my opinion :) I don;t want to single you out, but you're the first person I've come across who actually thinks the Theatrical cut is better. To each their own I guess.
-
Just to be clear I am not defending this review. I really do not give a shit about it. I also do not give a shit whether I am "contradicting" myself or not. I am just looking forward to the film and I think people are taking this review way to critically and seriously. Keep in mind once the film comes out worldwide, this review will be worth about the same amount of shit to me then as it is now and I am sure that speaks for a lot of people here as well.
-
Didn't Sauron order Saruman to "build ME an army worthy of Mordor" or something along those lines? So the Uruk-hai ultimately belong to Sauron. So this so-called "reviewer's" slip up of words aren't completely false. An extremely fishy review none the less...
-
There's one bit of information that indicates the review *might* be true: It mentions that Treebeard is "perfectly vocalized" by John Rhys Davies. Does anybody else heard Fangorn (I always preferred his elven name) speaking before? I haven't... If i am wrong, please someone tell me where I can find such "precious" information? I want to hear the tree-shepherd talk...
-
For once and for all: Saruman DID NOT CREATE THE URUK-HAI!!! Sauron did that in the Second Age. Yes, Saruman did it in PJ's movies, but that's not the way things worked out in Tolkien's actual work.
-
Don't get me wrong...I have complete faith in him. Nevertheless, the sheer amount of information he's going to have to cover seems staggering for an ostensibly 3-hour movie:***** Narsil forged, Shelob, the final confrontation with Saruman (which should have been at the end of ttt if changed the way we all know it has been), Denethor, Gondor, Big Final Battle, Mount Doom, Faramir and Eowyn (I'm concerned that this may seem silly if not given proper interaction between them, given her infatuation with Aragorn), Crowning of Elessar, Sam and Rosie, the Grey Havens.***** Even without the scouring, that's a heaping load of material. If it means a five-hour extended dvd...well, that'd be frickin' fantastic. Otherwise, I'm just not totally sure Jackson can pull all of that off convincingly...i.e. giving it time and proper weight. Anyone else a bit concerned?
-
Since it keeps being brought up, I think that it is my duty as an uber Tolkien geek to explain.
Black, Arab and Asian people are lacking in the current movies for a very simple reason. It's very sad and it's something Tolkien geeks don't like to mention. Black, Arab and Asian people were on Sauron's side in the books. Many people forget that there were Men living to the East and South of Gondor. Rhun and Harad were filled with them. When we get to the battle of the Pellenor Fields in RotK and we finally see them, it's very obvious in the descriptions that they are Arab or Black. "...and out of Far Harad black men like half-trolls with white eyes and red tongues." Since we know they're Men, it's pretty obvious what race they are. Not a flattering description to be sure. The ones riding the Mumakil are never directly described, but we are given to understand they look very much like ancient turks on elephants...war towers and all.
If you look at a map, you will see that Asia and Africa are East and South of England. It's not a coincidence.
What it somes down to is that Tolkien was fashionably racist. Fashionably I say since racism was immensely prevalent during his time. Prevalent to the point that it was just taken as a matter of course. He probably didn't realize that he was being so racist, but that's how it was written and that's how it remains.
I'm assuming that the depiction of non-white races will not be carried over into P.J's RotK. I'm expecting to never see a sinle non-white actor. When compared with the alternative -- having Black and Asian captains of Sauron's forces, I'm sure it was the better choice. It's not like they could have written other races into the West. Tolkien goes into detail on how "fair skinned" and such all the peoples of the West are.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.
But eh. I still like the story. -
Well no, but still... I agree with Splinter and Alice. Yes, it's very likely that this movie will be incredible, but the review is probably made up from trailers & spoilers. Tells us nothing we already didn't know. I don't want spoilers mind you, but good lord man, you're writing an article, at least contribute something. Harry just posted it because it was the "first review", real or otherwise. Can't blame him really, I'm wetting myself already.
-
teehee!
-
For one, Hotdog is a VERY good movie magazine, which is only poor selling in the UK due to it still being relatively new and customers sticking with their established Total Film (over-rated but good) and Empire (used to be great, went poor, then good, now fantastic again with the woman editor on maternity leave). Secondly, "The Insider" is a regu;ar writer for the magazine and is normally spot-on with his reports (if I remember he broke the news of Brad Pitt leaving The Fountain before ANYONE else - remember this is a amagazine with a publishing deadline, so he had to have had the news pretty quickly). he/she printed reviews of Potter and Bond last issue, both of which were pretty spot on. And finally, his line about the "dragon-riding ringwraiths" turning up is a bit more specific to anything I'd heard before, especially at helm's deep. The general consensus was they were seen leaving Mordor but would not be seen in battle until ROTK.
-
I beleived I just reviewed review magazines. Kevin Williamson is probably taking notes now for his "hilariously ironic" werewolf movie. And the Extended Edition is a fuller film than the theatrical cut. Not that anyone should be dissing that.
-
Nov 26, 2002 9:23:07 AM CST
Condensed hype. I doubt that the "reviewer" did really see the f
by harrz
-
This is the most ridiculous piece of 'news' I've read on AICN, and Harry and his lackeys seem to be doing this more and more lately. The 'review' is merely info we all already know. And besides, 'Empire' magazine is the biggest-selling film mag in the UK, 'Hotdog' has nowhere-near the same readership. Why would they get to see it first? Ridiculous, I say! And that recent Hayden Christiansen 'not gonna be in Ep3' rumour - who in their right mind believed that? AICN did. Wake up guys, you're beginning to lose credibilty. I'm very disappointed to read lie after lie on what is otherwise an excellent website.
-
Dude, Howard winning for that overblown TV movie is one of Oscar's biggest mistakes. Right up there with Cahriots of Fire winning over Raiders and Marissa Tomei and Mira Sorvino winning in any year.
