Ain't It Cool News (www.aintitcool.com)
Movie News

So Many RETURN OF THE KING Reviews That Your Browser Will Collapse Under The Weight!!

Hi, everyone. "Moriarty" here with some Rumblings From The Lab...

I’m going to do this fast, or I’ll never finish posting them, and I’ll never get to finish typing my own review into the computer.

...and it was pretty rip-roaring kick ass good! with one big flaw I'll get too...

I saw in at 11am in Columbus Ohio at the Marcus Crosswoods Cinema. I won tickets form radio station QFM96.

First off I have to say I really enjoyed it. I actually would give it a 8/10.

As usual I was sea-sick with the overly-sweeping epic pans, followed by extreme ring closeups, and then again with another heaping helping of overly dramatic sweeping shots or overly dramatic slow motion shots. Which are all back in there glory....honestly do we really need to see Frodo wake up and greet everyone in his sick bed IN SLOW MOTION! ...but all in all I loved it and have grown accustomed to PJ's overuses of those 3 things. Dare I say I became a fan, I even read the book this year, and watched the Extended DVD's this past weekend (FOTR) and last night (TTT) before going to see ROTK.

The battle scenes were fantastic, unlike anything before, they make Helm's Deep look like a grade school playground fight. These battle scenes will be talked about for a looooong time, and the end of the Clone Wars is still 2 years away and, even being a huge SW fan, Lucas won't top ROTK's battles.

BUT of course I have some complaints....the one thing I am really pissed about is Christopher Lee, or lack of....because HE'S NOT IN IT! Saruman has a big part in the book's end and the major foil in the first 2 but his fate is dismissed in one sentence towards the beginning. There were things that could have been left out (2 scenes in the beginning of Merry and Pippin drinkin' singin' and smokin' & the origin of Gollum tacked on the beginning seemed not needed and forced, we know he had the ring he was turned bad yadda yadda yadda), and the ending seemed too long, I thought it was going to end a few times, then ANOTHER scene followed, but the one I was waiting for never did...>shakes head< no Saruman...if I would not have read the book it wouldn't bother me as much, but knowing a major character's fate was left to "he's powerless, he can sit in a tower" cheeses me off bigtime. We see Sam get married for crying out loud, he sees Frodo off to the Gray Havens, we see Sam return home to his Family but the major intsrument of the first 2 movies was not even shown, we see a too long version of Gollums unneccesary origin, we see Sauron loose his fingers AGAIN! but there is no Sharkey, no Scourging of the Shire, no Wormtoungue slicing Saruman's throat then getting shot down by the Hobbit's taking back the Shire as their own, there is no damage to the Shire. There is no completion to the story IMHO. In FOTR we caught a glimpse of the Scourging, it makes it seem as if the fact the hobbits went on the Quest to save Middle Earth had no bearing on the Shire. Teh return and everythin is as it was, So why go? What's the Point! Well, the first 2 movies were way better in 4 disk extended version DVD, so will this one....it was still a fun movie and I highly recommend it.

-D

I’ll be honest... most of these are raves.

Hola,

It's becoming par for the couse, but here's yet another Return of the King review. It's kinda hard to put into proper context what sort of an impact a film like this has on a person. Myself, over the past few years I've yearned for December. Prayed for it to come early. Checked web-sites on a daily basis for any new information, new press shots, new trailer descriptions. Anything to get me overwhelmingly excited and quench my seemily unquenchable thirst.

Then, the day finally comes. When it's all over. Most would laugh or roll their eyes at someone being this excited over a simple movie. However, when you look at the reaction this trilogy is getting, the line between film and quasi-spiritual experience is blurred. To me, it's like losing a loved one. I'll always be able to revisit the memories I have of those people, but never will I see them again, see them do the things that made me fall in love with them in the first place. As the Lord of the Rings trilogy concludes, I know next December will just be another month on the calender. And that's overwhelmingly sad...because the movie's were THAT good.

Return of the King is everything you expect it to be and more. When you actually think about what was accomplished, just sit down and think about it, it really does seem impossible. Yet, the movie raises the bar once again. When Fellowship came out, many people theorized that perhaps this was a new generation's Star Wars. Well, I think any doubts of this can be laid to rest. No longer is it a question of IF this movie franchise will be a classic, but merely if everyone will recognize it as the classic it is. After watching Return of the King, in fact, after watching to whole trilogy, there's an amazing thing that happens. Looking forward to a mere 2 hour film seems like vanity. How could they EVER come close to reaching the amount of brilliance that is packed into this 9 hour trilogy. Other movies, just, don't seem as important.

This isn't really a review, but more a love letter. A love letter to a friend that I'm now parting ways with. Everyone will react differently to these movies, but I never remember geniunely feeling BAD for those that don't love a movie. Right now I do. I hope that everyone who sees this film falls punch-drunk in love with it. I hope that it effects them the say way it effected me. I hope that they cherish their last few days before that friend leaves forever.

Razzberry Jamm

Some people have been making noises like the only reason people flipped out for stuff at BNAT this year was because of the filmmakers being in attendance. Nonsense. Not one of the reviewers in this entire article were at BNAT. These are just people who saw it and felt compelled to write in about it.

"For Frodo"

Yesterday I was privileged to be invited to a press screening of the final installment of "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy. I must admit that I have many fond childhood memories of reading the novels that J.R.R. Tolkien so eloquently penned. I must admit that I am a fan, and I must insist on being totally truthful. I never enjoyed Harry Potter, the first Matrix movie is amazing. The Cheesy appeal for the old Star Wars are okay. I will not own the DVD or videos. For me I prefer drama and comedy.

In 1998 I learned there would be a motion pictures based upon the novels of J.R.R. Tolkien, I was thrilled. I had no knowledge of Peter Jackson or his creative team. Five years later I am still feeling thrilled. I have been immersed in Middle Earth. If ever in my life up to this point I needed the escapism of LOTR it was the last three years. I hated the statement that these movies needed to be judged as a whole, I feel that each individual film stands by its own merits. These films are not perfect but I accept the flaws as hey I never was given 300 million dollars and told to adapt a story that is second only to the Bible. So I accept occasional cgi flaws, I accept the changes and cuts to the story and, I buy the EE DVDs.

The Return of the King is a moving cinematic experience that for me will stand as a comparison for all epics. I was not prepared for what I was going to experience. My expectations were through the roof and I am still blown away. I care of Frodo, I did not want Middle Earth to fall from the screen and I did not want to go home. This is a Hobbit centric movie. This is about the 4 little ones and how they change the world of Middle Earth. This is about Pippin learning accountability, this is about Merry testing his courage, it is Samwise the Brave, and it is about a fallen hero named Frodo. I loved everything about this movie. The battle for Gondor will never be matched on screen again. I still wanna know where they trained that big spider and, I want to buy some property by the Grey Havens. There was one scene that I can’t forget, spoilers...The Hobbits are back in the Green Dragon, drinking ale, and watching the other patrons dance and sing. There are some unusual and uncomfortable glances to each other and then a hesitant toast. It is a scene of this is what they fought for and these ignorant hobbits have no idea. It was a scene of pain and experiences wanting to be forgotten. Each performer gives their all and that is all we ask. Gollum is evil, violent and amazing. Weta will add a third golden guy to their collection, and PJ will see gold. I don't care about Oscars, I don't care about cash. I care about Middle Earth. I will see this movie again in the theaters at least twice in the theaters and snug up with the novels that will always hold a place in my heart.

Thank you,

Jonasplaysguitar

One of the great pleasures of this past weekend was being able to thank Peter Jackson face-to-face for making these films and refusing to compromise them. I’ve never looked into eyes more tired than his, but he also looked deeply satisfied with what he’s created. And he should be. I mean, listen to these raves...

If you're more interested in the review, skip the first three paragraphs--though I must say that the story of how I snuck in is a rip-roarin' good yarn if I do say so myself.

Every word of the following is true, I promise:

Don't EVER say lying through your teeth never got you anything. BOY did it ever get me to a nice place. Umbeknownst to the general public, this morning (Monday the 8th) was the official screening day for Lord of the Rings: Return of the King for American critics. This part was actually well known to me, but thanks to my trusty partner in crime Lucas I managed to figure out the exact location and time of the screening for the Arkansas Press. 10am, at the Rave Theater, here in Little Rock, Arkansas. A few clever e-mails, and Lucas managed to get us on 'The List' as "Lucas from National Public Rado" (technically true) and "1 Guest" (that there'd be me). I e-mailed my teachers a BS excuse (plausible, with alibi) for missing class along with a promise to come visit them in their offices later in the day, and at 9:15 I was at the theater waiting in the parking lot for Lucas. At 9:30 I was still waiting. At 9:45 I was getting antsy. At 9:50, I grew a pair, decided Lucas wasn't going to show, and executed a daring, James Bond-esque infiltration to the hottest and least known ticket in town.

Noticing a critic who's badge read Arkansas Democrat Gazette, I grabbed my work badge (which had my name and a real radio station that I work at), pinned it to my shirt, and followed about 12 steps or so behind her. The theater was locked, but her badge got her in, and when she saw me, I was close enough to her that she held the door for me. I'm in. So far, so good. I nonchalantly walked over to the critics' reception table and got some coffee (I hate coffee, but this is a 3 hour movie, and I only got about 4 hours of sleep) and a doughnut. I glanced around and saw the woman who let me in headed down to a theater that had, simply, "Private Screening" posted over the entrance. I took a sip of my coffee, grimaced, and saw in a younger critic's (Free Press) hand a smallish, color ticket with the poster art on one side, and a LOT of words on the other. For a second I panicked. I didn't have one of those. Did I need one to get in? I looked around frantically, paced the lobby a bit, and finally noticed a tiny pile of four or five of them near the coffee. I swiped one. I decided then that if anyone were to ask, I was Lucas with NPR, but forgot to take off my badge. The "Private Screening" theater by now had a long line of press folk in front of it, and I wondered why until I got close. When I got there, there was an intimidating man with a black folder wearing a black suit and a New Line Cinema badge. Near him was a cute blonde overseeing all of this--she also was from New Line. And at the theater's recessed entrance were three men: the theater owner, the other two in security guard uniforms. The first was waving a metal detector baton, the other was simply there to hold stuff if need be. These guys were leaving nothing to chance.

I filed in at the end of the line, but then noticed that it was going very slowly as the metal checks were VERY thorough. Deciding I had plenty of time (and I did), I ducked off to the bathroom for a last minute draining (for the record, this movie is 3 hours and 20 minutes, THEN the credits). I was washing my hands when in the mirror I noticed my badge. I stuffed it in my pocket, preferring to say I simply forgot it and call myself Lucas. I walked back out, and took my place at the tail of the (still) long line. I played it cool and calm. I struck up a conversation with some of the critics there about the upcoming Tim Burton flick "Big Fish" and found out that the press screening for THAT is Wednesday (movie isn't due out till sometime in January, I believe). Then the conversation turned to the Extended Editions of Lord of the Rings and Tracy, the New Line supervisor girl, joined the conversation. As best as I could tell from speaking with her, she was a publicist who frequented the set. I managed to steer her away from the conversation group and talk to her one-on-one and tried my best to keep it moving. She was animated, intelligent, and a Tolkien fan, so this was not hard. And since she was in charge, none of the other folks dared tried to interrupt our conversation. I kept the conversation moving quickly, never letting up. This never gave her the chance to ask who I was. Meanwhile the line got shorter and shorter until I was having to pull my wallet and keys out of my pocket, while metal-detecting radiation rotted my ability to reproduce. Then I simply walked into the theater, and took a good seat. I won.

This review is virtually spoiler-free.

So is it any good? Is the conclusion that we Tolkien fans have been waiting so many long years for worth the blood, sweat, time, and tears it took to manufacter? Definitely! I should qualify this by saying that I loved Fellowship of the Ring dearly, but Two Towers left me more than a bit miffed at the changes. While Return of the King has changes (only 2 really notable ones--neither at all anything worth seriously whining about) to the text, what its only true downfall is are the exclusions. There are several moments in the film where you feel that there used to be a scene there. Not just because, if you know the story, you know what's supposed to happen where, but more like edits that needed just a few days more time to make perfect. This will keep the film from winning best picture (it will get nominated), though I'm fairly confident in saying that the film will get Jackson his much deserved Best Director Oscar. This will also make the Extended Edition easily the best of the three. You really do get a ton of story even if so much is clipped out. As expected, the Battle of the Pelennor Fields is utterly brutal and gruesome and sad and heroic and amazing--much more so than the Battle of Helm's Deep. Each battle really has their own place being a great action sequence, however. Helm's Deep had a feeling in it all like they would eventually win and it was fun watching our heroes kick hard and take names. Pelennor has a feeling of utter despair.

The special effects guys are again to be commended on such magnificent work. Minas Tirith looks absolutely amazing, Gollum actually looks slightly more believable (if that's possible) than he did in Towers, and the Nazgul (particularly the Witch-King of Angmar) are nothing short of awesome. The talent of the folks down at WETA cannot be overstated. They, over three films, have managed to make every single frame of the film feel like Middle-Earth instead of being simply somewhere they filmed at. Here we see spectacular locations from the Black Gates, to Cirith Ungol, to the Court of the White Tree and each feel completely authentic. The effects in the film are remarkably consistent with the only disbelief really coming from looking at the sheer volume of things on screen and knowing it is simply impossible for what you're seeing to really be there. One knock against one effect, however, is that the army that Aragorn brings to the table is a shade of green that belongs more in a Mountain Dew commercial than in an epic masterpiece--minor gripe.

The acting, as always, is spot on with special note again to Sir Ian McKellen for truly being the Gandalf we all know from the books. Fans of the books and films alike will be glad to know that the White Wizard really gets into the thick of battle in this one. He also looks great doing it. Rhys-Davies and Orlando Bloom as Gilmli and Legolas continue to truly immerse themselves in their characters as well. Special note, though, has to go out to John Noble for bringing Denethor to bitter and spiteful life, and again to Bernard Hill for making Theoden the kind of king anyone would follow. Aragorn finally gets to show off some of his heretige, and Viggo Mortensen acts it marvelously. Also coming into their own are Billy Boyd and Dominic Monaghan. Merry and Pippin truly get their chance to shine in this film (as in the book), and show true courage and spirit. And then there's Elijah Wood's Frodo, Sean Astin's Samwise, and Andy Serkis' Smeagol. Andy actually has the oppurtunity to be himself without the effects as just Smeagol for the first ten minutes or so of the film, showing his downfall and enslavement to the Ring's power, and just like before, his Gollum is cruel in all the right ways. Elijah Wood seems, as usual, to have been born for this role. As Frodo quests the long dark of Torech Ungol and across the Plains of Gorgoroth in Mordor, you really do sense that he's just exhausted--you truly feel that his body will give away at any moment. For the short time he is without his shirt in one scene, check out the scars around his neck where the ring has been hanging. Frodo is a truly powerful role and Elijah fits the bill perfectly. I have mixed, though honest, feelings in saying that I believe that this will be the role he will always be remembered for.

And then there's Sean Astin as Samwise Gamgee. If anyone in this movie is going to get nominated for anything, it will be him. No question about it. What you see him go through is truly painful and heartwrenching, and Astin keeps every line in check and every emotion exact. His role is so shockingly powerful that it is hard to describe. Those that have read the book will be glad to know that (my personal favorite chapter) the Choices of Samwise is just as powerful a moment in the movie as it was in the book. I could frankly go on and on about his performance, but really it is simply utterly perfect.

As to my own reaction to the film, I thought the first hour was just a touch weak (Towers' theatrical cut has the same problem for me), but once it clicks, it clicks hard and has an emotional resonance that is simply undeniable. The film has the feeling to me of being just a tiny bit inferior to Fellowship's theatrical cut, and far better than Towers'. I knew how the story went before I walked in, so I made sure to bring quite a few tissues. I'm not afraid to admit that as a stoic male in an age where showing one's emotions is almost cardinal sin, I cried. I cried hard. I cried out of joy, I cried out of sadness, I cried for every reason worth crying for, and I honestly can't think of a better story to have let loose this way for. Also, what you've probably read by now is completely true, the movie ends several times, but each is pure magic.

Looking back, it really is hard to believe the story is over now. Just like reading the book, when it was over I really didn't want it to end. I wanted something, anything, another chapter, another fifteen minutes to spend with these characters and in this world. But "The End" does finally appear, and the last chapter in the book does come to a close. And just like the book, the movie ends appropriately though not quite how you want it to. You really do feel that the story is finished, and when it is all over you can wipe away the tears and think back fondly on a story told that was certainly worth telling.

Like so many others, I truly cannot wait to see it again.

Coda: Just before the film began, Tracy (the New Line chick) asked us to talk to her after the film and give her some general criticism, as well as anything in particular that we felt should be worked on for the Extended Edition. I gave her a mouthful, which she wrote down greedily. She then asked for my name and who I was with. For a split-second, I almost said Lucas with NPR. Then a smile came across my face. "My name is [real name] and I'm with [people I actually work for]," I said. She got a cross look on her face and replied: "I didn't think we gave any tickets to the [people I work for]." I simply smiled and shruged. She shrugged back, shook my hand, and said that she'd make sure that the studio got the feedback. I walked off, went to my car, drove to school, sat down next to my friend Jacob in the computer lab up in Stabler hall. "Well, I'm back."

-We'll just call me "Calta Lanta"

Here’s another for you:

Hi Harry:

First-time reviewer and the only reason I feel compelled to write is because I have to share how amazing and mind-blowing RETURN OF THE KING was. T-Gun did a great job summing the film up so I won't get into too much detail, but I have to assure every LOTR fan or even semi-fan that this movie will certainly live up to your expectations and more. It is a landmark film and one that exceeds the grandeur and emotion of the also-brilliant first two films. For once, a trilogy improves with each movie, ending in a climax that is so thrilling, so well-written and moving, that you feel as if you were a part of something great, even though you're simply an observer.