-
Nov 26, 2002 9:31:54 AM CST
The Academy loves films about mentally challenged people overcom
by rev_skarekroe
Rain Man proved it. Forrest Gump proved it. A Beautiful Mind proved it. OK, so I Am Sam didn't win anything, but they were just trying to hard. Anyway my point is, this year it's Oscar Gold for Lord of the Rings! Why? Well, who's more mentally challenged than Gollum? I mean, he's a schizophrenic, baby-eating, dissociative personality ring junkie who somehow manages to be both sympathetic and utterly revolting. Get ready Tinseltown, Gollum's coming and he's gonna make Michael Jackson look as normal as Paul Reubens! sk
-
I tried to approach this topic last year, pointing out similar things, and boy oh boy, did people attack me. Of course, I also suggested that Perhaps there could be black Gondorians, with Djimon Honsou as Boromir and Omar Epps as Faramir. And I also thought John Noble could still be Denethor. But people, being still hung up on race, got all irate. So I think by the looks of it, Peter did the right thing, to populate the whole movie with caucasians. Since the ugly face of 'purity' would rear its head. And by that I mean the ugly practice of claiming that since this myth was written 'for whites' that the presence of 'non-whites' was being all PC. Peter is protecting white people from making fools of themselves by getting angry over the color of Gandalf's skin, as though that's what makes a man. And to echo the informed sentiments in the latest Jesus talkback: Arabs are Caucasians, you ignorant oafs. Just because the Pres of the U.S. wants to classify 'arabic' as 'evil' doesn't mean we should all blindly join him. I saw a stage production of the Hobbit once with an asian man playing gandalf. He was the best Gandalf I'd seen, up until McKellen. Let me qualify my remarks with two things: I'm a white guy, and I wouldn't change a thing about the way the trilogy has been cast by PJ, as the performances have been spectacular.
-
There is a lot of speculation as to what Tolkien meant by the title of the second book of his "trilogy", The Two Towers. There is also a lot of speculation as to who has seen the movie. As Harry said months ago, the film is under lock and key. It has been reviewed for a rating, and most assuredly NOT distributed by New Line any earlier, than indicated in the news section at the official website. The primary political issue today, is the actual name of the movie. The events of 9/11 are in shape, form or fashion, related to the Lord of the Rings. The original attacks upon the Twin Towers pre-dates the making of the movies. I have already e-mailed my personal opinion about screenplays and extended versions to Sir Ian McKellen (see: Bravo channel Sunday night). I suggest if fans truly have constructive criticism, you do the same. To set the record straight; Tolkien
-
I might agree with Mr Baggage. It's possible this reviewer didn't really see the film. There's not enough tid-bits of info to convince me. It's just very general, and says this scene and that scene was so great. Talk about superfluous. What was this magazine called? Hotdog or something?? Um ok that sounds a bit gay. This person probably just read the Two Towers picture book that just came out. I still want to see the movie rather badly though. :-D
-
i dont understand what people liked about the first one so much it looked good but there was no tension ive tried to watch it again but got bored
-
So why not the second? You do have to figger that what made the first one work was the action, the setting, and the utter conviction that was brought to bear on every inch of the enterprise. What didn't work-too much walking, Atomik Bloo Galadriel, Breakdancing wizards-ummmmm they can improve on I am very sure. I am also sure that the Braveheart comparisons will be made.
-
Nov 26, 2002 11:26:45 AM CST
Well, I'd say it's a "real" review, but not a "real review," er.
by pallando blue
As in, someone there did see it, but it wasn't exactly a press screening for Hotdog. If you read the entire feature outside the review, the last paragraph mentions how only an "elite few" have gotten to see T2T already, and added parenthetically something like "(including one of Hotdog's spies, who worked on the production)". Soooo... one might say there's a slight conflict of interest as far objective criticism. Also, wouldn't surprise me if the "spy" wasn't the author of the review, the writer just wrote a review from the gushings of the "spy." So, really, changes nothing: Someone associated with Hotdog has gotten to see T2T before anyone else, but the subsequent "review" matters absolutely zilch. Ah well, matters not, got my tickets last week!
-
Okay, that "half-troll" description was, uh, unfortunate at best, but Tolkien was a polite guy and I suspect he would have changed it if someone had bothered to say something to him (there are those who think that the passage refers to an actual half-man/half-troll monster of some kind, but as far as I'm concerned they're just grasping at straws to defend a flaw in their hero's character). As for the fact that the Easterlings and Southrons were working for Sauron, Tolkien makes it very clear that they weren't doing it because they were inherently evil, or even of a lesser race. They were ordinary people, deceived by Sauron into serving him (It could, and did, literally happen to the best of them - the Numenoreans represented the pinnacle of the human race, and Sauron's deception was their downfall). There's a scene in the book where Sam realizes this as encounters a fallen Southron warrior. I hope it makes it into the film. sk
-
I've pasted this from a post over at TORC messageboard. Someone emailed the editor of Hotdog: Hi,
Thanks for your email!
We have every confidence in our reviewer, who has been working in the
film industry (on many major films, including LOTR) for over 15 years,
and who obviously wants his/her identity kept under wraps. This person
(one of Hotdog's industry insiders) has helped Hotdog break several
scoops in the past (revealing details on the two Matrix sequels that
were confirmed literally days after the magazine going on sale by the
film's producer!), so we have no reason to doubt that he/she saw the
film at an industry (not press) screening. Certainly everyone on the
magazine is jealous, as TTT looks as though it's going to be the film of
the year!
Andy McDermott
Editor, Hotdog -
The addition of a few seconds more of the stone trolls is not one of my favorite SEV additions (partly due to a lack of continuity between Frodo waking up in a muck sweat and merely looking a bit clammy as Sam says, "He's going cold!" a few seconds later) - HOWEVER, you have to imagine the scene as if you were seeing it for the first time, from Frodo's point-of-view. He is waking up semi-delirious, and the first thing he sees is this terrifying stone troll hovering over him. Sam's appearance and words then become doubly reassuring: "Look, Frodo! Mr. Bilbo's trolls...(You're not going crazy...)" The only thing that spoils it for us repeat viewers is that we already know about the trolls; it would have had more impact if we had FIRST seen the trolls from Frodo's POV, as we do in the SEV. ***I, personally, do not believe in the legitimacy of any TTT review that doesn't even mention the Dead Marshes.
-
Don't buy it. And by the way, Beautiful Mind was complete crap.
-
There better be some dope scenes of the ENTS fucking up Isengard... NO REALLY, there better be... Treebeard is by far one of the coolest dang on characters in the Rings story...
-
Nov 26, 2002 6:05:06 PM CST
HOTDOG'S "INSIDER" ISA WELL-KNOWN FAKE IN THE UK - DON'T BELIEVE
by steve_zodiac
I'm sure the movie will rock but I recently wrote to the editor of Hotdog afer "The Insider" claimed to have th first "Die Anothr Day" review ahead of any test or press screenings. How did he manage that? Answer: He didn't. His "review", like this one was a combination of conjecture, fanboy enthusiasm and , oh yeah, a quick look at the trailer. You don't even have to read between the lines to see that this idiot HAS NOT SEEN THE TWO TOWERS. Hotdog is a cheap imitation of the far more respected Empire movie magazine in the UK. It tried to sell more copies by publishing fake reviews ahead of the competition - a fact well known in this country. Sorry, Harry, but you really should check your facts before falling for this kind of thing.