SPOILER ALERTS

I attended a Variety-sponsored screening over the weekend, which meant putting up with Peter Bart's blather. He moderated a brief discussion before the movie started with Bob Shaye (head of New Line) and the great Peter Jackson who was a surprise guest. Jackson got an enthusiastic standing ovation from a mostly industry-filled (RE: Jaded) crowd when Bart announced him. He wore his traditional shorts, sneakers, a red and blue striped shirt, and a tuxedo jacket. A very amusing outfit, to say the least. Bob Shaye was annoying. He kept plugging his crappy New Line movies when everyone just wanted to hear Jackson talk. The only thing he really mentioned was that the end scene where Frodo awakens after the journey and Sam comes in the doorway, giving him a majestic smile, was that the scene was shot separately between the two actors but edited seamlessly so that no one knew the better. He then talked about his next project KING KONG and why he chose it. He said the original made him want to make movies and he first saw it when he was 8 years old. He also said he planned to shoot it in New Zealand and that he would focus on the humanity of King Kong rather than the effects, etc. Now for the movie.

In my honest opinion, the movie was the greatest, grandest spectacle of movie-making magic that I've ever seen. I was too young to have been around for the original STAR WARS craze and can say that LOTR is certainly the STAR WARS of this generation, if not greater. I was enthralled from the first opening sequence where Andy Serkis brilliantly portrays how Smeagol transformed into Gollum. This was a very stark, incredible sequence, heartbreaking and frightening at the same time. To echo T-Gun, please Academy, nominate this man.

The highlights are obviously the battle scenes, but for the first time, we get to see the hobbits finally come into their own, esp. Merry and Pippin who had previously just been comic relief (and in my opinion, I was bored with their Tree Beard scenes in TT). Separating the characters was infinitely better for both of them. We get to see Merry gather his courage and go into battle (loved his relationship with Eowyn) and we get to see Pippin bond with Gandalf (who is AMAZING) and save Faramir's life. The scene where Pippin sings for Faramir's dad while showing Faramir and his men ride into their doom was emotional and touching. That Billy Boyd can sing, by the way! Another beautiful moment is when Aragorn faces the overwhelming number of Orcs, and in slow-motion, turns to his friends and says "For Frodo" before rushing to meet the Orcs. Really awesome scene. Gimli is hilarious and I only wish I got to see more of him and Legolas. Another great scene is when Eowyn kills the Witch Hunter (with Merry's help). Her line had the audience hysterically applauding (I should also add that they applauded after nearly every battle sequence and when Gandalf kicks Faramir's dad's ass).

Sean Astin also deserves enormous praise for making Sam such a well-rounded character (both figuratively and literally). Sam saves Frodo's live on more than one occassion, and Astin's portrayal emphasizes how one person will never have to carry a burden alone if they have friends. I've never been an adult Sean Astin fan; I've always found him to be ingratiating and whiny in interviews, but he impressed me even more than the always-impressive Ian McKellan and Viggo.

Now people will most likely complain that there were at least 6 endings, and this is true. But I honestly wanted it to keep going. I had no problems with the multiple endings and if you think about it, how could Jackson want the journey to end? It must have been difficult for him and so he kept it all in and while it is a little extended (shades of A.I. but much better), you're still left emotionally wrung. The movie also slows considerably every time Arwen and her storyline is mentioned. Even though Liv Tyler and Hugo Weaver are excellent, its hard to get emotionally involved in her storyline. I wanted to see more of Faramir and missed seeing him actually hook up with Eowyn (though you do see them together at the end -- signaling a new alliance between Rohan and Gondor). More Eowyn and Faramir and less Arwen and the elves would have been nice.

To sum it up, I was truly moved by this movie, and the entire journey. I felt like I was part of something so special, so monumental that I wonder if I'll ever see another feat like this for another 20 years. Peter Jackson and his entire cast and crew deserve so much more than just Academy Awards or even record-breaking box office. They should be enormously proud. I was crying on several occassions (yes, I'm a wuss) but like Gandalf says, not all tears are evil. This trilogy overwhelmed me. I can't wait for the DVD for this one.

If you happen to use this review, just call me O-Ren.

Thanks Harry.

A couple of people weighed in from Palm Springs...

Hi Harry-

I was lucky enough to attend the Palm Springs screening of Return of the King with Ian McKellan on friday. I saw Fellowship hours after it was released, I saw Towers right as it was released at midnight, and now I've seen King before it was released.

I've lived off of AICN reviews in the past so it's my turn to give back.

With that...

After mulling this over a lot in my mind, I'll start by answering some basic questions.

Yes, it is on-par with Fellowship and Towers.

No, it is not perfection incarnate.

Yes, it is the film that will probably most improve in the extended edition.

No, it is not obviously better than Fellowship and Towers. It may in fact be better, but it will take me repeated viewings to figure this out, andFellowship and Towers have an edge in that I never watch the theatrical versions of either anymore. Note that there's no way in hell King is worse than either.

OK, with those out of the way, I'll move to a more thematic observation:

The movie feels rushed.

One can look at this in different ways. To say that a 3 hour and 20 minute movie feels rushed is a monumental complement to the filmmakers; the film feels like it goes by in two hours which is rather unbelievable.

Still, rushed means rushed. Rushed means that there are times when emotional energy isn't allowed to build to where it should be. Rushed means that almost everything that can be excised - and some things that can't - are.

I'll start with the good side of rushed.

Part of the reason why the movie goes by so quickly is that there is so much stuff that is just un-fucking-believably amazing. Shelob. Denethor sending Faramir out on a suicide mission to Osgiliath with Pippin singing in the background. The paths of the dead. The lighting of the beacons from Gondor to Rohan. Shelob. Gollum. The paths of the Dead. Eowyn and the witch king. Shelob. Gandalf taking over the defense of Minas Tirith and getting some fighting action in himself. The paths of the dead. Tributes to Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi. Shelob. "It was the bravest thing he ever did." The paths of the dead. A CGI finale that tops the Ents destroying Isengard at the end of towers. Shelob.

Note: When you go see the movie, make sure you chant "Grond" along with the film at the appropriate time. I tired doing this but no one else in the theater was really picking up on it.

There's so much I left out of that list it's not even funny. If you liked the part in towers where Theoden recites the "Where is the horse and the rider?" poem, there's another poem that gets into this movie that you'll also love. Feel free to guess what it is.

There are probably as many "payoff shots" in this movie as there are in the first two combined. These are shots that are as gorgeous as Boromir on his knees from the side in the shadow of the statue at the end of Fellowship, as gorgeous as the Rohirrim led by Eomer and Gandalf charging into the Uruk-Hai at the end of Towers. You will know them when you see them. They are everywhere.

If you haven't read the book, parts of this movie are going to freak the shit out of you, especially if you care about the characters. Thank the Jackson they moved Shelob to this movie.

God I want to see it again. Now.

Now for the bad.

Some people complained about how Two Towers seemed to drag because Jackson spent so much time on irrelevant scenes like the women and children in the caves seeing their husbands and sons go off to defend the keep. Irrelevant scenes like Aragorn talking to the child - "There is always hope."

These scenes are not - not, not, not, not, not - irrelevant. This is not multiple negatives, this is emphasis. These are the scenes that make us care about the outcome of battles. There are parts of this movie that sometimes make you feel like you need to inject the emotional energy yourself if you want to get anything out of it. They mostly come within the first half hour. For me the first half hour of the movie really felt like the filmmakers were going through the motions. I understand it's incredibly difficult to introduce the movie to everyone and get everyone up to speed. Still, be reassured - about a half hour in, when Gollum, Frodo, and especially Sam reach a "turning" point, the movie jacks up the emotion and becomes a lot better. It's just still not as good as towers.

I hated the Smeagol/Deagol flashback.

OK, now let me give you an example about what I mean about emotional energy.

There's a scene where Gandalf has to ride out from Minas Tirith in order to save Faramir from the Nazgul. In the book, you have Gandalf arrive just when things look beyond hope. You have men on the walls shouting for their captain whom they love. You have Pippin screeching at the top of his lungs for someone to please save Faramir.

In the movie, Gandalf is already running before we even realize there is danger, there are no men calling from the walls.

Peter Jackson is a canny enough filmmaker to film all this stuff - he proved it by including so much of it in the Two Towers. But when you have a lot of movie to get through, it gets cut, and it feels rushed. Although the scene I described is probably the worst example of emotion falling flat, it is not unique. It kinda permeates the movie.

Now let me talk about the cuts.

There are a lot of them. And they hurt. There are so many cuts that it makes me wonder if it is even possible to include _every important scene_ in the Extended Edition. It makes me worried that, as awesome as the Extended Edition is going to be, it won't include everything thats necessary unless it's four hours or longer. We need all those little scenes of men on the walls crying for Faramir. We sure as hell need the Mouth of Sauron. No question about that. We need the confrontation between Gandalf and the Witch King. I think even the little part in the trailer where the King lands on Minas Tirith in front of Gandalf was cut from the movie. I wasn't too hurt by no Voice of Saruman. If I had to choose between having the Voice of Saruman back and having all those little emotion-building scenes from Towers, I would probably choose the latter. Of course I haven't seen the Saruman scene. If I had to make the same choice between Emotion and Mouth of Sauron, that would be a lot tougher, considering the Mouth of Sauron is probably my favorite scene in every book combined.

Not enough Eomer.

Even though there's no confrontation between Gandalf and the Witch King, there are horns of Rohan. And they rock. Elrond rocks, for the first time. Everything about Frodo & Sam rocks. Except...

The journey up the mountain feels rushed. Maybe it had to happen this way because they want the journey to correspond with the battle before the Black Gate, which can't last for very long, but I think maybe this was a bad decision.

The Frodo/Sam/Gollum parts are incredible.

I'm lapsing back into serial complementing of this movie.

Pay no attention to the fact that 2/3 of this review is negative and 1/3 is positive. I loved this movie. I will probably see it more times in theaters than either Fellowship or Towers. I have a feeling the pacing means that 3:20 in a theater will never feel as long as the 3 hrs of either of those two movies.

Did I mention I want to see it again?

In a way, what all of this means is that Lord of the Rings is not over yet. The extended edition is set to have the most impact on this movie of any of them (yes, more than TTT). This means I still have something more to look forward too.

Oh, one beef - The music in this film is the most poorly arranged to match the action of any of the films. Certain scenes are lacking in music entirely and lose a huge amount of emotional energy for it.

OK, I know what it's like to read an early review, so I'm going to conclude with just a little bit more detail about how awesome certain things are.

If you thought Gandalf got shortchanged in Towers, he hugely makes up for it and then some in this movie. Awesome scenes. Awesome character. Awesome ass-kicking. One particularly gruesome scene involving the Siege of Minas Tirith comes straight out of the book. It's gutsy and awesome. Gimli's jokes are not only funny but more appropriate than they were in Towers – no "cross-country" references or some of that other crap. There is a huge difference between 10,000 Uruk Hai at Helms Deep and 200,000 fighters at Pelennor Fields. Each of the 6 endings is awesome and totally necessary.

"It was the bravest thing he ever did."

The book places an emphasis on characters (Bilbo) giving up the ring voluntarily. The movies have continued this in an awesome fashion, extending it to Aragorn in fellowship, and now Sam in a terrific scene. The Eagles are superb. If you have any concerns about the Sammauth Naur, rest assured. It's perfectly done. The movie makes a huge point to tell things from the Hobbits perspectives, and succeeds. I repeat - so many gorgeous camera angles and scenes. Every scene with Theoden is terrific.

This will be the longest I have ever gone between seeing a Lord of the Rings movie the first and second times. I know this isn't something you guys can exactly sympathize with, but believe me, it's going to be hard.

This movie rocks.

Snapper

And this one...

Harry,

Last night was a very special night for me, as I was able to attend the very first public screening of Return of the King in Palm Springs. Sir Ian McKellen was there to receive an award from KCET public television, and he also was interviewed before the film. He was a very gracious host, and you can see his love for his fans in every moment he spoke of being Gandalf or Magneto. In one very funny moment, a metal brace from his chair broke off while he was being interviewed, and he held it up with one hand, and put his other hand out and exclaimed “I told you I was Magneto”! He finished the interview by reciting Shakespeare for us for a good five minutes. A truly magical night for those of us in awe of this amazing actor.

Before I review the film, let me give you a little background information on where I stand with The Lord of the Rings. First, I have never read the books, only The Hobbit. I didn’t read any spoilers, so I went in only guessing what would happen. Secondly, I absolutely love the first two movies. I consider them among the greatest films I have ever seen. However, I love The Fellowship of the Ring more than The Two Towers. That’s not to say The Two Towers has many faults. I just loved The Fellowship more – being introduced to the whole story of the Ring, the amazing prologue, etc. The Two Towers is fantastic, and the extended edition is truly an amazing film, almost as good as The Fellowship of the Ring.

So, just like everyone else who loves these movies, my anticipation for Return of the King was off the charts. When I heard Peter Jackson say it was his favorite of the three, Elijah Wood say it was better than the first two combined, etc., I was expecting a whole lot. Harry, I was humbled by Return of the King, and completely blown away, in awe of the amazing accomplishment of Peter Jackson and all involved in bringing this fantastic trilogy to life. I don’t even consider this “best movie of the year”, it extends far beyond that. This is truly the cinematic experience of my lifetime, one that I cannot imagine ever being topped. And I’ve seen lots and lots of movies. This movie (combined with the other two) is going to inspire kids to become directors, actors, composers, cinematographers.. the same way that Star Wars and 2001 inspired some of the great talent working today. It is a truly magical film. Now, on to the review... beware of spoilers!!!!

After the amazing prologue of The Fellowship of the Ring, and Gandalf battling the Balrog in The Two Towers, it is obvious that Peter Jackson knows how to open a movie, and Return of the King is not the exception. Return of the King opens with two hobbits fishing in a boat, Smeagol and a fellow hobbit. The fellow hobbit catches a fish so large that it pulls him in, to the river’s floor. There he see’s the ring, and takes it. When he surfaces, Smeagol is there, and he tries to take the ring. The two fight, and Smeagol ends up murdering the hobbit and stealing the ring. We see him as he slowly transforms into the creature Gollum. Truly an amazing opening, one that casts an even more ominous shadow over Return of the King, as we see that Gollum is actually very capable of murdering anyone who would stand in his way to reclaim the ring.

Return of the King is a very dark movie, with much less humor and lightheartedness than the first two films. In this movie, everyone suffers. The characters we care for are all put through many tortures. Above all, Sam and poor Frodo are put through the ultimate struggle. Their relationship is tested as Gollum tries to convince Frodo that Sam is out to take the ring for himself. When Frodo tells Sam to go home, it broke my heart.

This is Sean Astin’s movie. He is the heart and soul. No matter what Frodo goes through, Sam is there to help. Whether he’s protecting Frodo from Gollum, battling Shelob, or just offering friendship, Sam is true to the end. The moment when the two are climbing Mt. Doom, and Frodo doesn’t have the strength to go on, and Sam exclaims “I cannot carry the ring for you, but I can carry you” hit me over the head like a boulder. What a truly powerful moment.

There are so many moments in this film that will floor you. When you see the Witchking getting suited up for battle, or Gandalf blinding the winged-riders with his staff, this movie is just one cinematic high after another. It is almost overwhelming.

With Return of the King, Peter Jackson has crafted his finest movie. His vision and talent are extraordinary, and rest assured that it all holds true to the end. Cinematographer Andrew Lesnie has also filmed his most amazing movie, as the photography here is the most beautiful of the three movies. Finally, Howard Shore is absolutely perfect with his score, definitely the most accomplished of the three scores.

Again, I have never read the books, so I can’t tell you what is missing or different. But, as a true movie lover, I can easily say that Return of the King is everything I hoped for, and so much more. I will rush out to see this many more times, and just the thought of an extended edition of the film gives me chills. I expect this to take the Oscar for best picture, but if it doesn’t, does it really matter? I mean, which film do more people hold closer to their hearts, Saving Private Ryan or Shakespear in Love? The Fellowship of the Ring or A Beautiful Mind? The Two Towers or Chicago? This movie will long outlast it’s competition and should be placed in high regard from film fans all over the world, for years to come.

Moviefan

And another...

LORD OF THE RINGS: THE RETURN OF THE KING

(NEW LINE CINEMA. 200 MINUTES) **** (out of four)

Let’s face facts, folks: there has never been a third chapter to a movie trilogy that has fully delivered or satisfied the way it should have. Return of the Jedi was a good but soulless end to the original Star Wars trilogy, full of wooden acting, an overwhelming sense of trilogy déjà vu and Ewoks. Godfather Part III, also decent, was completely unnecessary, nowhere near as good as the first two and starred Sofia Coppola. The less said about the third parts of the Matrix, Alien and Back To The Future franchises, the better.

Eventually, someone had to break the curse, and it has finally happened. It brings me great pleasure to tell you, though it should come as no surprise to anyone who has seen the first two films, that Peter Jackson’s third and final entry in the Lord of the Rings saga, The Return of the King, is the film to break said nuisance. It’s a vital, exhilarating concluding chapter that successfully entertains and more than stands on its own merits. The New Zealand director has pulled out all the stops to deliver a bigger, darker, more emotionally resonant motion picture experience that is more satisfying than any fantasy film or second sequel that has come before it. And yes, that includes The Fellowship of the Ring and The Two Towers.

Despite shooting all three films at the same time and doing a hell of a job on parts one and two, Jackson’s work on King is his finest hour, more accomplished and assured than ever. Trials and personal dramas that each of the characters endure in their journeys are given as much attention as the massive battle sequences, in particular the breathtaking Battle of Pelennor Fields.

Sharing writing duties once more with Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens, the director does a fantastic job adapting Tolkien’s final book of the series from page to screen. The trio faithfully capture and translate the late author’s eye for detail, small character idiosyncrasies and themes of friendship, temptation, loyalty and bravery that will please both hardcore fans of Tolkien’s books and fans of the films.

I stated last year that his trio deserved at least an Oscar nomination for their work on adapting The Two Towers (didn’t happen). By taking the slimmest of the three novels and turning it into the richest of films, they deserve not only an Oscar nomination, but quite possibly the award as well.

The large, returning ensemble cast also displays a higher level of acting quality. All have become comfortable, but not complacent, in his or her character. There isn’t a bad performance to be had (John Noble makes a fine addition to the cast as Denethor, the jerk of Middle Earth), with the trio of Sean Astin, Elijah Wood and Andy Serkis being this chapter’s true standouts. Wood does a fine job handling Frodo’s physical and mental struggles with his task, Serkis is once again wonderfully evil as Gollum and Astin’s heartfelt turn as Sam reveals his character to be the true hero of the saga. If there is one minor quibble, it is this: I missed seeing Christopher Lee’s Saurman, whose scenes have been cut and saved for the Extended Edition due in 2004.

On a technical level, this is about as good as it gets. From Howard Shore’s majestic score to Andrew Lesnie’s rich cinematography to Weta Workshop’s eye-popping visual effects, including the terrifying giant spider Shelob and an army of 200,000 orcs waging war on Minas Tirith, the movie dazzles the eye as much as it does the mind and heart.

Looking back to a little over two years ago, I remember that I wasn’t looking forward to these films. Hollywood seemed to be stuck in a rut: while the price tag on films kept going up, the level of quality went in the opposite direction. After the horrible summer movie season of 2001, I had become so jaded with mega-hyped blockbuster wannabe’s that I was convinced this series would just be more of the same: all style, zero substance.

How wonderful it was to be wrong. While the overall quality of big-budget American cinema continues to slide into the sewer, Peter Jackson and his cast and crew of thousands have shown me that quality commercial cinema such as this, the most fully satisfying cinematic trilogy made to date in the history of cinema, is still capable of existing.

Getting the point yet?

Okay,

I saw it last night at DGA in Hollywood and I'm still blown away. Really, it's impossible to get ready for this thing. I have never seen a movie like this before. Truly, it blows the first two away - in the action scenes, in the tension, in contrast of good v. evil, the emotion, everything. The end is legendary, gollum is incredible, the whole thing is just amazing. The Oliphaunt battle and Ride of the Rohan will literally drop your jaw. The entire Shelob scene had my heart pounding. When the black gate opens and the eagles come (there's one spoiler I guess) it just took my breath away. The dead army - cooler and creepier than you could ever imagine. And Sam and Frodo on the mountain, just utterly fantastic s! tuff. I loved every second of it. Just try and hold back the tears when Theoden rallies his troops, when Eowyn mourns the loss of her king, when the Aragorn cries “For Frodo!” before the black gate as a tide of monsters close in around his army, or when Gandalf takes Frodo’s mangled hand and they walk together on to the silver ship. I wouldn't want to spoil any of the details for anyone. It really is better than the first two, hands down. It's a classic and truly epic, and even knowing all that you know, you will be shocked at what PJ and his crew have been able to accomplish. Completely remarkable. There ya go.

PJ came in after the movie and did about an hour of Q and A. Unfortunately, most of the questions were things covered in the DVDs - how Elijah was cast, Howard Shore stuff, etc. He talked a little about the Hobbit, he said that UA and New Line each have some of the rights, so a deal would have to worked out. But he was kind of non-commital, but there was no "NO" said. Also, he said that Orlando Bloom was originally cast as Faramir, but when they couldn't find a good Legolas, he was cast instead. After the Q and A, PJ graciously stayed for about 25 minutes, signing autographs taking pictures with the fans. He was so nice and polite - HE would say thank you after he would sign an autograph. He signed my little brother's book and PJ personalized the autograph and said "thank you for coming to my movie." It was great to finally meet a hero a! nd have him be totally gracious and a bigger stud than I had imagined.

So it was fantastic, and I can't wait until I can see it again.

If you use this call "The True Nerd"

Anyone? Is it getting through yet?

Landroval's ROTK review.

Dear Harry, Moriarty, AICN, all,

After a brief email correspondence with Harry and Moriarty a few weeks ago, I promised to provide not only a review of the LORD OF THE RINGS: THE RETURN OF THE KING, but also a description of the pre-screening reception with Barrie Osborne, whom produced (in conjunction with Fran Walsh & Peter Jackson) the LOTR movie trilogy.

Back in 1996, when I first read the TIME magazine article that suggested some Hollywood studio had given a green light for the creation of the LOTR movies, it was like a Morgul-blade had been stabbed in my heart. As many LOTR fans may have experienced at that time, I felt that it had been my destiny to one day adapt this masterpiece for the big screen! That it had been my birthright! My precious!

LOTR has been a passion of mine since I first read the books as a boy in the early 80's. Over the years, I have come to claim the self-professed title of "Tolkien Scholar", and Phillipa Boyens would probably consider me one of the feared "guardians of the literature".

My passion for this story went so far and sat so deep, that I actually corresponded briefly with Wingnut Films back in early 1999 for a possible job in New Zealand to participate in this inevitably epic production (I would have worked in the stables, if need be). Yet, as I own and run my own company here in Minnesota, the responsibility to my employees and shareholders was too great, so I tearfully hid the unfinished Wingnut correspondence in my dusty black file cabinet of lost dreams.

Though I did not elope to New Zealand in 1999, I have still been blessed with touching Middle-Earth professionally. Since 2001, my company has had the fortune of designing and publishing a range of official LORD OF THE RINGS board-games, which has allowed me the pleasure of working with such LOTR legends as Ted Naismith directly and John Howe indirectly.

In December 2001, when the FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING was pre-screened at the first Carleton College fund-raiser in Minneapolis, I was fortunate to attend this event and meet the impressive and soft-spoken Mr. Osborne and hear some of his experiences with the production. Now, jump forward to 2003, and I am once again heading downtown Minneapolis to attend another Carleton College LOTR fundraiser and screening with Barrie Osborne. At the same event, my company will be giving away bucket-loads of our LOTR board games to the huge crowd that will be previewing the RETURN OF THE KING. More than a thousand enthusiastic fans will see the film on three screens in the shiny new "block e" cinema in downtown Minneapolis. As I am driving downtown, I am getting really excited for this spectacle and for the final installment in the trilogy.

The pre-screening reception with Mr.Osborne is reserved for high-level donors, college faculty, Twin Cities media personalities, and a few geeks willing to spend the big bucks like myself.

I arrive at the event with my brother-in-law, another big Tolkien fan. The reception is a dressy affair with cocktails and dainty snacks served by a snazzy serving staff. Posters of LOTR: ROTK abound everywhere in the room, and the latest ROTK trailer is running on a large TV in the background. The pre-screening reception is only about an hour long, but after about 15 minutes of waiting, there is no sign of Barrie Osborne! I have a couple of questions in store for him, and I am starting to wonder whether he actually will show up.

Since I promised Harry & Moriarty that I would give some coverage of the reception, I am starting to feel a little silly. It would not be much of an exciting tale without Barrie himself. But then, as I am mulling this over, Barrie arrives and instantly begins to dutifully shake hands and mingle with the crowd.

Now, back in 2001 when I had the pleasure to attend the LOTR:FOTR Barrie Osborne screening, the crowd at the pre-reception was small (about 30-40 people). At that time, to most of the world, LOTR was 'just another movie' and only a few of us knew how huge a phenomenon it had the potential to be. Two blockbuster films later, and presto: The 2003 reception has swelled to a crowded affair with several hundred people in attendance. Barrie himself is immediately swamped with faculty, old friends, and other wine-swilling attendees.

The reception crawls along in this fashion, and the movie is almost ready to start when Barrie is finally presented on the small podium in the reception area. Here he provides us with a few tales and inspirations from the production, including some experiences from the Wellington Premiere of ROTK from which he had just returned. Barrie especially notes how he feels that, to him, LOTR's secret strength comes from the notion that the races of Middle Earth, peoples of different cultures, unite and come together to fight a common foe and achieve a shared and vital goal.

After Barrie's brief presentation, the reception quickly ends, and before I know it, we are at the nice new cinema (complete with that 'new cinema' smell). As we are about to give our tickets at the gate, I finally manage to catch Barrie Osborne for a couple of questions. My main interest is that of THE HOBBIT, and what might be brewing for this very obvious LOTR follow-up. Given the success of LOTR, the production of a HOBBIT movie must certainly be a hot topic within New Line and in Hollywood. Barrie nods knowingly and informs me that there are some IP rights problems with THE HOBBIT to be worked out between a few rival movie studios. Yet, most importantly, he notes that Peter Jackson is keen to do THE HOBBIT -- possibly after King Kong (which is Jackson's current project). This is, of course, great news.

I had heard that Peter Jackson was not crazy about returning to Tolkien after 8 years of hard work with LOTR. So, Barrie's remarks, and Howard Shore's comments in the LOTR:ROTK soundtrack CD slip, have me hopeful that ROTK will not be our final visit to Middle Earth, and that movie-making forces are at work to provide us with the story of a Hobbit who went there and back again (complete with more Gollum and Gandalf goodness, of course).

Slightly off-topic, I also asked Mr. Osborne: 'What went wrong with those Matrix sequels?'. He grins widely and notes in jest that "I did not work on them!" and subsequently declines (understandably enough - this was a LOTR evening) to provide any further insight or opinion on the new Matrix movies. (In case you did not know, Barrie Osborne produced the original Matrix movie).

With all the talk, wine, cocktails, HOBBIT news, and socializing behind me, I am finally ready to rumble. Ready for the steak. Ready for the main attraction. The theater soon grows dark, and the film begins at last.

As with THE TWO TOWERS, the film begins with a powerful flash-back sequence. In THE TWO TOWERS Frodo dreams the Balrog/Gandalf Moria descent for us, and now in the RETURN OF THE KING we are given the back-story of Gollum and how he tragically and violently became ensnared in the history of ring. It is a potent beginning, and a clever choice by the filmmakers given the wonderful impact Gollum had on audiences in THE TWO TOWERS, and the vital role the character plays as the story progresses. This was one of the scenes that I *wished* would be in the movie (and had actually expected to see in the first film), so I was tickled-pink to finally be allowed to see it. It was one of those 'thank god they showed that' moments that can occur when you watch a film adaptation of a novel.

Without too much exposition, we are immediately whisked deep into the story as it left of in THE TWO TOWERS, and events unfold with blistering pace before us. Without a doubt, the ROTK is a far more visceral movie than TTT, and FOTR. Shelob, the Dead of Dunharrow, the numerous battles; Peter Jackson does not hesitate to give us old-fashioned blood 'n guts 'n bones. Heads literally fly.

The ROTK is an emotional and epic movie. During our brief conversation, Barrie Osborne confirmed that this was indeed his favorite movie of the three; he nodded and noted that the 'emotional payoff from three movies' is provided here. He was right! ROTK gives us the whole emotional spectrum, from the sweeping arousal of armies and battle, to the intimate sequences of friendship and loss (I was fond of the Gandalf/Pippin sequences in particular).

What seems to have been widely neglected throughout the general coverage of the LOTR movies, in my opinion, is the fact that LOTR is at its heart, one of the great literary tragedies of our time.

Although the story majestically creates and re-invents the mythic, the heroic, and the epic; at its soul, like Tolkien's silent tears, it laments the passing of time and of beloved things. The passing of friends lost in war, the passing of beautiful rural landscapes as urbanization and industry encroaches, the passing of our years and the dull ache of mortality. Tolkien yearns for what has passed, for mythic ages and languages long gone, for heroes, untouched vistas, and simple emotions. In almost more than mere allegory, the aging Bilbo in Rivendell personifies Tolkien himself, engrossed in ancient languages and songs of the past, dutifully chronicling the passing of events while a new age is being born violently around him. Recall that much of LOTR was written while Tolkien's son was fighting in WWII, and the professor himself safe in his own Rivendell, the old college town of Oxford.

Is the ROTK perfect? No. I have a few quibbles with the choices made by the filmmakers; the Dead of Dunharrow, and the (quickly disappearing) armies that cover the plains of Gorgoroth are especially sore points for me. Yet I can easily forget my small misgivings because the movie truly delivers overall! And it delivers more powerfully than I had dared hope for. Peter Jackson (and Barrie Osborne, of course) have shone a projector light to our minds eye, and have shown us sights that we have never seen. ROTK delivers a spectacle that is not only a great finale for a terrific trilogy, but a truly passionate and successful adaptation of Tolkien's untouchable literary masterpiece.

Perhaps the word 'tragedy' is considered unhealthy to the financial success of a modern-day commercial film? Yet, to my relief, its spirit has thankfully remained intact in this adaptation. In fact, it seems that Jackson goes out of his way to illustrate it. For example, in THE TWO TOWERS, he wisely chooses to include the imagined "Where is the Horse and the Rider" soliloquy for King Theoden, as well as including Arwen's and Elrond's powerful 'vision of her future' inspired by the books appendices. Through the presence of these moments, Jackson, like a tragic sage, allows us to glimpse Tolkien's secret sadness: that the old world of magic and wonders, of earthen values and noble lineages, of hobbits, elves, and wizards, is passing into the west, and we will be left behind. We come to see that only the mundane world of mortal men will endure, and that the magic and wonder on the screen (or in the book) will soon will fade into memory, tale, and myth. The incredible detail and realism of the production, like the books, is the real key to that secret place, that ever-sought 'suspension of disbelief'. LOTR (movie and books), in my opinion, remains the pinnacle of successful escapism (in the positive sense of the word), one that is much more successful than other imagined settings because we keenly feel this imaginary place, this Middle Earth, slowly slipping away. Like life and history, it is passing, fading regardless of how much we want to hang on to this beautiful dream.

Some may find the ending of ROTK long, but I am glad that Peter 'winds us down' and gives us an ending that is both a detailed farewell and an emotional severing. Very importantly, we are given those very crucial scenes of Frodo's bitter-sweet return to life in the Shire, and the suffering that he still bears. For all the pain, the brave deeds and the long journey he undertook, Frodo - in the end - utters those vital and haunting words: "I tried to save the Shire, and it has been saved, but not for me."

I respectfully tap my hat to the creators of these magnificent movies. In my heart of hearts, I will never forgive myself for not abandoning my coat and breakfast to run off and join the New Zealand adventure. Not only have Jackson & Co. masterfully provided us with a great adaptation of the books, and not only have the filmmakers created an epic that David Lean could have envied, but they have thankfully, and powerfully, retained Tolkien's gift to us. The powerful aching emotion of passing. We feel it as this epic fantasy, these characters, this world, sails away into the west, and into our hearts forever.

The world changed.

I felt it in the water

I felt it in the earth

I smelt it in the air

Call me Landroval.

I would be happy to receive personal feedback to this review here.

It makes people wax poetic.

Holy shit, I feel like I have just smoked the best weed in all The Shire! I am eternally high! The Return of the King was in my opinion a perfect finish to what is and always will be considered one of the greatest cinematic accomplishments of all time. Truly awe inspiring stuff. And I do believe that the reason this and all of Lord of the Rings plays so well is because of the intense amount of emotion that every scene seems to carry. I felt great emotion during all of these films, but especially during Return of the King. So much is at stake. Each battle feels so hopeless, so important, that one cannot help being caught up in it. We have traveled so far with all of these characters, we are so attached, that much like the books, we do not want to see them go. But if we were to see them go- this is a great way to do it. Yeah. Emotional is what i took away from Return of the King, a very cool emotional experience.

This was a screening for Backstage West at The Grove in Hollywood. Thanfully Viggo Mortenson would be there after the film to talk to all of us. What a blessing, I get to see Return of the King and then have Aragorn shoot the shit with us! New Line is taking every precaution here since everyone, and I do mean everyone, was scanned and patted down for this screening. People with any kind of cell phone that could take a picture were asked to turn their phone into guest relations.

The film started without previews, immediately throwing us into the movie which does start with a sweet little bit of backstory on Smeagol and how he came to the ring.

It seems a lot of reviewers have already gone into specific plot details so I feel the need to just mention a few of the things I felt really stuck out.

The battle scenes, as I mentioned, intense. A feeling of total dread. There is alot of adrenaline pumping through these scenes. The way Legolas takes control of an Olyphant, the running head on into a sea of Orcs, the catapults, the arrows, the ghost army, the flying nazgul! If there is one thing I wanted more of it is orc heads a

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Dec. 11, 2003, 6:49 a.m. CST

    Artificial Womb

    by JAGUART

    ...As I write this, I'm lying here completely naked. I've set my waterbed temperature to 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit, and filled it with a combination of amniotic fluid and cattle blood. I've plugged all my orifices with hunks of foam rubber and now suck oxygen through a SCUBA regulator. The room humidifier is on eleven and I'm covered with a thick layer of uncooked hotdogs. There will I incubate for the next 5 days, 17 hours and 13 minutes according to my official Return of the King countdown clock. On the morning of December 17th I shall emerge anew, have my girlfriend at the ready slap my ass, shower up and head to the theatre, Reborn Once Again.

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 7:01 a.m. CST

    where is your ROTK review?????

    by stackpointer

    Hmm, Mori??

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 7:01 a.m. CST

    Good holy hell

    by Nafl

    Is it just me, or did about two dozen updates just get posted here? Christ, when this site's not constipated for a week or more, it's got diarrhea. IMHO, the whole site's overdue for a major technical and stylistic overhall. On topic: I'm going to go out on a limb here and state that I think ROTK will be a good film. Just a hunch.