By the way, guess what the the editors's reply to my direct e-mail was? Fuck all. -
Ok, the review is superficial, but the article on the magazine is full of information: The reaction of the actors after the screening, differences between the movie and the book, more details about Gollum and more. It's easy to believe is a fake since the magazine came so early, but it's nothing like 2 months early, the movie is almost here and reviews should start popping up at any minute. At least it's more relible than some dude coming out of nowhere with an email to Harry ...
-
Nov 26, 2002 6:58:35 PM CST
This will never come close to the brilliance of "Weekend at Bern
by dataset
Jes'kiddin'. We all know it will rock. And we'll feel a tint of grief that Star Wars kinda' let us down. But we'll own both sets of DVD's and watch them for the rest of our lives. Because we're geeks, and the geek shall inherit the earth. All your Zombie Bruce Paltrow are belong to us, brother!
-
I really didn't see anybody slamming Star Wars in here so I'm not quite sure what your gripe earlier was? Anyway, can I ask why you actually bothered to by an extended addition DVD, and then watched the commentary, for a movie thay you considered to be 3.5 hours of boring, annoying characters walking through a forest? Weren't you the one also ripping on all the plot holes in Fellowship in a previous talkback and how you didn't understandy Sauron's motivation and such?
Oh well, this review is iffy. I do agree with what an earlier poster said though - the Nazgul showing up at Helm's Deep on their flying steeds is new. Sounds pretty cool, though. -
The second book is easily the most enjoyable to read from beginning to end (I've read it a couple of times now) and has great new characters. The movie should be more interesting than the first one...
-
think Peter should get back to the genius that was Brain Dead. Now that is an epic of bloody proportions...I particularly like the bit at the end where the guy is mowing down multiple zomies with a lawnmover turning the house into a swamp of blood, guts, bones and debauchery.
-
PJ left out numerous parts of the first LOTR book, to include scenes of his (and his screenwriters) own choosing. Scenes left out include the entire Old Forest/Tom Bombadil sequence, the Barrow Wights scene, most of the scenes with Aragorn at Bree, Bill Ferny and the obtaining of Bill the pony, Glorfindel, the major change of Arwen resisting the Nine rather than Frodo resisting the Nine, (simply to give Arwen something to do it seems, rather than display the innate power of the Elves), most of the Council of Elrond, the battle against the wolves during the journey towards Moria, some of the major incidents in Moria including Gandalf's first confrontation with the Balrog, ie: the holding spell on the door etc. The list goes on and on. I love the movie FOTR, both the Theatrical and Extended Edition and have them both on DVD. PJ deserves to be acclaimed for his work on these films. One thing he did not do though, was improve TOLKEIN's story. An example of this is the deliberate 'dumbing' down of the conversations between the Characters to suit a "modern" audience, one of the worst was, "he needs Elvish medicine." The quote in the book is along the lines of, " Alas! he cried. It was this accursed knife that gave the wound. Few now have the skill in healing to match such evil weapons. But I will do what I can." A little bit better written no? After attempting to heal Frodo with the Athelas and failing, I think it would have shown the healing power of the Elves in a better light (no pun intended...) because at this point in the movie we have only seen the Elves during the Last Alliance. People unfamiliar with the story, would have no real conception of why Elves would be such capable healers. By following the book a little more closely and not re-writing the prose, the audience would gain a greater understanding of the Elves power.
-
Oh hellz yeah! Looks like the naysayers are gonna have their asses kicked around the block by TTT. Btw, the Star Wars prequels suck. Had to throw that in.
-
...A salty wave of pure dissatisfaction washed over me while reading this article, and has slowly corroded and steadily deteriorated strong walls that were once built high with ambition. But now the water is thick with sand, and I can hardly see the bottom. In other words, all hopes that I had for the next installment of the Lord of the Rings are clouded and dirtied by the various subjects covered in this article; It is disheartening to read more than just a measly paragraph. My faith in both Peter Jackson, above all else, and in a second film that would successfully idealize the important passions and cherished themes of Tolkien like the first (The Fellowship of the Ring), have tarnished... Yet then, the words of this article seem tattered, twisted, and turned; The way the article is written does not flow, but rather bends and curves. I find it quite difficult to clarify the information here as concise and consistent with all the other material presented about the Two Towers in other magazines, publications, etc. Most of it (if not all) seems like a counterfeit and cheapy-made copy of all the current news that surrounds the hype of the new movie. Personally, it does not make sense with the majority of what I have heard.In addition, while compared with other articles, the words of Elijah Wood and Liv Tyler seem like fraud quotes. Any movie star (whether they are inteligent or not) would know to keep their mouths closed about how they feel about fans and the public. The various swear words, too, seem very needless and falsify the previous interviews given by the young actors. Yes, I know they have sworn before. Yes, we all do. But something smells queer in terms of his outrageous responces of fans. I cannot help feeling that this article is shady. It deserves to be put in the limelight for its subject of suspicion. I am utterly repulsed, and sick at heart, to see a wonderful production go down the drain and completely miss the strong points of Tolkien's book. There is another issue I have yet, concerning
-
NYC traffic is shit. SO! My take on the situation is nothing more than I've stated before...TTT will be awesome and there aint no denyin. We should all be happy we have people making this film, for it is superior to anything out today. Modern day classic. Now, the reviewer here does nothing more than paraphrase, and Hotdog magazine (who has bought an issue?) doesnt sound to have the calibre to screen TTT. I think this is the hype machine in fifth gear. So my opinion is that this review is bogus trash. However I think its nice Harry is watching out for us BIG TIME by getting dirt for us from any corner of the world. But it SURE is nice to have fodder for the canon that is TTT, as we ALL KNOW OUR JAWS WILL BE GLUED TO THE GRIMEY CINEPLEX FLOOR as we take this in. OH! and the LOTR extended DVD super combo meal (w/biggie size coke and fries) IS THE BEST DAMN DVD EVER MADE. And how great is it that we have two more buddies for it in the next two years? couldn't be fuckin happier.
We're all gonna be blown away. Run, tell the people. -
Thank you, MrBabbage (and others that share the oppinion that this article is a fake), for your comments concerning this issue. I must admit that I could not agree more. I have taken everyone's opinions into great consideration, and agree with the majority of justifications. This article has a very peculiar smell to it...
-
Not to ever defend Fettastic, but he was talking about a specific quote from Fran Walsh on the Director's Commentary where she stated that Boromir's death scene is more emotionally resonant in the movie than it is in the book, or something along those lines. As much as I've loved the LOTR books for most of my life, I tend to agree - it plays a bit stronger on screen. And I may get flamed by Tolkien purists for saying this, but PJ definately did us all a favor by leaving Tom Bombadil out of the movie. Some things don't seem too bad when you read them, but holy God that would have been hard to sit through with a straight face in a move theatre.