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 7:02 a.m. CST

    I am so damn excited to see this movie!

    by Jon E Cin

    I havent been this excited over anything since I got to feel my first titty. Tits! I want to see it now but I have to wait until Wed..argh..its killing me...KILLING ME..

  • But hey, who doesn't like candles?

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 7:30 a.m. CST

    Please oh please

    by devanjedi

    Please oh pretty please.. an ROTK review with no reference/put-down/comparison with any other franchise. Please.

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 7:42 a.m. CST

    I think each of those reviews should have gotten their own headl

    by FluffyUnbound

    Why not?

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 7:44 a.m. CST

    So much love. What can trolls do against such reckless praise?

    by JAGUART

    I've heard that this third movie is so tits it makes the other two look GAY.

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 8:36 a.m. CST

    "FOR FRODO!"

    by CellarDoor

    Brilliant addition. I would say I can't wait but i've lasted five years so the next week should be a piece of piss. Enjoy it guys.

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 8:37 a.m. CST

    razzberry jamm, do yourself and the rest of us a huge favour and

    by Windowlicker74

    jesus christ, that writing was a real crapfest. were you masturbating while watching the movie?

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 8:53 a.m. CST

    So where are the Mori and Harry reviews?

    by minderbinder

    So far RT is at 100% (mostly raves) and we've only seen one negative review on here so far. Not too bad. So bring on the two reviews from the big boys (PLEASE include at least a spoiler free section!)

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 9:02 a.m. CST

    Thanks!

    by Shawn F.

    Thanks for posting the review, guys. I am dying to see this again. And again. And, well, you get the idea. I enjoyed reading all the others as well, with two exceptions: Harry's and Moriarty's. Get crackin' guys!

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 9:31 a.m. CST

    Witch king arming himself?

    by Ryalto 3.0

    ugh. I can only image the sort of Ash-knock off scene this is going to be. PJ has no clue on "perspective" in the story. It reminds me of the scene in TTT where the winged Nazgul shows up and we don't see it from the ground, we get this painfully gratuitous "windshield" shot of the Nazgul up in the air. He's making movies, not films.

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 9:40 a.m. CST

    LOTR sucks

    by Indiana Clones

    LOTR sucks.

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 11:33 a.m. CST

    Ah. Hmmmm

    by BCfreeB

    Wow. How does one respond? I keep wondering if Harry an Moriarty are posting a representative sample of the reviews they are receiving...but based on the rotten tomatoes rating, it looks like it. Anyway, I can't wait til midnight tuesday night! www.unseenfilms.com

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 11:40 a.m. CST

    That's pretty good...

    by Halloween68

    One so, so review and one negative review; the rest overly positive. That's good odds. For the first one, the so, so review: For someone who claims to be such a fan of Tolkien and the film adaptation of Rings, he seems to be painfully ignorant of news pertaining to the LOTR films. It's been common knowledge for over 4 years now that the Scouring of Shire was cut from the get-go. Jackson has said a billion times that that section of the books is his least favorite of the lot. He feels it anti-climactic. This was pretty much announced around the same time it was announced Tom Bombadil what not be making an appearance. It's been common knowledge ever since. We get a slight, if not exagerated, nod to it in the mirror of Galadriel scene in Fellowship. If the reviewer reads this, I hope he takes comfort in knowing the Saruman sequence will be given more of a wrap in the Extended ROTK DVD out next year. Scenes were shot but cut because of time. I am disapointed that it did not make the theatrical release as well. Hopefully it's not that distracting. Most people seem to think it's not. As for the negative review... I don't agree with any of his assessments as what he thinks needs to be in the film and what he thinks doesn't. So I'm not that worried about him. Nearly every problem he mentions he had with the film I feel is necessary and warranted for the film. He's obviously not a fan of Tolkien. Definitely hasn't read the books, probably talked through his viewings of the first two films if he even saw them. That's cool. Tolkien's not for everyone. I'm more worried about exclusions as I mentioned before, than inclusions.

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 11:56 a.m. CST

    I Wish........

    by Wyrdy the Gerbil

    just for fucking once people who have read the book and seen the film would review the film the`ve seen and not the book v film its totally pointless anyway to keep harping on about scenes from the book that have been omitted and all the details..

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 12:09 p.m. CST

    EW's Lisa Swartzman just gave it a rave review - A

    by Halloween68

    Supposedly "A" is EW's highest review. That's cool. I'm not a big LS fan. She's easily entertained and gives films good and bad (but mostly good) reviews for all the wrong reasons. Still, the highest possible compliment. I'll take it. EW is a pretty well read magazine.

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 12:59 p.m. CST

    "It was like a Morgul-blade had been stabbed in my heart." Agai

    by hipcheck13

    Seriously - it's like writing a review for Star Wars with the line "it's as if a light saber was plunged into my heart" or writing a review for Matrix with the line "it's as if Agent Smith plunged his hand into my heart." See how stupid that sounds? Is the LOTR trilogy excellent? Yes. Quality, timeless filmmaking with superior craftsmanship? Yes. Filled with great acting, great writing, a great musicial score? Yes. IS THERE AN ACTUAL MORGUL-BLADE? Or light saber, for that matter? Of COURSE not. Appreciate the thing for its artistic merit, but THAT'S it.

  • The majority of these reviews are not plants. The losers who are always saying that are just trying to get attention and say what seems to be the trend right now with you geeks. ROTK will be awesome!

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 2:14 p.m. CST

    double fuck

    by raker

    i can't take it anymore. i'm more jittery than a gerbil in a san fransisco pet store on valentines day. will wednesday ever come.

  • Quite a few spoilers in these reviews, but I can live with that. I love spoilers actually - makes the build up ever more frenetic. ROTK appears to meet all expectations - with a few reservations. Gandalf NOT confronting the Witch King is a major disappointment. This was a powerful scene in the book after Minas Tirith's gate was smashed, and it's kinda sad that PJ ditches that in favor of more Legolas action. Of course, Eowyn ultimately dispatches the Nazgul lord, but seeing Gandalf face to face with the enemy is a missed opportunity... As for Shelob -- she was always going to be a very sinister creation and might even be more frightening than in the book. Arachnophobes need not apply. Scary shit... I can't wait!

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 3:30 p.m. CST

    Where is everybody?

    by mortsleam

    Where are the funny, incisive trolls? The valiantly defending Tailenders? The cross-franchise flame wars? This place is awash in faceless stupidy, cruel ignorant misanthropic ugliness and boring repetive Anti-Harry bullshit. Almost makes me want to stop fucking around on the Internet and get back to work. Almost.

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 4:01 p.m. CST

    moviemack...

    by mortsleam

    Don't wait for the Extended Edition either 'cause the Scouring ain't in there, man.

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 4:19 p.m. CST

    ROTK

    by Shunkeat

    LOTR is good. VERY good! PERFECT! I can't wait for the Pelennor and Shelob scenes. By the way, why does everybody hate the ONE and ONLY scene Andy Serkis is actually in, in the ENTIRE trilogy??????

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 4:38 p.m. CST

    Why is this talkback shorter than the article???

    by Yo Yo Man

    Are all the LOTR fans burnt out from the Neill Cumpston debate?

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 4:42 p.m. CST

    Since I probably won't be able to get on this site next week, I'

    by Moonwatcher

    All the rave reviews so far have got me believing that my 34 year quest for the filming of these books has come to a glorious conclusion. Do we really appreciate what New Line, PJ, Weta, and this incredible cast have done for movie geeks everywhere - nay, for Western Civilization? A movie company took a fantastic gamble with a director whose previous work belied any ability to put together such an awesome work as what we've seen. And we had a front row seat at this glorious unflowering, this beautiful and stunning production that we will tell our grandchildren about ("Yes, I was there opening night!) I doubt we'll see anything in our lifetime that will equal this amazing achievement. Soon our family will drink in the last installment and say a tearful good-bye to Frodo and Co., happy that we were there from the beginning. Peter Jackson, New Line, Barrie Osborne, Richard Taylor, Elijah, Sir Ian, Mr. Lee (glad you lived long enough to be in this!), et al, thanks for a glorious and blessed ride. I hope that guy who wrote last year that he wouldn't die in the next 12 months is still here to see this. Now, if only the Cubs had won the World Series, this would have been a PERFECT YEAR.

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 4:49 p.m. CST

    Yeah, where is that guy who wanted to live to see all three movi

    by Yo Yo Man

    He must be getting really nervous now...

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 5 p.m. CST

    Gaffer eyes Flipper near Binbole Wood!

    by morGoth

    Oy mortsleam, there

  • I just can't see cutting out the Saruman scenes. There are PLENTY of things that could have been cut from both Two Towers EE and, I'm sure, Return of the King, from what we've heard, so I just can't wrap my mind around such a major blunder. The excuses we've gotten so far just don't ring true for the simple fact that it is so painfully obvious that there are so many other things that could have been cut to make room for a scene that actually adds, GASP, closure to a MAJOR character and one of only TWO major villains. No matter who believes the excuses, it's still a decision that makes no sense in the face of the facts. I can understand not putting it in the Two Towers theatrical addition, cause that thing could barely breathe anyway, and I can understand not putting it on the EE of TT, cause they were probably thinking - "this is too important to risk the majority of the audience not seeing it." I don't think it was left out of the EE of the TT for time or anti-climactic reasons, cause that's just stupid when you look at what WAS put back in - Merry and Pippin finding the little storehouse full of food and pipeweed, Treebeard's song/poem, Frodo and Sam rock-climbing, the extended walk through the woods with Gandalf, Legolas, Aragorn, Gimli, the post-Helm's Deep scene between Legolas and Gimli wrapping up their 'count'. Like I said, I think it was left out cause it was probably deemed too important to risk people not seeing it in a theatrical cut. Even this doesn't make much sense cause they still wound up leaving it for an EE DVD. I will never understand this decision. I guess I won't know for sure if the decision makes any sense until I see just how jam-packed with all-important scenes ROTK is. I'm sure there are seven minutes of shit somewhere in there. And no matter how long the cut is... would a few extra minutes REALLY kill the exhibitors? To me, anything that hurts the film, hurts the repeat business. Well... like I said, I'm sure I'll love it, but amid so many perfect decisions and an amazing enthusiasm and deep love for the films, why does there have to be one glaringly bad decision to unnecessarily muck up the proceedings?

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 5:18 p.m. CST

    questions and comments

    by hildebrand

    The question that I have is whether or not they deal with Aragorn finding the new White Tree. I know we see the dead tree in the middle of Minas Tirith, just wondering about the new one as symbol of Aragorn's rule and whatnot. The comment deals with the excising of Saruman. Sure it's a bit of a miss not to have him there, but I wonder about the casual viewer, are they going to miss him? Really? They would have to show him and then kill him off in pretty short fashion, and is that really the way you want to bring that story arc to a close. I can imagine the howls about 'giving the character short shrift', etc. I see this one as a no win situation. The readers of the books will be miffed, and the general audience will not care. Or the general audience will wonder why they are going back to an already defeated villain, and the readers will be happy, happy. Ok, and here is where I may upset some of the folks who have read the books, I have always felt that the death of Saruman in the books was forced. The Scouring was fine, but it is always one of the chapters that I have the tendency to skim so that I can get on to the Grey Havens. That Saurman is at the heart of it just seems a bit overdone. As if no other villainy could exist without either Saruman or Sauron driving it. Saruman was a lackey in the end, and once he lost at Orthanc, I have always kind of washed my hands of him. I won't miss him in the movie. I won't mind his end in the EE, but it is hardly necessary for the resolution of the story. On one talkback someone mentioned that it was necessary to help work out Gandalf's story arc, and I can see that. I just find that I don't need to see it, and I look forward to seeing how they work out Gandalf's arc in the movie. That all being said, I am getting pretty darn excited about seeing this. It is going to be awesome.

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 5:20 p.m. CST

    gah! rip out my eyes!

    by djinnj

    I just watched the Pippin palantir scene and I didn't want to know! No no no no no (not that it's particularly bad, just completely unexpected and, well, let's just say completely different from the book). I also skipped the above review to see if any TEs were here, and lo and behold, there are. If you haven't seen the palantir bit yet, and don't mind RUINing it, it's here: http://movies. yahoo.com/shop?d= hv&cf=trailer&id= 1804738130&intl=us (take out the obvious spaces). And don't say I didn't warn you!

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 5:30 p.m. CST

    ***HERE BE SPOILERS***

    by Yo Yo Man

    Elanor's review IS the best so far. But what I want to know is... does it really end with Gollum holding up Frodo's middle finger to the camera and saying "Up yoooursss, Lucas!!!" PS: sorry to bring up the Star Wars/LOTR debate, but this talkback needs some life.

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 5:44 p.m. CST

    SK909 and Hildebrand

    by morGoth

    SK909

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 5:49 p.m. CST

    Quick question

    by Yo Yo Man

    Has anyone had/will anyone have a chapter of their lives bookended by the Lord of the Rings movies? I'm sure plenty of people got married between FOTR and ROTK, but did anyone get married and then divorced? Did anyone write a novel? Walk the Appalachian Trail? Make a movie? Figure out what the hell Bullitt is about besides a car chase? And just to settle a long-running debate, is it Baron Greenback or Baron Von Greenback?

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 7:17 p.m. CST

    Whats up wit that?!

    by Bruce LeeRoy

    Wah Wah Wah! Crying Crying and more crying. Whats up with all these people crying during the movie. The only way that I would be crying during this movie is if someone came up to me and drop kicked my nut sack while i was watching it.

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 7:23 p.m. CST

    Do the Dunadain rangers appear in ROTK?

    by Fred

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 7:25 p.m. CST

    I'm So Excited To See It I'm Going To Lose Bladder Control!!!

    by delwin

    I can't take it anymore! I need to see it! Its like crack! Trying to avoid spoilers has taken a great deal of restraint over the past year, I'm not going to blow it now. I only read the first book and The Hobbit. *SLIPS OFF CHAIR*!!!ahhhh!

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 7:30 p.m. CST

    TS2? Try MK3.

    by Recognizer

    Lex, while Drew may not be credited on Truman Show (which wouldn't be the first time writers have had their names excised from credits), he IS credited as a co-writer on MORTAL KOMBAT: DOMINATION due out in 2004, featuring the return of Chris Lamber and Linden Ashby, for some unfathomable reason. ********************** This is the sequel to an inferior sequel to a fun-at-the-time-'cause-I-was-14-and-played-the-game-at-the-arcade-and-appreciated-the-Johnny-Cage-ball-punch Paul W.S. Anderson movie. If Moriarty can make MKD *not* suck donkey ball, he deserves all the praise of "evil genius". If he fails... then he's been a hacky shill and we can always hold that over him. Except that most of us aren't even hacky shills, or we wouldn't be WASTING OUR FUCKING TIME POSTING ON A FORUM THAT'S LIKE (to misremember the words of Penny Arcade) "If the bottom of the barrel had another bottom, that opened up into a sewer" or some such.

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 7:31 p.m. CST

    Star Wars is fucking dead! Return of the King is here!

    by JarJar25

    I hope this new Lord of the Rings film kills Star Wars once and for all. Looking forward to getting the original trilogy on DVD, but then that is it. Does anyone really care about the third Star Wars prequel? NOOOOO! It's time to call it quits boys. Lucas meat is back on the menu! Yeaaaaaa!

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 9:12 p.m. CST

    Orions Angel: "These LOTR films will age like fine wine, because

    by Commando Cody

    You know, I have to say something here and I don't mean to be hissy or contrary. Nor do I mean to be the sour guy raining on anyone's parade, since I'm a film geek and I feel everyone has a right to love whatever films (or franchises) float their boats and get them excited. Hey, you love something? More power to you! Overall, I like the LOTR films -- they are great movie going experiences. And Peter Jackson deserves to be saluted for what he did -- though let the record show he was NOT the first person to shoot back-to-back movies at once (I mean, historically Richard Donner did it while filming SUPERMAN 1 and 2 and they were considered epic productions at the time (although he did get booted off 2 by the Salkinds) and Zemeckis did it with BACK TO THE FUTURE 3 and 4. Hell, if I'm remembering right, didn't Richard Lester shoot 3 MUSKETEERS and 4 MUSKETEERS that way too? Anyway, I digress...and going back to Orions post...look, I thought FOTR was "okay" (truth be told, I actually fell asleep twice during it in the theater and to this day I still find it slow) but I loved TTT (since it actually had action) and I'm genuinely looking forward to ROTK. I'll be there opening week. I'm sure I'll have a blast at it and love it. Hell, the X-Box game for it is certainly fun. But all that said, I still love my STAR WARS films, I liked the MATRIX films, I'm really dying to see VAN HELSING, X3, Gibson's PASSION OF THE CHRIST, a new flick by James Cameron whenever he gets off his ass and actually directs an action movie again...and yes, I'll be there for Jackson's KING KONG too. And lots of other movies beyond that. My point being that while I have no problem with people embracing and loving the LOTR films, I'm not ready AT ALL to declare them the capstone on all filmmaking. I'm SURE that in years to come, as Orion pointed out, the LOTR films will age gracefully and be remembered as classics. But I'm ALSO sure that one day someone will come along and create a new film or a new film franchise that makes everyone stop in their tracks and go "Holy shit! That fucking ruled!" Every time something like a STAR WARS or a LOTR comes along, everyone goes "Man, they'll never top that!" Well, guess what? That ability to top things IS still out there in the budding minds of up and coming filmmakers who I'm sure WILL create all-new wonders, most likely with all-new filmmaking technology. And yes, one day, the same way that no one ever predicted a movie like TITANIC would come along to outgross the original STAR WARS and become the most popular film in history, I'm sure someone will likewise come along with enough filmmaking bravada to top the LOTR films just because it IS inevitable. Creativity takes a backseat to no one. In short, contrary to Orion's post, I'm not ready to totally subscribe to the notion that Hollywood will now utterly sink into crappiness and that the LOTR flicks are the end all of everything, as if we should now turn out the lights and go home. Sorry, I love the LOTR films but I'm not ready to go to THAT extreme. Well, assuming I'm reading her post and emotions right. So sorry, Orion, if I did read it wrong or put words into your mouth...maybe I'm just having a gut reaction to what you said.

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 9:12 p.m. CST

    Peter Jackson deserves the best director oscar, but hollywood is

    by Red Raider

    Hollywood sucks ass. Peter Jackson, IMO, has resurected the art of creativity & devotion in filmmaking. The Academy however, is too fucking stupid to acknowledge Jackson's accomplishments...

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 9:32 p.m. CST

    Guys, don't

    by Darth_Inedible

    Because there's nothing more pathetic than a blubbering man at a movie. If you do this I will laugh at you in front of your friends/ SO/mother/children, I will ruin your night because I am sensitive like that... So just don't fucking do it.

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 11:16 p.m. CST

    Some answers for morG et al

    by elanor

    GENTLE SPOILER ALERT: As for morG's question about the POTD - the distance they must travel is simply not an issue in the film. It's glossed over completely and I doubt you will mind it. Corsairs AND Banner are in, and done well, but not like in the book. Also, the White Tree is in, but again, not like in the book. Jackson likes to surprise people. Book lovers, I must repeat my warning: the hardest thing for you (on your first time through) will be that you can't help but know what is NOT in this movie. TONS of scenes are NOT in it, and I know you will miss them terribly, BUT, as the greatness of the movie washes over you, as you are swept up in the emotion of it, you will find plenty of scenes to adore, and you will also understand how long it would have had to be to include all the "missing" moments. No doubt we will argue endlessly over what should have been included: "I would have gladly traded six minutes of xxxxx for five minutes of yyyyy!" and everyone will have different plug-ins for xxxx and yyyy. morG! I though you were not gonna read any more spoilers! I hope I didn't leave anything out. If I did, I'll post again.

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 11:20 p.m. CST

    YO YO MAN - YES TO MOST OF THOSE.

    by SK909

    I wrote a short film that was sort of like an update on how Rasputin, the mad Russian monk was murdered and the whole mystery behind that. I started the screenplay the day after I saw Fellowship of the Ring and six months later, in June of 2002, we shot the film. I streamlined the guy, made him weird but in a more modern way, although he was still Russian and the clothes were the same. Anyway, my wife produced it and the stress of the entire project was so great that we ended up getting divorced a few months before I finished the edit. That was... August 2002. Then, we nearly got back together in November of last year, and we went to see Two Towers together and then, a week after New Year's of this year, we broke up again. I know it's gonna sound crazy, but we've put aside all differences and realize that we just belong together over the last few months or so and Return of the King is coming out so we're obviously gonna see that as a renewed couple... but yeah... a lot of stuff has happened to us along with these movies. A lot of the discussion on the set of my film was about Fellowship. Also, to get even more bizarre, I hiked a few trails in the appalachians over the summer. So... yeah to answer your 'trick' question.

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 11:21 p.m. CST

    Error...

    by SK909

    That was supposed to be *quick question... don't know where trick came from.

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 11:22 p.m. CST

    I can save you a lot of time reading the reviews

    by raoulkduke

    This movie is so fucking cool I almost peed my pants! --AICN Geek Fan Boys

  • Dec. 11, 2003, 11:31 p.m. CST

    Ooops. I did miss one

    by elanor

    GENTLE SPOILER ALERT: morG, about Gandalf & the Witch King. Hmmm. I really don't want to give much away here. How about this: in all the discussion and speculation we've had on the tb regarding the Witch King, none of us got it right and, the shots in the trailer are...how shall I say...misleading. However, you can rest assured that there is a damn good scene at the MT Gate. I have much (good) to say about this but I'm gonna wait.

  • Dear hipcheck. Telin le thaed. If you are more comfortable with emotionally restrained writing then I'm afraid you will find yourself most unhappy on an AICN tb. Anything goes here, darling. That goes for the folk (like me) who are head-over-furry-heels in love with PJ's movies as well as the trolls (like Ryalto) who come to hyper-bash it. I, for one, am going to continue to gush away. If I toss in some Quenya or Sindarin phrases along the way because I know my mellyn will get a kick out of it, then I'm gonna, whether you lasto beth nin or not. I'll do it because I FUCKING FEEL LIKE IT and because I have been over-the-moon happy for four solid years, all due to the overpowering joy of seeing my favorite story so lovingly rendered on the big screen. K?

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 12:11 a.m. CST

    Mouth of Sauron Cut?

    by Nickdude77

    Did I read correctly or have I misinterpreted?... Is the Mouth of Sauron IN or OUT?--> Please say "IN".

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 12:19 a.m. CST

    Once upon a time, Matrix was going to be the 'be all. end all tr

    by TheGinger Twit

    Lord of the rings is good... but it's just to damn over blown.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 12:22 a.m. CST

    It's not fair to class LOTR in the same catagory as Star wars or

    by TheGinger Twit

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 12:31 a.m. CST

    I'm a troll cause I won't kiss PJ's ass??? Fuck off, elanor

    by Ryalto 3.0

    Far be it from a troll, I'm the exact kind of critical eye that you PJ fanatics despise, someone who loves the books, knows them through and through and can't ignore all the places where PJ fucked up in the films, not because he HAD to make necessary changes in adapting to the screen, but because he's a hack director without much talent for writing or storytelling. I will always be right and you will always be a sycophant.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 2:17 a.m. CST

    Wow....."frododies"....you...are...the..biggest...12 yr old nerd

    by gil-galad12

    To actually go out of your way to create a screenname like "frododies" just so you can hopelessly make fun of a movie that enjoys such broad appeal, you have to be pretty pathetic. Seriously, you can't be over the age of 12. Why do Star Wars fans (assuming you are one) feel the need to go out of their way to pitifully prove that their movie is better? Wow, you really have way too much time to fiddle on your parents computer. And to Elanor, rock on, sista! Mae govannen, mellon. (okay, that's all I know). p.s.-Seriously, "frododies", you are one hell of a loser.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 2:24 a.m. CST

    What do you mean, "outgrossed"?

    by FatherMcGruder

    Sure, IF you combine the earnings of Phantom Menace and Attack, they outgross the combined earnings of FOTR and TTT (by a little), BUT, singly, AOTC did not gross as much as either FOTR or TTT. The only reason for TPM's extraordinary success is the fact that the hype and the wait were so enormous. The difference in running times should also be taken into account. I guarantee you that Star Wars 3 won't make nearly as much as AOTC, while ROTK will outdo TTT, just as TTT outdid FOTR. So there.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 2:58 a.m. CST

    AHEM! Actually Father McGruder (sheesh, here we go. I can tell

    by Commando Cody

    As I already said in this thread when I responded to an OrionsAngel post, I think if you're a fan of WHATEVER franchise floats your boat, go enjoy. Really. Go off in your own corner, play nice and have a good geek time. Ok, politically correct disclaimer aside -- just a quickie to answer Father McGruder directly. The key point that was being made is simple: it's about money and inflation. Adjust the box office dollars from 1977 and compare it against the LOTR films and even if you combine them, STAR WARS -- just the original film alone -- still comes out atop the heap of all films. (Of course, then you get into the number crunching argument that if you re-adjust GONE WITH THE WINDs original numbers, that would take the crown...and if you re-adjust the original KING KONGs numbers, that would top them all.) The other point being made is that Phantom Menace and Clones -- while techically chapters 1 & 2 in the series -- are for all intents and purposes simply perceived as SEQUELS in the general public's minds (and don't give me this crap they count as all-new films, they're fucking sequels to the granddaddy of them all that started the whole thing.) So basically, what we have are sequels 4 and 5 and for STAR WARS (as a franchise) to have a FIFTH film come out and still be raking in THAT kind of dough is pretty much a testament to the staying power of the franchise and what Lucas has crafted. I mean, if we're talking domestic U.S. box office, hey, shove your "Lucas raped my childhood shit", the bottom line is that it is pretty amazing that CLONES was right up there with TTT and HARRY POTTER 2 in terms of box office dollars. Go to IMDB and check their domestic numbers and you'll see that all 3 are only a few million apart. So they were all big hits...but it's saying something that a FIFTH Star Wars film can keep pace with only the second LOTR or POTTER film. But again, that's all just splitting hairs here. As I keep saying, whatever floats your boat, you know? On the other hand, I will DISAGREE with you McGruder on one point: I'll bet you right now that you're totally WRONG about the box office take on Episode 3. I'll bet it DOES do better than CLONES, and is a major hit. Why? Because it's the ONE prequel that everyone DOES want to see -- namely Obi Wan and Hayden going ballistic on each other's ass with light sabers, it's the birth of the twins, it's got fan favorite Chewbacca back, AND we finally get to SEE Darth Vader again, in full armor AND with fucking James Earl Jones voice coming out of the grill. Trust me, the mall multiplexes will be packing them in for Episode 3. Regardless of what you thought of the first 2, Lucas pretty much has all the cool shit people WANT to see in this last one. So I think it'll do just fine...

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 3:03 a.m. CST

    You'll pay dearly for those comments TOO, OrionsAngel!

    by Commando Cody

    Ahh...just kidding right back at you. ;) Sorry if I seemed to pounce on your earlier post or your wording. I got the gist of what you were saying, I just felt like venting a bit about the state of cinema and tossing my own 2 cents out there. Overall, I see your posts often in these talkbacks and I enjoy them -- and, yes, quite often agree with them. In fact, reading your last reply it would seem we're about the same age and grew up influenced by alot of the same things, so I understand where you're coming from (in terms of wondering "who" or "what" will truly recapture that childhood movie magic for you again.) I'm glad to hear the LOTR films did it for you -- personally, I think it's great when ANY film fan can find ANY film that rocks their world and keeps them interested in movies. But that's just me raving as a die-hard movie buff...

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 4:52 a.m. CST

    So what's all this talk about Pippen in every review?

    by Mr Jingles

    I don't remember any of the characters looking like a tall black basketball player.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 5:20 a.m. CST

    SK909, bloody hell!

    by Yo Yo Man

    You've been busy! Well, you're the only one who replied to my question, so I guess it's fitting that you ticked "yes" to most of those boxes. Well done! I made a film as well, but it's not quite finished yet, so I'd be struggling to fit it in to that LOTR timeframe. Elanor, welcome aboard. Your review rocks. And I cried at ET. In fact, I always cry at ET. Just a little, you understand. But it's the only movie I've ever cried at and if ROTK has me blubbing in my seat... er... what do I do? Uh-oh. I'm panicking now. Help me! What happens if I start crying at ROTK? Should I try and cover it up? (Sniff, sniff "Whoa that cold..." sniff sniff "...it's just not..." sniff "...going away!") Or just valiantly lead the way for the rest of the audience? Advice, please.

  • (from BoxOfficeMojo.com) Total worldwide for the first two LOTR films: 1,783 millions, for the first two SW sequels? 1,573 millions. And the box office debacle of Attack of the Clones, wich grosses are 648 millions (a big 920,5 millions for The Two Towers) only proves that the popularity of LOTR LARGELY rose from the first to the second film, compared to SW popularity going straight downhill from episode 1 to episode 2. Now, while TPM's succes is largely explainable by the huge hype among fanbase aiming at the sequel trilogy, about the same could be said for FOTR with Tolkien fans. But here the big difference can be seen in how the second films of each of those trilogies, as LOTR has know a huge increase of popularity from the first to the second movie (TTT is #4 worldwide, and FOTR is #7), while the Star Wars sequels just went downhill from the episode 1 to episode 2. Stats? TTT beats Attack of the Clones 920 millions to 638 pathetic millions Yes, as you see I am using worldwide stats, since all of those movies were made for worldwide distribution and that they were shown at about the same time frame everywhere in the world (except for TPM only)there's just no reason to compare those films on a domestic, USA, basis (unlike what you may think, USA is NOT the center of this world. It is because Hollywood is the biggest film industry of the whole? The Lord of the Rings just proven that a foreign film can beat any Hollywood flick on all fields). If I'd make the same comparisons for the total grossings in Canada, and you too would complain about my patriotic bias, so please stop the stupid flag waving and face the music. Star Wars is dead, dead, dead. And stats are just one of the way to prove how it's dead. Just compare the tomatometers of those movies at Rottentomatoes, just realize how much talking of Star Wars to somebody at your job will make you look as insane as if you were speaking of scatophilia, or just contemplate to what mediocre level the SW fanbase has deteriorated to on the internet's last "serious" website, TheForce.net(Episode 3 fan drawings posted as spoilers!? Ughhh...! GET A LIFE, you pathetic larvas!!!) Alright, the old Star Wars trilogy was great, but it feels like Jackson created a hype with LOTR that took 15 years for Star Wars to have; it was INSTANTLY received by filmgoers and critics alike as a major ARTISTIC achievement, and it used a truly original blend of old time and modern special effects to make the whole thing look wonderful, while thew '77 Star Wars did'nt made such a great, almost unanimous, hit among critics and filmgoers alike. Star Wars is DEAD, and it was killed by George Lucas himself (with the help of Rick McCallum, Ben Burtt and all the other money hungry, untalented, assholes that keep crawling around him since he's into that prequel project).

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 5:40 a.m. CST

    Star Wars is finally dead on the 17th

    by krylite

    You SW snotheads just don't get it. All Lucas sold were his "race" scenes because he broke his back when he was hotrodding as a teenager in the Mojave desert. Lawrence Kasdan was the scriptwriter for SW and ESB. Kershner directed ESB. Marcia Lucas edited SW. Kasdan was fired because he was upstaging too much and didn't do ROTJ. Lucas tried to prove he was as good as Kershner in PM, and AOTC. He's still taking freaking 20+ years to try to convince everyone he can direct and write which he can't. He can only sell Ewok merchandise. With ROTK, the SW trilogy will be shown that Lucas was an untalented hack and only a good salesman. It was Kershner and Kasdan who gave you your childhood memroies of the SW mystique. Finally the brilliant ROTK will put the nail in the coffin on this stinking cash cow of the SW franchise. Matrix sequels were an idiotic wank by the WB brothers to compete with ROTK. They just didn't know what they were dealing with. Have a good retirement in the Ewok funny farm. wtf, hobbit-rippoff that is..

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 6:06 a.m. CST

    Emotional diahorea

    by Summer_Pudding

    I don't get it. Most of these reviewers have emphasised the emotional resonance of the films. Some have wept openly in the theatre. Perhaps NewLine should offer councelling after the show to these overwrought wallflowers. I am a huge fan of the books, and the BBC Radio 4 adaptaion, and have marvelled at the themes explored so masterfully in them. I have been known to shed a tear at the movies, at particullary poignant scenes, but so far, with the exception of Gollum's split personality scene in the Two Towers (the pinnacle of CG animation to date), there has been nothing in the first two films to warrant even the slightest sniff. Am I alone in finding the film's supposedly heart wrenching scenes laboured, tiresome, and at times plain embarassing? Peter Jackson is a man of many talents and boundless energy, but prizing subtle, understated emotions from certain (by no means all) key cast members seems to be absent from his otherwise vast repetoir of skills. I'll see the film, hell, I'll probably see it at least three times, but I won't be going for an acting masterclass.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 6:42 a.m. CST

    Robofag: "TTT beats Attack of the Clones 920 millions to 638 pat

    by Commando Cody

    Only a fucking idiot would consider ANY movie making over half a BILLION dollars to be "pathetic." Riiiiight. That's SO paltry and worth hanging your head in shame over. Especially when you just made THAT much money off your FIFTH movie in a series. Tell you what, Robo, get back to us when you actually manage to climb the stairs to get out of your parents basement, take a shower, get a life, meet a girl, get laid, stop being an immature child, grow a brain, and actually come out here to Hollywood and work in the business in order to get a clue and some real perspective about the silly drivel you post...

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 6:46 a.m. CST

    Robofag: "unlike what you may think, the USA is NOT the center o

    by Commando Cody

    Actually it IS.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 6:57 a.m. CST

    CommandoCody

    by raw_bean

    You're argument that the Star Wars Prequels are the 4th and 5th Star Wars films and therefore doing really well to keep up with younger, fresher frnachises is interesting, but has a major flaw: a very large part of their audience are kids who are coming to the series for the first time. It is somewhat impressive that the films can still draw enough people so long after the original, but not so much as you suggest, because they are at least in some repspects a new trilogy that stand independantly, and that are introducing a new generation to the Star Wars universe. ----- morG, elanor, greetings! Since this TB seems not to be hosed, I'll start posting properly here once the traffic dies down and there are fewer people who insist on declaring their opnions as though they are indesputable facts. (Ryalto, I won't call you a troll, but will you accept this description of you?)

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 7:11 a.m. CST

    And CC,

    by raw_bean

    I what way is America the centre of the world? Have you ever lived anywhere else?

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 7:17 a.m. CST

    I saw The Lord of the Rings:

    by Miami Mofo

    The Fellowship of the Ring - Extended Edition on the big screen last night! Why? THE SUPERTRAILER MADE ME DO IT!!!!!!!!! :~) Don't know how many of you bought the deluxe version of the soundtrack that was released Tuesday (I did not buy the regular version two weeks ago), but I'm sure glad I waited the two extra weeks. The supertrailer ROCKS! And the Howard Shore documentary is pretty cool too, but I like the still photos found on track three more. Oh, and elanor, based on the presentation of 'Into The West' on the 'lyric pages' on track four, I would say the film-makers imagine that that's Galadriel singing to Frodo. I wouldn't be surprised if Annie's decked out in some Galadriel outfit should the song get an Oscar nom and she's called on to perform it. If so, I sure hope she gets to wear those "glam disco boots." ;~) [John Forde, where are you now?]