-
There have probably been others to observe this as I haven't read all the posts since Barry White's, but...he mentions there are no blacks in the film. In point of fact, one thing I think PJ consciously disregarded was Tolkien's descriptions of the Easterlings and Haradrim, which (equating NE Middle Earth with NE Europe) should have been Asian and African, respectively. I'm sure some will contest this, but it's all there in the descriptions of the people, and in the maps in the Ambarkanta in which the Harad Continent is most definitely Africa. I am a bit miffed at PJ for not observing these details, but I'm sure he wanted to avoid controversy by making the "non-white" humans in the film all bad guys. And while I don't want to dredge up the tired and pointless "Tolkien/LOTR are racist" debates, I'll observe that Tolkien had Chinese students (even gave one of them an original piece of art), spent a holiday in his youth with two mexican boys and their aunt (which ended in a tragic car accident, unfortunately), enjoyed the stories of Mark Twain which featured blacks in a more positive and for the time controversial light, longed as a child to be an American Indian because of stories he read, and stood up against Germany's anti-Jewish racial policies when this became a matter of debate in preparing a German edition of THE HOBBIT during WWII. I think that's all that really needs to be said on the subject....come on flameboys (on al sides) and tell me how I've got it all wrong.....
-
F***in beautiful!Well,were waiting for Dec 18,...we can revisit this again,no?
-
Why do people insist on making comparisons between these two films. We all know Jar Jar was an annoying character, hands down. But to claim that the CGI in any of the LOTR is "better" then that in Star Wars is a moot point. Watch the documentaries on the AOTC film, and you will discover scenes in which I and everyone else couldnt distinguish between CGI characters and real ones. Obi Wan getting dragged by Jango on the landing platform was a CGI stuntman...every single clone in the movie was CGI, not an actor in costume. Could have fooled me. Question Lucas' directing skills and storytelling abilities compared to what he was twenty years ago, and I will agree with you. But no effects house can touch what ILM has accomplished since its inception, and any other effects entity in the entire movie industry owes their tools, skills and talents to the groundwork and ingenuity laid down by ILM. Cripes, Jackson even admits that collaboration with Lucas and ILM was a key aspect of his and WETAs ability to visualize LOTR. I give Jackson credit, because he did do a fantastic job in bringing the LOTR to life, but it was not a perfect adaptation, because adapting Tolkien is a near impossible task. But the story and groundwork, and much of the art and conceptualization, was already in place before Jackson took the helm. While the Lucas creativity well may be dry, let us not forget that it was a universe he created, not adapted from someone else's novel, but a unique and personal adventure film inspired by the stories and movies Lucas enjoyed as a young man. Give both directors credit for being visionaries. Heck I am willing to go as far as to say Jackson is what Lucas and Spielberg were as young directors. The reason Jackson succeeded was because his ego did not get in the way of his collaborating with a myriad of talented artists and directors. Lucas and Spielberg have become so arrogant that they forgot that their greatest movies were those in which they collaborated with other creative powerhouses. Look at the Indiana Jones films in terms of their sheer craftsmenship, or even Empire Strikes Back, and you see what the prequels should have been if Lucas had Kasdan, Kirchner, and the others who once gave life to his vision.
-
Nov 26, 2002 8:35:21 PM CST
Howard Shore said that there's no Smeagol\Gollum flashback in th
by cash bailey
Begin crying... NOW!! And this review is a fucking fake.
-
Harry:
I'm as big a LOTR fan as the next guy. Took 25 of my closest friends to the FotR premiere in Vancouver on the night of my twenty-tenth birthday; planning to do the same with TTT the night before my 31st. So it's not with any prejudice or arbitrary dismissal that I wonder whether this review is the goods.
A conspiratorial thought: Online ticket sales have started (got mine!), and this is just about the right post-Bondmania time to get everyone thinking Rings. (Just out of curiosity, Hotdog wouldn't happen to have any relationship to AOL/TW (and thus New Line), would it? I suppose that would be too easy a connection to make, but it wouldn't be the first time they've cross-pollinated their "product", would it?)
Just a thought among the many hopes that "The Insider" is in fact right... -
But it's pretty obvious why people insist on making comparisons between these two films. Star Wars is considered the pinnacle of special effects movies by most people. TPM was the first movie to use a digital creation as a major character, and the TTT is pretty much the second one, so comparisons are plenty warranted. On a purely technical level, I agree that ILM is likely the best and most powerful effects house on the market. However, they definitely have there problems when it comes to intregating that technology in with the real actors in terms of eyelines and believability to name a few. That's where PJ and Weta really surpass ILM - in the overall impact of various scenes that utilize CGI rather than being overwhelmed by it.
-
Nov 26, 2002 8:49:54 PM CST
King Fart! ....Bunch of sanctimonious pedantic purist dickheads.
by skyway moaters
...film maker wanna-be blowhard douche bags... I'm not actually singling Karl out, (so I'll single out Rhysenn instead, (heh!)Lay on you fop, put em up, put em up!). The words "King Fart" just popped into my head as I was reading the GUANO posted to this TB. Word association? I don't know. *** Here's a "novel" (pun intended)idea: I think I'll wait and actually watch the film before I get into
any debates on how well PJ has adapted T2T to the screen. In the end, that's the topic that's really pertinent here. Shall I repeat the mantra one more time? LOTR is a novel. Novels are a very, very, very, very, different medium from Film. Novels are about imagery and character development. Films must rely primarily on visual representations of ideas handled by the imigination when one is reading a novel. LOTR verbatim on screen would be disasterous. It would ruinously long to begin with... is any of this sinking in? *sigh* no, I'm sure I'm just wasting my breath. Namarie, Trubba Not. SM{;-0 -
http://www.theonering.net/movie/scrapbook/large/5316 This poster is roughly ten million times better than that photoshop dog-shit they tried pass off recently.
-
Nov 26, 2002 9:09:57 PM CST
"Watch the documentaries on the AOTC film, and you will discover
by pfloyd
"Watch the documentaries on the AOTC film, and you will discover scenes in which I and everyone else couldnt distinguish between CGI characters and real ones"
*Wow, you must still run from the theatre when you see the those old films of trains and such moving toward the screen. As far as the new Star Wars films go . . . the diner scene ruined any chance for people to see those films as advancemnets in film tech. LOTR looked fine, but you an still see the CGI. Personally I could care less about either film, they look nice but are just fun movies (no more no less). But I did feel the need to respond when I see someone post that the latest Star Wars film graphics impressed them, and thus made the movie the great. You need better standards for judging films, b/c CGI is just a tool not the actual art. -
Ok I think that this could be answered and dismissed in a simple sentence: "How many people of different races did you see in 'Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon?'"
Well, some might object "That was set in ancient China and there wouldn't be people of other races in any great quantity." Well, the same holds true for Middle Earth. You see, Professor Tolkien's intention was to create a myth for the ENGLISH people (The English do not have any of their own myths...even the Arthur legend comes from somewhere else), and the heroes of the story are ENGLISH (in his intention), and hence white.
Now as far as the enemies go (as I understand it) in the Simarillion the race of Men comes essentially from one tribe group, this group came under the influence of Morgoth who lied to them in order to make them slaves to his service. But there was a section of this group that yearned for the Light in the West and went to it, these people became the Numenoreans (after quite a lot of struggle.) When Morgoth was defeated the men of the East and South who had never went West to the light of the Valar were left without a God (Morgoth made them worship him as a god); Sauron filled this void and took up where his master left off. Eventually the Numenoreans fell to the cunning of Sauron; indeed many of the Nine are in fact Dark Numenoreans (the Witch King definitely is). So I guess what I am trying to say is this: the men that fight for Sauron are not of a different "race" than the people of Gondor and Rohan, and they are really only in the service of Sauron because they have been made to through force. They are essentially fighting their own people, albiet several thousand years removed. Now when Tolkien describes something as black (as in Black Men), what he really means is those who have never seen the light of the Valar or are forsaken of said light (the Numenoreans have never seen it, but they do know of it). In fact, Wood Elves are known as 'Dark Elves' because they have never seen the Light either, this doesn't mean that they are black Elves. The cultural parallels are also false; Tolkien did incorporate elements of different cultures into his work, but he HATED allegory and would not have made one people in Middle Earth stand for another in reality (the exception being that this is indeed an English myth, so the good guys must be English-like). Some people have posted excerpts from RoTK as 'proof' of racism, this is false. Tolkien was describing the hated mix of human stalk and orc/goblin/troll stock, the Uruk-Hai is also one of these mad mixtures and is described very much the same way. Also, those in the service of Sauron tend to act somewhat primal and paint their faces and do other things that make them seem more imposing, this isn't a racist characterization...but rather a description of their preparations for battle.
I suppose that it is inevitable that in this day and age people might get a little prickly when they see "under-representation" of a certain group on screen, or worse a stereotype or other racist portrait of said group being portrayed. In LoTR however what we have is a mythical place outside the bounds of such criticism, created for the English to build a myth that can be claimed by the English. The argument that it is racist simply does not hold water (after all, how many different races should you expect to see in Beowulf?)
-
yeah this is true. it is part of a fundraiser at the galaxy cinema and with eyeball soup in peterborough ontario canada. it is being showed on decmeber 8. i cant go but i hope someone does and posts a real review of it this time.
-
OrionsAngel-I also think these LOTR movies reflect what's going on in the world today.*I agree with that**** Just like Tolkien's books reflected WWII.**** It does not,it started 'long before the forshadow of 1939 had yet become a threat of inevitable disaster'.One could say that the Ring=nuclear weapons,the coalition of Rohan,Gondor and the Dhire(etc)= the Allied powers,Mordor= the Axis powers.Tolkien wrote; 'the Ring would have been seized and used against Sauron',as nuclear weapons were use against Japan;Barad-D
-
"Alas! he cried. It was this accursed knife that gave the wound. Few now have the skill in healing to match such evil weapons. But I will do what I can." A little bit better written no? UM...NO. Definitely wordier. And clunkier. Not better. I bow to no one in my respect for Tolkien's imagination and thoroughness. But his prose -- which I admired when I was fifteen -- seems pretty hard to stomach now. PJ, Walsh and Boyens HAD to change the dialogue -- or risk a cringe-fest in the movie theatre.
-
Yes, I agree! This is a considerably better poster than the last one. Will Harry post a post-review poster story, so I can post my poster comments?
-
Nov 26, 2002 9:45:26 PM CST
Mind if I borrow that time machine after you're through with it?
by nazismasher
I'm left with a grain of disbelief that this review is authentic too. It probably is authentic because there's 9 pages posted at warofthering not related to the review and they are completely legit. Dece. 18 just cannot get here fast enough. Christ! I'm so fucking tired of the SW/LOTR squabble in AICN talkbacks and the "Tolkien the racist" argument. Screw it, both don't merit attention anymore. As for purists' complaints, PJ left out numerous parts of the first book because the didn't advance the story or were directly connected the Ring's progress. You could probably spend another 3 hours of film on those morsels and produce something no one would have enjoyed as a film. Ah, jeez, were Tom Bombadil, Bill Ferny (Bill Ferny?!?!), Glorfindel, or the Barrow Wights truly necessary to the film? Let's be honest, IMHO in a motion picture these guys are footnotes better left on the cutting room floor. Was it really necessary to repeat verbatim everything in the Council of Elrond that wasn't necessary to advancing the story or furthuring the audience's understanding of the plot? Hmmm... a 45 minute council of Elrond... greeeeat. Was Glorfindel's brief cameo in the books more important than establishing Arwen's character presence in the film? (Oh, yeah, Tolkien never wrote nothing like her. Should have made her a characterless sit at home n' knit socks elf woman like Luthien... oops! wait a second?) Like Christopher Lee said, "Well, this could go on, and on, and on, and on, and on....", and that is coming from a man that actually met with Professor Tolkien. I fail to understand why it is so difficult for the hard purists to divorce themselves to the necessary extent from the books. In the most cliched way I think they've missed the forest for the trees. Purist Tolkien fans and Integral Tolkien fans have been debating this for months. I respect the purist camp, I 'tolerate' their opinions even though I've found maybe 9 out 10 of their arguments utterly specious, but I haven't found the "it wasn't in the book" crutch at all convincing since day 1. Well, that's all I's got's to say 'bout that.
-
At no point did I claim that the effects made AOTC a great film...it was a fun film, but not as great as Empire Strikes Back. But I would hardly call the diner scene a flop. I felt Dex along with Watto are some of the more inspired characters in the prequels, as the voice actors and animation really gave those characters a sense of personality and gravity in the Star Wars universe. If you watch the evolution of the Dex character in the documentaries, you can see the attention to detail and pains ILM went through to bring that character to life. I thought Ewan did a good job in helping flesh out that scene, but then again I think Ewan's performance was consistently strong throughout the movie, even with some of the lines he had to work with.
-
Watch the making of documentaries for ESB and ROTJ...Lucas used the same process...mix and match elements from different creatures, designs and concept art to create his world...the Rancor, B-Wing, A-Wing, Jabba and everything in between was the melding of different elements from various concept sketches...hell even WETA used the same process, mixing and matching concepts that worked together to flesh out Tolkiens world.