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 7:21 a.m. CST

    Ryalto's right

    by Summer_Pudding

    Raw_Bean, Elanor, I hate to say this, but the guy's got a point. You know I love the books, but we all know PJ isn't the next Kubrick. He's ridden roughshod over the original text for a start, and doesn't have an eye for nuance or scriptwriting.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 8:36 a.m. CST

    HAHAHA!!! You fucking wierdos who desperately attempt to knock L

    by Snake-eyes

    What is the matter with you all? Are you so insecure with your own choice of films that you feel them somehow threatened by the undisputed greatness of the LOTR trilogy? Arguing about box office taking is just about the lamest arguement one can make. Look how much cash Titanic made compared to Shawshank Redemption for example!!! I wonder which is the better film there, hmm??? Everyone wants to see their favourite films do well, and I suppose like the Oscars, the box office takings should be a good reflection of a film's greatness...but they AREN'T!!!! So STOP bringing it up losers!!!

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 8:50 a.m. CST

    Oh and another thing...

    by Snake-eyes

    To those SW fans who mocked LOTR fans earlier by saying "What will we do after ROTK is over?" Well..... we have the ROTK EE to look forward to (4 and half hours I've heard!!!!), which will be magnificent! And if that isnt enough, we have very probable chance that The Hobbit will be made!!! SWEET!!! And not forgetting, we always have the books and films to keep as entertained in the same way the books alone managed to do all those years before there was even any talk of LOTR films!!!!! Maybe you havent yet realised that you lot only have one more SW film to look forward to and, given the last two STUNK, that is hardly an exciting prospect!!!!

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 9:04 a.m. CST

    Johnny Suede.....(read my last post)!! Commando Cody......(read

    by Snake-eyes

    Dear god, do you not see how you're mindless rants are giving your fellow Americans a bad name!!! I'm Welsh and a proud Welshman at that! But I certainly dont announce ridiculous boasts such as yours! Believe me, America's global reputation isnt all that great at the moment and the last thing it needs are childish, immature comments like yours reaching out to the world wide web, albeit inititally through a small web community like this.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 10:23 a.m. CST

    Hey, mynameisnobody...

    by Halloween68

    I read that Yahoo AP review link you posted earlier. That guy is a complete and total idiot who wrote that. A) You had to know some nimrod would eventually complain about the length of the film. There was one for each of the films. There are just some people (who I frankly think shouldn't have a thing to do with the film industry) who can't sit in a movie theatre longer than an hour and a half. These people are easily distracted. Their buzzing cell phones continue to remind them that they have calls to make in order to continue to feel self-important. B) How can you take anyone who says this next at all serious: "There's far too much cool-down time for casual viewers but probably not enough to satisfy the hard-core Tolkien legions. So why not put Blanchett back in voice-over mode, let her narrate a Reader's Digest condensed montage of Jackson's interminable ending, and save the elongated conclusion for the extended home-video cut?" Because that would cheapen the film you twit.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 10:25 a.m. CST

    lets wrap it up for all u Star War Jar-Jar's..

    by palebluedot7

    .. ys thts the SW synonym for the word 'troll'. and here i state a few reasons tht should incite u for some self-introspection 1.) LOTR fans are largely people who have read books. 'Books' ring any bells? its something only a patient educated soul can get through with and appreciate.So tht single fact would put the LOTR TBer's sooo.. above ur nonsensical eye candy movies. 2.) SW is not science fiction, its a scientific tragedy: " HE IS IN HYPERDRIVE FOR ABOUT AN HOUR NOW, HE MUST BE AT THE EDGE OF THE GALAXY BY NOW" draggg!. i have had science till my post grad level and knw tht statement is for wannabenerds who think the laws of physics can be bend like JAR-JAR's tongue. 3.) George Lucas was a greedy masturbatory lunatic who duped millions of dimwitts like u into watching his movies, even if it meant catching up with the 'story' from the THIRD MOVIE ! and to finish it BACKWARDS twenty two years later. LMAO. The race of men is hopeless. 4.) George Lucas movies are for pre-pubescent kids.Four words : JAR-JAR, Lightsabers, R2D2 and tht funny looking wearing Vader. 5.) its in a galaxy far far away and a long long time ago.. wt a farce 6.) Lucas could never in his motherfucking lives put together a comic strip let alone 900+ page books 7.) Its wrapped. Enough said to shut u up and if u dont, ul justify y u soo dig the idiotic SW series..

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 10:31 a.m. CST

    no mouth of sauron? WTF

    by Goneburger

    i'm too depressed about the thought of gandalf beating up Denethor. Since when was gandalf a goddamn thug? Bastard Jackson. A valiant effort, but not a true representation of the Lord of the Rings.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 10:36 a.m. CST

    SW is better than LOTR

    by Indiana Clones

    SW is better than LOTR.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 10:54 a.m. CST

    Summer_pudding

    by raw_bean

    PJ is not the next Kubrick, it's true. What makes you think Kubrick would've been right to direct LOTR though? Sorry fella, just my own humble opnion, but I disagree with you. PJ's films aren't perfect, but are closer to it than I could ever have hoped them, to be before they came out.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 10:55 a.m. CST

    Don't worry about it cutest,

    by raw_bean

    I'm not even annoyed at the guy, I just wondered if he could offer any kind of explanation/clarification/justification for the claim he made.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 10:57 a.m. CST

    let's face the music!

    by TheKingInYellow

    star wars has seen its share of glory in the spotlight. lucas did a really dumb thing when he decided to prequel it and he's paying for it. jackson, however, has taken a story, adapted it, and gave it to the world to the best of his ability. and might i say that the 'best of his ability' is probably the most ambitious that i've ever seen (on par with gilliam (sorry)). his work ethic is definitely an inspiration to me as well as others. i'm just satisfied knowing that i was at bnat5 which will probably be the closest to bliss as i will ever achieve, well maybe, we'll see. getting back to what i was saying; let's face it, tolkein's entire body of work blows lucas' out of the water as far as epic storytelling goes. but, they're both good at what they do/did and they both enjoy/ed it so what's the big deal? as long as you're enjoying what you're doing, then the rest of the world be damned. i think i've gone and confused myself with this ramble.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 11:02 a.m. CST

    "I was too young to have been around for the original STAR WARS

    by Indiana Clones

    Brilliant logic, dragon-slayer. LOTR is nowhere fucking NEAR the phenomenon that SW was, no matter how much you lie to yourselves. LOTR is popular sure, but SW was a global epidemic. STFU if you werren't even there. You'll never be a part of something like we were. Keep dreaming, level 9 wizards.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 11:08 a.m. CST

    palebluedot

    by raw_bean

    "LOTR fans are largely people who have read books. 'Books' ring any bells? its something only a patient educated soul can get through with and appreciate.So tht single fact would put the LOTR TBer's sooo.. above ur nonsensical eye candy movies." ---- with the obvious exception of you. Bloody hell, trolls like you give us LOTR fans a bad name. Real LOTR fans don't need to belittle others to justify their opinion of the LOTR films, and ignorant, offensive, barely literate rants like yours just lead to bile being directed at more tolerant LOTR fans who don't deserve it. -------------- Goneburger, I wouldn't get so het up about it. This incident sounds to me like another one of those that comes across much worse when described out of context than it does in the film, and at the end of the day, though it does sound stupid, it's only one moment in a very long film (apparently) filled with very good moments.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 11:12 a.m. CST

    Search no more, charCoal-boy, Sabster found the TB in question..

    by mortsleam

    She's such a diligent li'l Sab. I'm actually surprised it wasn't from the days preceding the GB (Great Ban.) But it turned out to be a natural extention of the Lord Of The Rings Musical, not off-topic BS or nothin'. Oh, and please don't call me "Flipper." For some unknown reason that just really annoys me. Sorry to be so humourless, I really wish I could understand why it irks me so. Blubulant One I can take, Sea Mammal, Wal-Mort, even Crispy or Gimp-Tusk or something, just not Flipper. Maybe because Flipper was a dolphin? I dunno. It's strange, huh? But I guess if nicknames didn't irritate you somewhere deep down, they wouldn't serve their purpose. This has been a rare moment of vulnerability from your friendly neiighborhood Walrus. Please resume your normal lives. Oh and to stay marginally on-topic: ROTK WILL rule, filmamking will NEVER reach these heights again, and even if something like Titanic comes along, it won't make much difference since that movie sucked sucked SUCKED! Lordy, did that ever suck. Hmph. No one's taking me seriously now, are they? Because you're all thinking of me as "Flipper." Damn you.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 11:17 a.m. CST

    Indiana Clones, "SW is better than LOTR"

    by raw_bean

    Oh, wow, epihphany! How can this have escaped my attention for so long?! It seems so obvious now you lay it out for me so clearly and logically. ---- Oh, wait, no. cutestofborg's argument makes even more sense. Sorry fella, I'm back to merely loving SW, and absolutely adoring LOTR. Nice try though, you genuinely had me convinced for a minute. ;)

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 11:21 a.m. CST

    eleanor - Ouch, You Cut Me to the Quick as If You Used The Thric

    by hipcheck13

    I don't care if people get "emotional" while writing reviews or discussing their favorite movies. Hell, I support it, and it's one of the things that makes AICN's TBs so damn funny. What I find pathetic is when fantasy crosses reality - and it's unintentional. Tolkien's books were just BOOKS, the movies are just MOVIES and that line down there is the one that separates real from not real. Imagine if you applied your theory to EVERY piece of art? By the way, it's not just the LOTR folk that do this - you read it in the Matrix, Star Wars, etc. talkbacks. The LOTR folk seem MORE apt to do it, and get more pissed off when they're called on it. It's great to get behind something you love, but it's not so cool to be a completely enwrapped religious zealot and lose sight of where "pretend" ends and "real" begins. As for me, I certainly love and appreciate Pete Jackson's work on the trilogy - it's beautiful, artistic and awe-inspiring, but I have no desire to track down the real Crystal of Coconuts and kill the gigantic Rolly-Polly bug which awaits in the Caverns of Goobersnot.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 11:33 a.m. CST

    Indiana Clones, let it go.

    by raw_bean

    You sound desperate to cling on to the glorious past when Star Wars 'was a global epidemic'. You'll always have that, no matter whether LOTR achieves a similar impact today or not. Incidentally, I'm sure people who disliked Star Wars back in the day were just as dismissive of it then as you are of LOTR now. --- Is LOTR this generations Star Wars? I couldn't give a flying fuck, I like 'em, and that's what matters to me. Next in the hierarchy of importance: most of my friends and family like them. Way down the list: the fact that a significant chunk of the rest of the world like them. Hell, in days gone by more people thought the Earth was flat than now think SW is the best thing ever/LOTR is the best thing ever combined, and they were still wrong. Do all these faceless millions that I will never meet outnumber the faceless millions who love Star Wars? No-one can ever convince me to care. Hell, in days gone by more people thought the Earth was flat than now think SW is the best thing ever/LOTR is the best thing ever combined, and they were still wrong. And since I belong to both camps (even though I find the uneven quality of the Star Wars films to be more pronounced than PJ's propensity to fuck some few things up pretty badly in amongst all the perfect or near-perfect elements of LOTR), I'm just glad to go watch the films and enjoy them. And look forward to ROTK EE on DVD, and SW EpIII, and hopefully the Hobbit.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 11:42 a.m. CST

    Oops, copy+paste instead of CUT+paste! Didn't mean to repeat the

    by raw_bean

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 11:52 a.m. CST

    Just to put all this "Global Epidemic" bullshit into perspective

    by mortsleam

    First of all, the proper term would be "Pandemic." Secondly, in the summer of 1977, Star Wars was everywhere, and there were lines around the block. I know, as my father, brother and I stood in them to see the movie seven times. But it's important to remember that: Thirdly, the book upon which these movies are based is the second-best selling book OF ALL TIME behind the Bible. Which leads me to: Fourthly, as stated above, the WORLD WIDE grosses of the Lord of the Rings movies far exceeds the grosses of the NEW Star Wars Prequels. The only conclusion any rational person can come to is this: In '77, and again in '81, and then to a limited extent in '85 Star Wars WAS a Pandemic. And for exactly one weekend in 1999 it almost became communicable once again. But then it didn't. And as of right now, there is only one series of films that has swept the entire world in a frenzy like George Lucas's original creation did nearly thirty years ago. Finally, Fifthly: In 1964 the Beatles traveled to America to appear on the Ed Sullivan Show and began a firestorm of mass hysteria that engulfed the entire world and has never nor will ever be equaled. I WIN! GOO-GOO g'MUTHAFUCKIN' JOOOOB! (;{=

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 11:52 a.m. CST

    What do you want me to do Pip, wah my fucking mouth out with soa

    by raw_bean

    Yeah, I remember that bit. Didn't he jump/fall out of a window or something, but saw something so stupendously distracting that he forgot to fall?

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 11:54 a.m. CST

    Damnit, waSh!

    by raw_bean

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 11:57 a.m. CST

    *Cue all the TBers frantically scrubbing, compelled by the hypno

    by raw_bean

    It was meant as a spelling correction, if that wasn't clear. :)

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 11:59 a.m. CST

    Actually, Indy old dork...

    by Skyway Moaters

    I WAS around when SW was in theatres in '77, and it came out of nowhere compared to the anticipation surrounding the release of FOTR. For one thing, there was no WWW in those days so the customary level of hperbole surrounding a major theatrical release now a days was not even 'dreamable' in 1977. Star Wars took merchandising tie-ins to the next level - wrote the book on how to wring the most revenue possible out of franchise property. It's a much bigger industry now than back in '77. The buzz surrounding ESB and ROTJ was louder by a large magnitude than was the case for ANH, but neither came anywhere close to the media saturation we are experiencing with T2T and ROTK.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 12:02 p.m. CST

    A Tolkien lover's take on the films

    by Prof. Ransom

    I have loved The Lord of the Rings for quite some time. I am very very familiar with the books inside and out, as well as the Silmarillion and other Middle-earth writings. I was apprehensive when the films were first announced because I feared that if they were made poorly the books would lose possible readers to the "I saw the movie and it sucks" crowd. Peter Jackson and Company have surpassed my greatest expectations. The films are not exactly like the books, but I feel they do capture the "feeling" of Middle-earth. I did not like either FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING nor THE TWO TOWERS upon first viewing because I was too busy mentally comparing them to the book, and noticing the parts that were different. Each became remarkably better on the second and subsequent viewings. I fully expect THE RETURN OF THE KING to be the same for me. I am able to accept the changes because I can seperate the films from the book and appreciate it on its own. Similarly, I love Ian Fleming's James Bond stories, and also appreciate what I call "movie Bond" who is not quite the same, but still entertaining. I have really no desire to compare movie franchises or to put down one film in comparison to another . . . it really boils down to tastes, and there is no accounting for people's tastes, or east and west (meaning the Shire and the Rangers) . . . if you take my meaning!

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 12:09 p.m. CST

    Aahh, a voice of reason! Welcome, Prof.Ransom.

    by raw_bean

    By 'other Middle-Earth writings', does that include Unfinished Tales and The History Of Middle Earth?

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 12:16 p.m. CST

    And now, a few words about feeding the trolls...

    by hildebrand

    The best way to continue to feed the trolls is to continue posting about esoteric bits about the Lord of the Rings. They develop their basic complaints about the people who watch these movies (which are the same old tropes that I still think we should play 'spot the anti-fantasy trope game'), whine about latent homoeroticism, the length of the movies, or that some other franchise is better. In response we should choke this talkback with the deepest of converstation about the most ephemeral piece of the books and run that discussion in the ground. So, here is my challenge to all of the tailenders, let us get a good discussion (must be of some substance, real intellectual debate seems to scare the trolls a great deal) underway so that the trolls die for lack of oxygen. Because, in the end, the trolls have nothing of merit to say. Nothing, and even they would have to admit that this is the case. They post here only to get their jollies, hoping to juice some of kind of life into their joyless existence. They cannot abide people happily chatting about things that don't interest them (or are above their heads). Some have been so desperately whacking away at those who enjoy the films that it is truly become pathetic, and should move us to pity, which is all they deserve from us. ***Ok, here we go, a few topics that might get the ball rolling. First, I posted last night about my lack of interest in Saruman after the fall of Isengard, what chracter in the book (a main one) that never really caught your attention, or lost your attention after a while. Another question, what character came to life for you in the movies in a way that he or she did not in the books? For me it was Boromir and Theoden. Conversely, which character in the book really did not do it for you in the movies? I'm quite sure that there are countless other questions that could be fun to discuss. Let us make that our focus.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 12:16 p.m. CST

    77 comparisons are idiotic

    by sparta2004

    1) SW was awesome for the time, and awsome for the now, but in 1977 it didn't have to compete with a gazillion other sci-fi/fantasy movies 2) There was no home video viewing in 1977. NONE! If you wanted to see SW 10 times, you went to the theater 10 times. period 3) Will all the folks clamoring to see the SW, it was released several times in several years. Anyone and everyone should know that movies' box office totals were heavily padded by multiple releases before 1980 or so. 4) The special effects were groundbreaking, and Lucas deserves credit for that. But if Lucas or someone else had broken the FX mold before SW, does anyone think that SW would have attracted as much attention as it did? 5) SW had a fan base from ages 5 to 80, making it a family movie as well as a blockbuster. Noone is going to take their 5 yo to see LOTR unless they want their kid screaming with their head in their shirt for three hours 6) SW had a much shorter running time than any LOTR movie. Shorter time means more showings means more viewers means bigger box office returns 7) Even the die-hard LOTR fans (like myself) don't see the TE 10 times (like I did with SW), 3+ hours is a burden and I get to buy the EE and watch it at home with the pause button.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 12:24 p.m. CST

    Just a hint for all self procliamed movie 'geeks'...

    by ZephyrHawk

    Girls like a man who cries. Not a lot, mind you, but showing a little emotion now and then never hurt anyone. For instance, crying at any movie starring Julia Roberts is a sign of unmanly weakness. But someone who doesn't cry at "Where the Red Fern Grows" is a member of the walking dead. As for myself, I cried while reading some of these reviews. Am I looking forward to Trilogy Tuesday? Oh, yes.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 12:26 p.m. CST

    and comparisons with the prequels=laughable

    by sparta2004

    And that's because the prequels are laughable. Jar-Jar sucked green weenies. The larval Vader is a suck baby, and his dialogue sounds like an interview with a boy band in Teen Beat. The SW prequels are loaded with eye-winking, don't take this seriously, pop-culture crap. Why? When Lucas did SW, it was because he liked all that stuff. Now, he doesn't anymore and is trying to produce movies that will appeal to someone else, namely, virginal teenagers full of post modern angst and die hard SW geeks. He doesn't take the movies seriously anymore (just look at the two headed color commentary dring TPM race, blech), why should I?