-
A "great evil" arising in the world? Hmmmm....somehow I don't think he was referring to Sauron, but rather to those damned Seperatists. But I'm sure before too long the Chancellor Bus--er, the President--will declare emergency powers--because the Jedi and most of the Republic are sure looking in the wrong direction as to where the insidious Evil truly lies.....oh sorry, was that out loud?
-
Pud--whatever. I'm glad my "lame excuse" proved you right. (But what's this about Tolkien's son? Send me the link to the news story, if there is one--or are you just attacking him because John Tolkien is a Catholic Priest?) In any case, would it even matter to you that my vote for best movie this year so far is "Undercover Brother"--easily, in fact, one of the greatest movies ever made? (No, I'm not kidding....) Oh well. Glad to have that resolved....
-
Anyway, tensticks, I couldn't agree more with your post about Bu - err Shrub. Damn frightening is what this is. You better be careful about what you say, though. Is is still legal to criticize the Pres in public?
-
people have no trouble believing that the ring corroupts all who touch it, yet they want the eagle to get it? Wouldn't the eagle become evil and carry off everyone's dogs? And by the way, i'm not calling the professor rascist, i'm calling that at all the simpering europeans who think they 'need' lord of the rings to feature all whites for it to be pure. You're not being rascist if this doesn't bother you, if it does, you are. plain and simple. No sense arguing, because you're wrong.
-
Please refer to my previous post about how false your contention of a racist Middle Earth is. But here's a tip for you, in debate (or in any persuasive medium) when you resort to base attacks such as swearing or name calling your argument pretty much dies. You look foolish and people immediately dismiss you, just giving helpful advice :)
-
Thats just Puds' miserable attempt at trolling. There's so little to critisize this franchise for that trolls start to grasp at straws. No biggie.
-
Damn. Three and a half weeks seems like eternity. Although Harry, I'm pretty sure this review is a fake. Wasn't it confirmed that the Helm's Deep battle was only 15-25 minutes, interspersed with Frodo and Sam stuff? Whatever. I can't wait to see it anyway. This has been a relatively good movie year, I say.
-
Holy crap! I just realized--everyone in my family is white! And even though we share the same cultural heritage and ancestral background, which MIGHT explain that fact, certainly the only LOGICAL explanation for our lack of color is that we're racist! :) Having said that...as someone who spent two summers working at the Marquette University archives, the headquarters of all things LOTR, with all original manuscripts, I will say this: It's absolutely understandable to see Lord of the Rings (or read it) and see racist undertones. However, you'd be more or less wrong. It's easy to see them when you look for them, but they were unintentional (if they existed at all), and often the product of misunderstood prose (i.e. "black" usually referred to the state of one's heart or his spiritual status than to actual physical description). And, as has been pointed out, Tolkien's field of expertise within the discipline of philology was Anglo-Saxon materials. He was an expert on Beowulf, Gawain, and other originally "Norse" mythologies that made their way into British culture. So why are their no blacks in LOTR? Easy--there were no blacks in early medieval and ancient northern Europe. It's an honest mistake to see racism in his work; it's malicious and ignorant to persist in that belief when someone correctly and elegantly explains why that viewpoint is based in misunderstanding of the material.******My question--are we getting a SEV of TTT sometime next year, or will the screen version be the finished product?
-
they would release the one DVD to rule them all and then not release its brother a year later,,, that wouldnt jive! My money says one theatrical early snapcase disc, then well, the delicious honey - glazed special edition disc come November. (just like before) yay!
-
Why aren't there any white people in Crouching Tiger? Because it's set in ancient CHINA, and it would look stupid. Why is everyone in LOTR white? Because Tolkien wanted it that way. Huge difference. Anyway, it wouldn't bother me if Tolkien was proven to be racist, it wouldn't automatically make him evil, just ignorant, not really his fault he's a product of his time. This book was written before WWII! It would be like knocking people 600 years ago for thinking the earth was flat. Most of the people in this board would have been "racist" if they would have lived in his time.
-
Oh, and another thing, PJ already said that TTT was going to be the most divergent movie (from the Tolikien books), good thing I think the changes and omissions he's made are for the best. Imagine if he would adapted them in 2 movies instead of 3!! (his original proposal, not that he preferred it this way he was trying to get the movies made), purists would be screaming bloody murder.
-
My days of being such a Star Wars geek are finally fading away.... I cannot even watch the DVD of " Clones " without reeling in disgust at how bad it is beyond all the polished effects that do nothing to make the film any better...in other words ...you can't shine shit....what does this bashing have to do with LOTR? quite simple...sincerity. Jackson gives what the audience wants and more by fleshing out what is a rather complex mythology into something simple and exciting enough that people can understand and love without having to buy or read a fucking book or magazine just to try to make sense of a some incident or character from a beloved film long ago that is becoming so lost in it's own storyline that it is too late to recocile the damage. To the generation that has been waiting for the magic to come again here it is...
-
Nov 27, 2002 3:50:07 AM CST
This movie's going to make House Party 1 look like House Party 2
by whiskeynight
In my estimation, Jackson has pulled off a feat unprecedented in Hollywood by crafting what basically amounts to a nine-hour epic with a singular vision and purpose. By the way, just saw Dead Alive. I really can't believe New Line gave this guy $300 million...The review does sound a little pre-fabricated, but that doesn't change the fact that it will desereve a best picture nod that it will not recieve. Can't fuckin' wait. [END TRANSMISSION]
-
The big crime comitted here is not that Howard won for Director (at least not in my opinion). It's Akiva Goldsman for Script. He is a HACK and should never be eligible for any award ever.
-
It has been roughly 19 hours since my last post, here at Ain
-
"Why aren't there any white people in Crouching Tiger? Because it's set in ancient CHINA, and it would look stupid. Why is everyone in LOTR white? Because Tolkien wanted it that way"
WRONG! LOTR is set in a prehistoric northwestern Europe. A made up history, yes, but still Europe. Tolkien wanted to create his own mythology for the English, since they don't really have one (as previously stated). Hence no black guys. That too would look stupid. End of story. -
The scenes I referred to above were examples of scenes that WERE left out of FOTR. I never suggested that they should ALL be used, obviously a movie must have some sort of reasonable time frame and lifting the story verbatim from the book would make an impossibly long movie. In saying that, replacing scenes and dialogue from the book with those written by PJ et al, always felt slightly wrong. Notable inclusions are the Elvish Medicine line, Arwen's defiance of the Nine rather than Frodo's defiance, the falling Staircase scene and the Atomic Galadriel scene. This is my opinion people. These scenes should have remained as they were written in the book. Having Aragorn saying "Elvish Medicine" does not advance the quest of the ring, nor does Arwen's defiance as opposed to Frodo's or Atomic Galadriel (most especially the effects used). I am not an expert at writing, however I can recognise one when I see it and TOLKEIN's prose is far superior (technically) to that written by PJ etc. He was an Oxford Literature Professor after all!!! In addition to this and despite the amazing success of the movie (and perhaps because of it) the books continue to be bestsellers all around the world. Surely this success is worthy of some consideration that perhaps using the actual dialogue from the books would not result in a "cringe-fest". Just my thoughts. Bring on the response. Cheers.
-
Um, mtoast, for what it's worth, I'm going to have to agree with Conan here. This is Phillipa Boyens very first screenplay. It's Fran's 3rd. It's PJ's 8th in 12 years. Tolkien was working on Middle Earth, as a literary scholar mind you, for over 60 years. I think if anybody knew what belongs where, it was the good professor. Especially when it comes to dialog and language. The man was a linguist of reknown distinction. He created over 9 different fully functional languages for cripes sake. This notion of tweaking dialog to make it more contemporary is downright silly, and has been something I've never accepted or supported. If it's comprehensable by the general public (which it is), then there's no need to tweak a line for the sake of language. This is supposed to be old world. There should be nothing contemporary inherent in its setting. The only possible concern, which I give the film makers leeway in adapting the dialog is concistancy in reproducing Tolkien's use of language in establishing scenes that weren't in the book for the sake of the film. For this I can see merit. But notice, in no way do I suggest that PJ and crew are better writers or know what's better suited than Tolkien himself.
-
See what happens when you're posting at two in the morning? Earlier post SHOULD be spelled "why are THERE no blacks." Would kick my students' asses for doing what I just did.*****Yeah, it would make sense that it would have a parallel TTT expanded version. The only reason I asked was that I considered maybe with the success of the first, he didn't have the same pressure to make decisions to cut certain parts to smooth along the passage of time? I know that most of the stuff in the expanded version was specially filmed FOR the DVD, but some of it was also stuff that he decided to take out to shorten an already long theatrical release, isn't it? Or am I wrong?
-
There's one major gap in your logic: They aren't actually speaking English. Westron -- the default language equated with our own -- is actually NOT ENGLISH. Every word in the novel is a translation...of a fictional tongue. But regardless of this fact, I stand by my assertion that much of the language in the books would sound downright silly coming out of an actor's mouth. This fact takes nothing away from Tolkien's genious as a linguist, an architect of an incredible fictional world, or as a scholar of anglo-saxon. As a person who dearly loved the book (I even got through The Silmarillion -- TWICE.) and is almost fanatical about the films, I still maintain that Tolkien's writing was unnecessarily stodgy and downright unwieldy. As you read the novel(s), there is a very clear shift from the beginning of FoTR to the end of RoTK. The writing gets more psuedo-Olde. Most critics have pointed to this as a deficit. You might view it as a strength. Even as a great fan of Tolkien's work, I have to recognize the flaws in his work. But if it
-
You are quite right about the shift in language from FOTR to TTT, at least for the non-hobbit characters - which is one reason I've always found the hobbit passages much more absorbing. There is a self-conscious grandiosity to the others' speeches that works well enough in context, as they are, after all, enacting the stuff of legends (though there are a few passages where the inverted syntax really gets to me - what I think of as the "Gone are the snows of yesteryear...." phraseology). There's one passage especially where Aragorn and Legolas seem to be capping each other in sententiousnes ("Hope oft comes at dawn," etc.) to the point where I want to smack them out of it. I think there is much in TTT that is going to be infinitely more immediate and emotionally-involving on screen than it was on the page. On the other hand, I am deeply involved in every sentence of the scenes with Frodo, Sam and Gollum, and part of that is that the dialogue in those passages is so PERFECT and so wonderfully captures the shifting moods and emotions and interplay between the three that I cannot imaging improving upon it.
-
Dude, your political correctedness whining is getting on EVERYONE'S damn nerves. GO EAT A DICK OR SOMETHING, and leave the rest of us alone. If you don't want to see The Two Towers and picket or something feel free to do so. However, you will look like a complete fucking asshole next to the millions of fans who will be there opening day!
-
Amen. I agree that there are wonderful pieces of dialogue and emotion in LotR. And I also agree that most of them come in the "small" parts of the book, such as the emotional moments between the hobbits. It almost seems that Tolkien felt a need for grandiose dialogue to accompany grandiose events and characters. (See Silmarillion, The) The hobbits are, after all, our proxies in Middle-earth. They are very much the reader (or viewer's) voice and they are amazed on our behalf. Oh well, after all this talk, I could use a little Elvish medicine!
-
Your post makes it clear you feel the Star Wars films are the hieght of film art. Fine, but you are wrong. It is more like video game art if anything, and my post was in concern to how it seems you equal fancy CGI to good film. On how you were amazed that you couldn't figure what was CGI and what was real . . . thus my crack about the train charging toward the screen and you running for your life. The fx was decent at best and the film itself was horrible. I'm not looking for "2001" when I see Star Wars movies, but when you consider who much they spend to make them and the amount of hype . . . they should be better movies. Atleast fun and entertaining. That said, I am not a big fan of these types of films, and really have no business on a thread about LOTR or Star Wars. I did not put words into your mouth, but your last post already said that for me.
-
Nov 27, 2002 10:08:38 PM CST
Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks this way...
by conan_the_humble
I do not and most likely will never agree that the substitution of TOLKIEN's dialogue for that written with a more "modern" flavour or tone is either necessary or an improvement over the original writing. Does anyone not agree that the use of Sindarin in the movie works? It's a language that almost no-one in the world can even understand and yet I don't see anyone complaining about it's use. The story of LOTR and related works is supposed to be a pre-history, archaic speech provides a sense of that and in my opinion (and apparently TOLKIEN's) helps draw an audience into the story being told. Deliberate and obvious derivations from this detracts from the impact of the story, in my view. Cheers.
-
TT is everything we expect it to be. It fills me with a deep sense of contented anticipation. But I have a question! How much money did the actors make for these films?? I know Jackson got a LOT! Were the actors shafted, do any get any points? Anybody knows please?