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 12:33 p.m. CST

    the king is coming

    by raker

    and he ain't just breathing hard.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 12:39 p.m. CST

    Indianaclones - LOTR vs SW worldwide

    by I_AM_SPARTACUS

    get your facts straight, moron. You say LOTR did no where near SW worldwide? Two Towers outdid SW worldwide boxoffice gross. By about 200 million. What? you say only due to inflation? OK, two towers falls off the charts when comparing tickets sales, but the reason those numbers don't mean shit - now pay attention here - is because VCR's and DVD's did not exist in the 70's. Or, if you can follow me here, in the 30's for Gone with the Wind. Release Gone with the Wind 47 times in 50 years in the theater and of-ucking course it will sell tickets. You want to pull your head out of your ass and see the light? Then take the DVD/Video sales upon first release, multiply x 4 or 5 (number of people watching one sale) and see what number you get. LOTR hasn't had 25 years to sell videos, so don't even go that road. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying any movie is better than another because of box office - (do you rank titanic highest?) - I'm only saying that you are a fucking moron. are we clear on that?

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 12:50 p.m. CST

    "media saturation"

    by Indiana Clones

    What media saturation? Without actually looking for LOTR, all i've seen are some ugly elf bastards on magazine covers. No newsspots, no front page headlines, no guest TV appearances, no t shirts, no kids in the street pretending to run around casting spells. LOTR is fucking nothing compared to what happened in '77. Hypothesise about societal paradignms and demographics all you like, unless you were there you don't know what it was like. When gandulf gets his own disco record let me know. Fucking kids.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 12:52 p.m. CST

    Thank you for the greeting raw_bean!

    by Prof. Ransom

    "Star shines on the hour of our meeting!" I think I like hildebrand's idea for a discussion strategy, so I'll try answering his questions . . . 1. All the characters in The LORD OF THE RINGS caught my attention . . . Prof. Tolkien's writing style so affected me that all his characters had a feeling about them that I loved, both hero and villain. 2. I already loved the characters from the book, so none had the chance or need to come to life more in the films. 3. I must say that Faramir lost a bit from book to film, and it looks like Denethor may as well, but I will reserve judgement until I have viewed the film.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 12:54 p.m. CST

    I_AM_SPARTACUNT

    by Indiana Clones

    get your facts straight, moron. I didn't say LOTR did nowhere near SW worldwide (which it hasn't). I said it was more popular.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 12:58 p.m. CST

    "do you rank titanic highest?"

    by Indiana Clones

    And yeah, i do rank Titanic almightily highly. Shit face.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 1:04 p.m. CST

    This argument about box office determining who is king of the hi

    by Commando Cody

    Look, I may have inadvertantly helped to fuel this franchise war fire back when I responded to a post about box office numbers (and the fact that in comparing LOTR to SW, you still need to adjust for inflation and that greatly increases the SW numbers.) But all that said, look, if everyone here wants to be childish and simply and purely go by NUMBERS as the validation for who is king of the hill (ie. box office numbers = the true barometer of people's interest) than it's a big FUCK YOU to BOTH the Lord of the Rings fans AND the Star Wars fans, because if you check IMDB's all-time worldwide box office charts, the franchise that beat BOTH Lord of the Rings AND Star Wars is...yes, get ready to swallow your pride both camps, the 2 HARRY POTTER movies. So as far as Lord of the Rings fans gooshing in their pants and stating "LOTR is the new king! We've deposed Lucas and SW! LOTR is clearly the fantasy franchise for THIS generation!" I'd say "Uh...no, you're STILL wrong." Because clearly today's kids (in terms of book sales and reading and outright interest) there's NO WAY you can argue that today's kids are reading the LOTR books more than the Potter books. And again, in terms of box office, the 2 Potter films beat BOTH of the LOTR films. And since someone brought up the notion of "running times" and "how many screenings a theater can get in" and "home video sales are the final judge because that shows how much people want to keep watching it at home"...well, if you want to bring up the whole home video argument, then the jury is still out. We'll just have to see how well the LOTR DVDs (in terms of overall sales) ultimately do stack up against SW:OT when it's released this November (by the way, Harry, nice going NOT ever reporting that here!) And furthermore, if you want to go by home video sales, than just this week alone anyone can claim PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN is more popular than LOTR becase the DVD/VHS release of PIRATES became the largest selling home video release in history. So sheesh, stop arguing numbers because they can be pretty much twisted any way you want...

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 1:04 p.m. CST

    OrionAngel - Hipcheck

    by I_AM_SPARTACUS

    Orion - think about what you said. The lines were longer for Star Wars? That proves it was a bigger phenom than LOTR? I guaran-damn-tee you that more people saw LOTR the first week, or weeks even, than SW. Simple mathamatics, because there are more theaters now than in '77! 10x as many! I saw SW a few weeks after coming out because I couldn't get in. I saw LOTR opening week because where there used to 2 screens in my pisshole city there are now 24 screens, with another thousand within driving distance. Maybe SW was bigger, maybe not. Time will tell if LOTR stands up. Maybe SW was better, I dont know, thats opinion. I'm only saying the lines and waits mean zero. --------- Hipcheck - what, you can't get emotional about anything not real? art? theater? opera? a beautiful sunset? - ok, I'm stretching - But what about sports? A chick cries because she won the gold on the balancing beam? That's not real either, by your logic - it's not life, not like anybody died or anything. When I see art, whatever the form, it can inspire, emote feelings. It makes me want to write, to sing, to dance, to run naked in the grass waiving my arms about like a little hobbit. It gets my juices flowing, surging, pushing, coursing through my body, the pressure.... ok, now I gotta go take a leak.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 1:05 p.m. CST

    Gandelf gansta rap song

    by Indiana Clones

    Actually isn't it more likely to be croony boyband slush?

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 1:05 p.m. CST

    Ah, 1977.

    by FluffyUnbound

    A few things to remember about 1977: Yes, there were lines around the block to see Star Wars, and the Star Wars characters turned up hosting television shows. But you have to remember that 1977 was before the era of the multiplex. I saw Star Wars in a small movie theatre in Patchogue, NY, and yes I waited in line. If I was back in New York and that theatre was still the only one around, and it was playing ROTK, I can guarantee you there would be lines. There will not be lines now, because there are 3 multiplexes within 15 miles of that site, each of which will show ROTK on multiple screens. With regard to the SW cast appearances on TV, 1977 was also during the era of the three networks, before cable took over the dial for most Americans. The networks had a penchant for latching on to any hot thing and building a variety show around it, because the public still had an appetite for variety shows [or maybe they were trapped into watching them because there were only 3 networks]. The fucking Climax Blues Band had a variety show. Tony Orlando and Dawn got a variety show. The Brady Bunch kids got a variety show. So it is not surprising that the droids got a variety show. There will be no LOTR variety shows because now that there are enough channels, no one has to subject themselves to viewing crap like that, so no such shows will be made. If the networks feel the need to show a variety show other than SNL and Mad TV they can just show another Carol Burnett clip show or Muppet retrospective or something. There will be no need for any LOTR cast member to humiliate themselves.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 1:08 p.m. CST

    "There will be no need for any LOTR cast member to humiliate the

    by Indiana Clones

    Yeah. they've probably had enough of that.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 1:12 p.m. CST

    Oh yeah, and to Snake Eyes about America and it's standing in th

    by Commando Cody

    ...Get your head out of your ass already. America has always been and will always be the country the rest of the world aspires to be like. And shove it if you don't like the fact that some of us are more than willing to say it openly, instead of cowing down to mentally fucked up internationalists who are too afraid to ever take a stand on a matter or actually fight for a cause without first figuring out (1) what their ultimate surrender plan is going to be, since that's what they'll be resorting to pretty fast or (2) how quickly then can dial up America on the phone and beg us to come bail them out of trouble yet AGAIN. Penis envy isn't pretty my friend. Just deal with the fact that the rest of the world have smaller dicks than us.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 1:13 p.m. CST

    Harrison Ford is embarassed he was Han Solo.

    by FluffyUnbound

    Sad, but true. That says a lot about Star Wars in general.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 1:17 p.m. CST

    EXCEPT cutestofborg....

    by Big Dumb Ape

    As Commando Cody pointed out in a dead-on accurate post just above you, if you want to play the numbers game and add the films box office take up, then the 2 LOTR films got THEIR ass kicked by the 2 Harry Potters. So me thinks the lesson endeth THERE.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 1:18 p.m. CST

    "Again let me educate the ignorant"

    by Indiana Clones

    Holy shit you're right. The honest wholesome movie studios would never fabricate favour-generating figures based on incredibly creative monetary theories. That would be wrong! Every figure you have ever read is surely 100% accurate. And fuck you for making me use the universal LOTR loser language of sarcasm.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 1:21 p.m. CST

    Ford

    by Indiana Clones

    Who cares what Harrison Ford thinks? He's a retard. So is Alec Guinness. 2005 will see the real return of the king.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 1:23 p.m. CST

    Actually, HP is a good challenger. Let's see after its 3rd film

    by FluffyUnbound

    Since CoS was $100 million lighter than TPS, I think HP will not be much of a threat to LOTR after both 3rd films are out. Unless something happens to reverse both series' trends.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 1:27 p.m. CST

    So I take it that the "Indiana" is after the River Phoenix versi

    by FluffyUnbound

    Sorry about your loss.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 1:28 p.m. CST

    I'm sure Harrison Ford will take pride in Han Solo over fucking

    by Big Dumb Ape

    Or Random Hearts. Or K-19 the Widowmaker. Or 6 Dazs, 7 Nights. Or Sabrina. Or Frisco Kid. Or Hanover Street. Bottom line: Harrison Ford has never said he wasn't proud of Han Solo, in fact he's long recognized and publicly admitted what the role did to propel his career into orbit. Not to mention acknowledging the fact that it got him the Indiana Jones role, the one role he DOES covet as his all-time favorite acting job (and RAIDERS as his all-time favorite filmmaking experience). Ford has never said he hated Han Solo, he's simply said he doesn't understand the uber-geek mentality of people fawning over a particular character to such an ultimate extreme. In short, Ford's attitude towards uber geeky fans is the equivalent of William Shatner's infamous "Get a life" declaration. Nothing more, so don't go trying to put a spin on it.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 1:36 p.m. CST

    I now have my ROTK tickets!!! Who wants to touch me!!!

    by Yo Yo Man

    Just read the review on Empire's website. A few excerpts for you: "Jackson has also proved that notions of risk and ambition needn't be confined to the low-budget, indie end of the spectrum; nor does California have an exclusive stranglehold on groundbreaking special effects." "While it might have been fair to grant Lee a curtain call, Jackson quite rightly realises that it is Sauron, not Saruman, whose fiery eye encompasses all the narrative strands of the climax." And, in case you hadn't guessed... five stars. Oh, and Beany, Cutest: hey, how's tricks? Indy: tell the truth, are you being stubborn or just brilliantly ironic?

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 1:58 p.m. CST

    I love AICN!

    by Prof. Ransom

    I love AICN because anytime I need to laugh I can come here and read delightful put downs by posters like Frododies, and the witty vulger constructions of some really talented talkbalkers. I love both the high brow and the low brow, and AICN delivers both!!!

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 1:58 p.m. CST

    frodododies

    by hildebrand

    Good work, young man, there may be a future in a waste-water treatment plant for you. Your command of the language is breath-taking. Your vocabulary, second only to Shakespeare. We stand in awe of your ability to make fun of people using the same old tired cliched references that have only been used by every other troll who has flamed people who enjoy LOTR. Why is it that the trolls cannot be more creative? I guess it is the fact that middle school is not the best breeding ground for creativity. Or worse yet, you live as a cubicle dweller, hoping that the next sales call will be successful, so that you can actually pocket more then $100 in commissions this week. Just stop, in the end you only embarrass yourselves, and serve to make the rest of us feel inordinately smug our lives. In the end, we are so much better then you. Hey, I heard that the service industry is the fastest unionizing industry in the business, better hop on board, we would hate for you to be treated poorly by those employ you to do the menial work that no one else would do. Have at it.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 2 p.m. CST

    To frododies...

    by Yo Yo Man

    Dude, you're right. I just had an epiphany. Of course LOTR sucks! I just didn't see the light until I read your post. What's this scraggly mess in my hands? Holy shit, it's Peter Jackson's butt hair! And why is JRR Tolkien's exhumed coffin lying open in the corner of my parents' basement? Look what I've become... I'm ashamed of myself. Thank you, frododies, for affording me this second chance at becoming a normal human being who doesn't get excited about great movies. By the way, that vinegar-tinged smell surrounding your strawberries is Peter Jackson's piss. Enjoy your opinions, they've only got four and a half days left.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 2:02 p.m. CST

    Fododie: "Antolle ulua sulrim...

    by Skyway Moaters

    ... Utinu en lokirim! Lle naa haran e' nausalle! Dolle naa lost". And finally the one you asked about: "Amin naer"! Get to it!

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 2:04 p.m. CST

    Book-to-film character translations

    by Warin

    The only one I really *hated* was Galadriel. I was so looking forward to Kate (Cate?) Blanchett, who no doubt could have done a spectacular job. But I think she got terrible direction from PJ, and the whole Lothlorien part of FOTR was just on the wrong note for me. Far too ominous and supernatural. And PJ should have let her act through the "temptation scene" instead of using CGI. (Too much CGI in Theoden's transformation as well. "Seamlesss" my eye...)

  • So does this mean that Titanic is the best movie of all time? Certainly not in my opinion. Others may disagree. Anyway, I think the whole numbers argument is ridiculous. It doesn't take an idiot to figure out that interest in Star Wars has waned considerably, regardless of numbers. I used to be... probably one of the biggest Star wars fans you'd ever see. I had ZERO interest in Lord of the Rings. I had only read The Hobbit before Fellowship came out. Anyway, I had a Star Wars collection to rival any fans, and about a year or two after Phantom Menace, I just gave up on the whole franchise and a few months ago I sold the entire collection for a song(I kept my original trilogy stuff though.) I thought Attack of the Clones was just passable. It still had ridiculous dialogue that pulled me out of the story(and that's the whole point SW defenders, when you note something in your head like, "gee that sounds pretty awful", then it ruins the verisimilitude of the film experience) and it held back where it shouldn't have and could have given the story more weight - when Anakin kills the Sandpeople. Anyway, I went into Fellowship expecting to be bored out of my mind and was actually blown away instead and thought it was just about perfect. I even waited like three weeks until I finally saw it because enough people were saying that it was great that I just had to go. Still, it took a few months of rolling the film over in my mind before I really thought, "holy shit, that was pretty damn good." And that actually happened with another movie way before Fellowship came out - The Matrix. I swear, I liked it in the theater, but the excitement around TPM was so intense that I didn't remember The Matrix until months later when the first twinges of disappointment over TPM started to settle and I realized that The Matrix was actually a much better and more interesting film. That wore off after a while and I haven't seen either sequel. Don't know why I lost interest... it was either time or the fact that by the time those films came out this year, I had already gotten into a lot of other types of films on DVD and LOTR's first two installments stole their thunder. So anyways... back to TPM and AOTC. I am happy for those people that can find the same enjoyment in it that they found in the OT, I really am. I just can't find that enjoyment. I've only gotten it out of... in recent years - LOTR, The first Matrix, X Men 2(a little on the first one), and, more recently, I thought Master and Commander was just an unbelievably great, meticulously produced film. I will say this for the Star Wars defenders - IF I HAD enjoyed TPM and AOTC as much as I enjoyed the OT films, George Lucas would have been able to pay off the national debt with his profits. Let's face it, even as a disappointment to many, those films raked in the dough on name recognition and expectations alone. If they were actually GREAT movies on the level of A New Hope and Empire, then they would have easily outgrossed Titanic and LOTR combined. Whereas I only saw AOTC once in the theater and TPM twice, I, along with many others, would have gone to see it probably five or six times if I loved them the way I love Empire. I saw both FOTR and TT three times apiece. One last thing - the kid(not really, he was 25) that I sold my Star Wars collection to kept asking me over and over again why I was selling it and, being that he had already told me about his plan to get Jango Fett tattooed across his entire back and Yoda up his leg, I didn't have the heart to go into my disappointment with the new films and lack of interest in collecting the memorabilia having to do with something so mediocre. I just kept brushing it off by saying that I was moving(which I was) and wouldn't have enough room for it all(a lie). His response? He told me that he took out a second mortgage and had an addition put on his house to store his collection. What do you say to that kind of insanity? I just thought... either he sees something that I don't or I see something that he doesn't or we both see something that the other doesn't. Like I said... I'm happy for those people. I wish I could be the same, but I just can't let what I consider to be the poor quality of those characters and those scripts slip by and join in the enthusiasm. And lastly, I don't know why Star Wars defenders don't just simply end the argument by claiming owneship of the best film out of all the franchises - Empire Strikes Back. Let's face it, it's better than Harry Potter, LOTR films, Matrix, Spider-man, X Men... you name it. In my opinion, it's the best fantasy film of all time and as far as sci-fi goes, it's only behind 2001. Don't come at me with Alien or some shit like that. Empire is just perfect. Even A New Hope is just as good, if not better than the LOTR films(so far, haven't seen ROTK), which, I also love dearly. I'm just saying, stop fucking defending TPM and AOTC, cause there's no way in hell they even come close to the quality of LOTR films and the CLASSIC BOOKS(cause that's right, that's where they came from you fucking illiterate film critics who act like these scripts were written just to make a quick buck off a bunch of retarded fantasy films) from whence they came. NEWSFLASH TPM AND AOTC FANS - you're losing the battle. Nobody gives a flying fuck about TPM or AOTC. At least nobody who isn't blind. LOTR had it in the bag before the films were even made just because they came from infinitely better and original stories rather than Lucas's infantile scripts written below the level of the goddamn Mary Kate and Ashley crowd. And we're talking the Full House years. Ok... rant over. Sorry. Gotta get back to being 'fair and balanced'. Anyway, you can win the argument over who has the best film simply by reverting to the OT, especially Empire. I'm serious. Overall... LOTR has the better trilogy of films when compared to either SW trilogy. SW wins a few battles, but LOTR wins the war. However, I still think Lucas frames his shots better than PJ. I still think most of the effects and action sequences in AOTC and TPM are nearly flawless. I just can't get over all the absolutely incoherent shit that's inbetween. Like I said - make Empire Strikes Back your flag... forget TPM and AOTC. You're just invading Russia in the winter. It's a lost battle as of two goddamn years ago.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 2:13 p.m. CST