-
As for the claims that Tolkien was some sort of a racist, consider this point:
The developing friendship between Gimli and Legolas (of different races) In my view, this is much more important tha one "unfortunate" line about the men of the south. The relationship between Gimli and Legolas doesn't come that well through in the movie though....allthough a bit more of it in the extended version. -
The movies can never EVER capture a book completely EVER! FOTR was 400 pages of walking. You think people are going to wanna sit down and see 400 pages worth of walking. The deal with the books is that they include narrations that let us in on all of the basic knowledge, since reading a book is a mental experience, the things we learn are mental chunks of info. Movies, on the other hand are different. Right off the bat a screenplay strips the mental involvement with the universal movie rule of "Write What You Will See, And Hear And Nothing Else". Right at that moment, the transferer has to decide weather to go the easy way (Add a Cheezy Voice Over) or take it the long painful, and extremely difficult way (Try to cram all visuals in, strip all info out, and still be accurate). FOTR is a laid back book, as it is the slower one in the seires. Tolkien had to keep the journey at the believable pace, that makes one sense the departure from home, but he also had to make this thing an adventure and not a walk in the park. Thus side-quests were written in. To the transferer this stuff could never be made into a movie. Movies tend to eat shit for having side-plots that block the real story (People get confused) so in order to keep the pace going, a major botch job had to be done. As far as accuracy goes, things are naturally re-arranged. We may not get all of the facts but the movie has many open features that would make one debate if it is actually following the book. I mean, do we REALLY know just what happened. Maybe the four furry whippersnappers, Frodo, Merry, Pippin, and Sam really did see all of their adventures, but we weren't there to witness them. It's all debatable. Accuraccy in terms of these books is too underrated. The Movie manages to pull off most of the things read from the books. But hell, not everything can be pulled out form the pages of the Lord Of The Rings. People who have never read the books love this movie. As for the nit-pickers who have read these books for millions of times and actually DON'T see 400 pages of walking as a problem should just realize that they already know what's happened so why the hell do they need to see it so desperately? These movies are GOOD! What good would whining and bitching do? Hell if people feel so strongly about the editing done on this, then they should try adapting the seires into a screenplay. I ain't a pretty task.
-
I have to see this movie!
-
Hello Harry! Read your post. Did you have a chance to link the news section at the official LOTR site yet? Check out the Time magazine article. There are many posts here at AICN.
-
As I previously stated, I don't imagine ANYONE could directly translate TOLKIEN's work and keep it within a reasonable length, suitable for theatrical (ie: movie) release. However, I do (FIRMLY) believe it's possible to incorporate direct passages of dialogue from the book (and said by the same Characters!!!) and yet still maintain an interesting and exciting movie. Obviously LOTR: FOTR did this, howver it also replaced important dialogue from the books with re-written dialogue, ie: "he needs Elvish medicine." Not once in the books as far as I can recall, does ANYONE refer to 'medicine.' Medicine seems to be a (relatively) modern term that is completely out of place in a 'pre-history' story. TOLKIEN as most fans would know, despised 'modern' technology. Take Ted Sandyman's mill for instance. The use of a modern term, particularly when combined with the liberal use of 'real' (ie: as originally written) dialogue creates a sense (IMHO) of uneveness, ie: a paticular part that 'stands out' because it doesn't quite fit with the rest of the dialogue. This to me, makes the story (somewhat) disjointed and lessens the impact of the story being told. ( The movie's actual purpose...) Cheers.
-
I absolutely agree with Conan's last. This is an adaptation, so you definately wouldn't use all the dialog... But the dialog that is used, why keep it faithful to the book. You hit upon it yourself, the dialog from the book is a translation. A "common tongue" if you will. So why not make use of it. Again, no one knew the world or the language like Tolkien. And I refuse to believe anything Tolkien wrote, as far as dialog was any sillier than "Give us the halfling, she-elf" or "You shall be the Fellowship of the Ring!" or "Let's go kill some orc." Come on! Do you think the many adaptations of Shakespeare's work silly? Chaucer? Malory? Granted some of the films ended up being silly, but that was because of the direction and production, not because the use of the original dialog. I do not at all find any of Tolkien's writing "stodgy" and "unweildy" as I think it was you said. It might not be everyone's bag, but I think the professor was and probably always will be a very "under-rated" writer because of the genre he chose to write in and because of the jealousy of his many peers turned critics. Tolkien's writing is very beautiful and very moving. Tolkien was a key influence in my life as a literature professor and as a writer. PS- The different writing style and different feel to the first half of Fellowship and the rest of the story was not a fault in the professor's style nor something that he might have overlooked. Between working on Rings and working on his works of the Silmarils, it took him 15 years to produce the Lord of the Rings. He started it because his publishers wanted a followup to The Hobbit. So, basically, It started as a sequel to The Hobbit. As he worked on Rings and the stories of the Silmarils, Rings became an entity on its own. By the time Rings was finished, and the professor had gone back to amend The Hobbit to work in as a lead in to Rings, it would have taken him another 15 years to go back and completely re-write the entire beginning to Fellowship. If you know anything about Tolkien, you know he couldn't have gone back and just re-written that one part and left it be. If he re-wrote the first book, chances are he'd have gone back and re-wrote the entire story. I prefer to look at the beginning of Fellowship and the adventures of Frodo in around the Shire, up until the point where they get to Bree as a transition from going From fairy tale to the harsh, dark tales of an apocalyptic struggle. The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings are really nothing alike, yet the professor had to figure a way to make them one complete story. Quite a task if you think about it.
-
Isn't the reason that we are all here, to discuss this and other movies? If you're going to state that us, 'nitpickers' have no place stating our opinion's on these movies, then why do sites like this exist? It was my understanding that these talkbacks are designed to allow such discussion. Now I know our discussions probably aren't going to force New Line Cinema to re-write and re-shoot the movie to make it more in accordance with our particular tastes, but maybe, just maybe enough Fanboy sentiments may sway the decision making on upcoming movies somewhat. P.S. Thanks for the backup, Halloween. Cheers.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 439 total posts 159 posts
- WTF HOLLYWOOD: SOLARBABIES -- 144 total posts 142 posts
- Herc’s Seen Tonight’s Return Of THE WALKING DEAD!! Discuss Also DOWNTON ABBEY, FEAR FACTOR, PAN AM, ONCE, SIMPSONS, DYNAMITE, LUCK, SHAMELESS, BAIT CAR, THE GRAMMYS And More!! Sunday Is Sweeps Day 11!! -- 155 total posts 140 posts
- Avid Comic Reader Hercules Does Battle With Tedium During Kevin Smith’s COMIC BOOK MEN! -- 55 total posts 45 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 196 total posts 45 posts
- I am The Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day! No, I’m the Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day! -- 35 total posts 35 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 60 total posts 34 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 127 total posts 32 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 513 total posts 29 posts
- The Sensorties Revisit The Friday Docback (And Still Smell)!! DOCTOR WHO Story #7 Again, The Coming Of Season/Series 7, And More!! -- 118 total posts 27 posts