    "infantile"

    by Indiana Clones

    Calling TPM and AOTC infantile is dwelling on a superficial face value in the extreme.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 2:14 p.m. CST

    : I_AM_SPARTACUS - Did You Actually Read My Posts?

    by hipcheck13

    Getting emotional watching a world-class gymnast (which by the way is REAL - she's not "playing" a gymnast) is great and terrific. Getting emotional at the movies is terrific. The difference is, one is REAL and one is FANTASY. I'm not saying don't get wrapped up in movies, books and painting - art in general; shit, that's why they exist. I'm not saying don't discuss the emotional ramafications of a movie. I'm saying there's a LINE separating ART and LIFE, and I cringe when I read things about guys feeling like they've been "stabbed by the hell-forged blade of Knucklehead" when NO SUCH BLADE EVER EXISTED. You can watch a gymnast break her leg on the pommel horse and refer to it, knowing it actually happened; it's a real part of life. But don't blow smoke up my shorts by saying your headache feels like "The Holy elf-sword of Cameltoe has split your skull in two." The person who responded to my initial post actually quoted some made-up Tolkien language as if it was an ACTUAL LANGUAGE. Folks - it AIN'T.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 2:15 p.m. CST

    "America has always been and will always be the country the rest

    by irritable

    That's so true Commander Cody. Everybody Else in the Whole world longs to have a person like George W Bush as its leader, not to mention those inspiring idealists Rumsfield, Ashcroft and Cheney really running the show. Everybody Else in the Whole world has always wished it had slavery and racial discrimination as a legacy to bask in, not to mention social injustice, no national healthcare system and a TV MacKulture of breathtaking vapidity and blandness. Everybody Else in the Whole world desperately needs the lower quality of life that exists in the US as compared to the countries in NorthWestern Europe (which have a substantial higher quality of life and more just and equitable social institutions). Everybody Else in the Whole world longs to be hated for foolish mistakes in foreign policy. That's because they all know that US citizens are genetically and culturally superior - (nothing to to do with the blind good luck of being born in a country with vast natural resources, a large local market and cultural institutions borrowed from Western Europe). But most of all Everybody in the world desperately wishes their country was full of ignorant, arrogant, simpletons like you. (BTW, do you realise how many of your fellow citizens cringe when retards like you do this sort of thing?)

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 2:19 p.m. CST

    Well, call me crazy hipcheck old fruit...

    by Skyway Moaters

    ... but the problem just may be that: For you there is a disconnect between 'life' and 'art'. And or some of us out here, be it good or bad in your, or someone elses estimation(s): There is not...

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 2:23 p.m. CST

    Dangit... and For , some of us out here...

    by Skyway Moaters

    <NT>

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 2:40 p.m. CST

    Actually, every country in the world DOES have a history of slav

    by FluffyUnbound

    You fucking unbelievable dumbass. I see that your knowledge of history starts in 1954.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 2:45 p.m. CST

    Actually no, you fucking unbelievable dumbass

    by irritable

    Every country in the world does not have a history of slavery and racial discrimination. I see your view of history begins with blind ignorance of the reported historical facts.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 2:48 p.m. CST

    Hipcheck's argument falling apart before our very eyes.

    by FluffyUnbound

    So let me get this straight - you are angry because someone used a METAPHOR to something you do not feel was appropriate? You have backed away from the rest of your "emotional involvement" argument, and are now falling back on the claim that one shouldn't compare something to a knife that didn't really exist? That seems a little silly. A valid metaphor is one that conveys the content one wishes to convey. The reviewer wanted you to know that he felt heartsick. You seem to have understood him in content terms - so that makes the metaphor valid. The same goes for language: a language is "real" if one can speak it to another person and be understood. That makes Esperanto real, although it has no native speakers. It ALSO makes Klingon and Elvish "real", to the extent that one person can speak it to another. Actually, more people probably speak Klingon to each other than many dying native languages across the world, and the anthropologists are knocking themselves out to study THOSE.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 2:52 p.m. CST

    Name a country that does not have a history of slavery at any po

    by FluffyUnbound

    Or that was not founded by colonists from a country with such a history. [No sneaking in New Zealand or something absurd like that.] Also, provide an example of a culture that never, at any point in its history, even as a fashion, considered its natives superior in some way to non-natives. Beyond that, the culture would also have to never had gone through a tribalistic phase, with its accompanying fetishes of inclusion / exclusion. It cannot be done. Sorry. Unless you arbitrarily cut your history off at a certain point, or unless you refuse to acknowledge systems of serfdom, indenture, or concubinage as slavery.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 2:55 p.m. CST

    dammit fluffy - - - Frododildo

    by I_AM_SPARTACUS

    you beat me to the "metaphor" argument to hipchecks reponse. Of course, I beat you to the multiplex one. I doubt Ford said he hated Han Solo, just that he hates the morons who bug the hell out of him when he's trying to make time with a 20 yr-old babe behind his wife's back. ----- Frododolo, or whatever the hell your assinine name is ( I cant believe you made me put the word dildo next to frodo in my subject line - asshole) - No, LOTR geeks do not think we are better than everyone. Only you. We think we are better than "you". You personally, I mean. All of us individually, as people, are better than you. Because, my friend, you are a fucking moron.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 2:57 p.m. CST

    hipcheck

    by Prof. Ransom

    Not only was metaphor used, but allusion, allusion to not just a knife piercing the heart, but a piercing of the being by a malevolent force seeking to destroy all that is good. A good allusion carries a connotation that expresses more fully the thoughts and emotions of the situation than mere description. Incidentally, my username is also and allusion . . . can anyone figure it out?

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 3:06 p.m. CST

    Prof. Ransom

    by I_AM_SPARTACUS

    Your name an allusion? Sure, it's easy. Obvious. Anyone can see that. It's an allusion because your not really there, a figment of the imagination, not really a professor, just like the dead faces in the marsh were an allusion - oh, wait, that is an "illusion". Nevermind, I have no fucking idea what professor-tolkien-held-ransom-for-his-success alludes to.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 3:12 p.m. CST

    . . . holds nothing ransom

    by Prof. Ransom

    I Love Spartacus . . . you are correct that my name alludes in some way to Tolkien . . . near the mark, but not in the gold.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 3:14 p.m. CST

    frododies to the rescue

    by hildebrand

    You, my friend, are the king on unintentional comedy. Keep posting, you are too priceless for words.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 3:20 p.m. CST

    Compare apples with apples ...

    by irritable

    .. and name a modern democracy with a worse record on slavery and racial discrimination in the last 150 years if you want to play logic games. *****I assume you're not seriously defending the retard chauvinism of Commander Cody. Remember him ""America has always been and will always be the country the rest of the world aspires to be like."****Anybody who can read knows no modern democracy has a perfect record in civil rights. Most ancient societies have appalling records but we're not talking about them - as you know. Cody is wrong and he's arrogant, but nobody's criticising national pride. There are plenty of admirable things about the US just like other countries. But the US (like other countries) is not a perfect society and many people in many countries don't want to adopt the bad aspects of US culture. *****Don't try to pretend I asserted the contrary. ***** For that matter, there's nothing 'absurd' about New Zealand, one of the few countries in the world which has dealt justly with an indigenous culture. It's a small country which boxes well above its weight in a number of important areas. Some countries aspire to that, too.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 3:26 p.m. CST

    America has

    by sparta2004

    the oldest extant written constitution in the world. the oldest extant democracy in the world. the strongest economy. the strongest military. andonandonandonandonandon. Yeah, we had that slavery thing going on here, that we inhereted from the Europeans, of course. And we have loads of natural resources, but so does Brazil, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and a gajillion other countries that suck ass. Pick at America all you want, there's plenty to criticize I suppose, but don't go carping about our culture when Euroweenies by the truck loads are falling over themselves to buy a Big Mac. At the end of the day, it sounds like the family runt bitching about us having the top bunk, even when we earned it.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 3:38 p.m. CST

    Did someone say that TPM was an "underrated classic"?

    by sparta2004

    What a tool! What a maroon! TPM was a fucking Saturday Morning cartoon. Meeza Thinx itz suxza! Really, it was irredeemable, despite the effort of one really kick ass light saber fight. Woohoo! I think the same idiot said that TPM was only "infantile" in a superficial way. Rrriiigghhhttt! Lucas wanted to make a movie that seemed like an infantile dipshitfest in a "superficial" way, but to those who can devine the deep meaning from Jar-Jar's scatology, it is an "underrated classic"! HA!

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 3:40 p.m. CST

    frododies ... too funny for words

    by I_AM_SPARTACUS

    I agree. Hey moron - I am the one that put dildo with frodo then lamented it. It's called a joke. self-deprecatory joke, you dumb motherfucker. but then that is the reason you are too funny for words. I only respond to you because the image of you sitting intently at your computer, feverishly typing words and sentencing that would get the shit kicked out of you on your playground at recess, then you punching refresh every 20 seconds to see if anyone talks to you, is an image hillarious as hell to me. "did they respond? did they talkback to me? ooooooooh, I can't wait to see"!

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 3:42 p.m. CST

    No intent here to slander New Zealand.

    by FluffyUnbound

    It seems like a lovely place. I did not mean that the country was absurd, I meant that its inclusion in the argument would be absurd. The later the date of a country's founding, the more likely it is that its political history will mirror current accepted norms. If I was to go out and found a country TODAY, it would be difficult for me to, say, exterminate the Incas to do it. As a result, it would be impossible for my country to bear the "guilt" of the Incas' demise. But it would be kind of silly for me to use the fresh vintage of my new country as an excuse to chastise, say, Spain, for its behavior in the 1520's. // But I only directed you to the broader human past because, prior to democratic capitalism's liberation of the world, political history EVERYWHERE is a record of migration, oppression, and extermination. The difference of 60 years between the British empire's banning of slavery and the end of the US Civil War seems like a trifle, measured against the total number of years that slavery was a standard, ordinary human institution.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 3:51 p.m. CST

    In fact, the US does not have the oldest extant democracy ...

    by irritable

    Even a runt like you, Sparta2004 (to recycle your lame jibe) - can pick up a book and find out who was earlier than the US - as if that was relevant. And plenty of totalitarian regimes have "extant written constitutions". It's not a measure of democracy. And having the largest economy and the largest armed forces in the world is does not have the effect that "America has always been and will always be the country the rest of the world aspires to be like." ****Or are you trying to defend Cody's bullshit and piss on the national pride of everybody else in the world, runt? Because "you" earned it?

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 3:55 p.m. CST

    Hardcore Yanker!

    by sparta2004

    If you would quit giving your stuffed Jar-Jar Binks doll a rimjob for long enough (its not anatomically complete you know), you might realize that the prequels are shit. FACT! And that Titanic was as successful as it was because it was a disaster movie (man flick) and a corny love story (chick flick) rolled into one. BTW, I think what you do to that Leonardo doll is illegal in most states.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 3:58 p.m. CST

    Forget the history lesson, everyone who can read can look up th

    by irritable

    ...there's only one issue here, Fluffy Unbound, are you defending Commander Cody's bullshit, and pissing on the national pride of everybody else in the world? No? I didn't think so.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 4:07 p.m. CST

    In fact, it is the oldest extant democracy

    by sparta2004

    Assuming of course you have picked up enough books in your days to know what "extant" means. And I said "oldest" extant written constitution. You do know what "oldest" means, huh? Actually, I didn't mean to get off on the wrong foot with you, and don't defend Cody or anyone else who pisses on everyone else's country. All countries have heritages to be proud of, as well as things to hang their head about, but your response to Cody boiled my blood a little, so I'll not apologize. If you don't give a rat's ass about what America thinks, pardon me if we don't give a rat's ass in return. Logical?

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 4:12 p.m. CST

    I can say

    by morGoth

    Yup, it

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 4:21 p.m. CST

    frododies and other repressed types

    by hildebrand

    Makes one wonder why someone who seemingly professes utter disdain for the LOTR movies has as an email address: Frodolives. Now, he will want to say he is simply being ironic. My guess is that he is simply dealing with a whole boatload of repressed emotions and thoughts. Come on, man, spill it, just how many different types of closets are you refusing to say that you inhabit. May be better for you to unburden yourself of all of your baggage and claim the life that you supposed to have, and shuffle off the coat of your sad existence as it is today. Again, another candidate for a few decades worth of billable hours for a pyschiatrist with expensive tastes to pay for. My goodness, I really missed a chance.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 4:25 p.m. CST

    frododies / frodolives

    by I_AM_SPARTACUS

    hey dumbass, why is your handle "dies" when your email link is frodolives? ha. You have as much shit for brains as that critic Roeper dude. He ripped, and I mean Ripped, fellowship, and ripped anyone who liked it. Now he says oh, well, when they're all together like that, i mean... Yeah, he has a thumbs up alright - thumb up his ass

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 4:27 p.m. CST

    dammit hildebrandt

    by I_AM_SPARTACUS

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 4:28 p.m. CST

    fact

    by hildebrand

    Were you banned recently, Hardcorewanker? Because the whole ending of each sentence with the declarative, FACT!, is a bit of a giveaway. Sadly you have learned nothing in your temporary exile. You still have so little to say, and you say even that with so little style. Nonetheless, I am glad that you are back, you and IndianaClones, Ryalto 3.1, Frododies, and whomever else, help to make sure that the low end of the spectrum of the bell curve is appropriately represented. (And yes, I mean the small number of folks who make up the 'fail' portion, we salute your stunning lack of ability)

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 4:32 p.m. CST

    Irritable is irritable.

    by FluffyUnbound

    I am definitely not defending Commander Cody. But to argue against Commander Cody it is ALSO not necessary to post diatribes against the United States. Merely favoring one's own country and savoring one's own patriotism should be enough. [Oh, except for in the case of France. France sucks. EAT IT, France.]

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 4:38 p.m. CST

    FluffyUnbound-Skyway Moaters - Swings and Misses

    by hipcheck13

    Fluffy unbound: Missed the argument again

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 4:39 p.m. CST

    Forget it fluffy......

    by sparta2004

    He's still looking up the meaning of "extant". Should take him a while, he's a stroke victim and his lips move real slow when he reads.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 4:44 p.m. CST

    hipcheck

    by elanor

    hipcheck, you are making grand assumptions about people if you think that using elvish or made up names in a post on a tb is an indication that the person can't distinguish between what is real and what is imaginary. Good lord, child. Talk about extreme prejudice! You say "What I find pathetic is when fantasy crosses reality". They are just words, hipcheck. I used elvish in my response to you to annoy you. You seem uptight and I think uptight people should be teased. I looked up some phrases that fit what I wanted to say, in order to please myself and my friends who frequent these tb's because it's fun. Really fun, not fantasy fun, to share jokes with your mates. You say "The LOTR folk seem MORE apt to do it, and get more pissed off when they're called on it." Who says I'm pissed off? I'm chuckling at you. I have been a Tolkien fan for 35 years. Do you have any idea how often I've heard people make this same tired complaint? I have a full and mostly happy life, thank you, and I enjoy being geeky with those who share my passion for Tolkien. I find it FUN to use Tolkien's words and ideas when I'm communicating on an AICN tb. You say "it's not so cool to be a completely enwrapped religious zealot and lose sight of where "pretend" ends and "real" begins." Oy, I hardly care any more for what is "cool" and whether I am or not, and you are free to have your opinions about what is cool for yourself, but what in the Shire do you mean by suggesting that using certain phrases amounts to losing "sight of where "pretend" ends and "real" begins."" Huh? How in Middle Earth would you know? And BTW, I know of noone who is currently trying to "track down the real Crystal of Coconuts and kill the gigantic Rolly-Polly bug which awaits in the Caverns of Goobersnot" because we all know they were destroyed when Smaug crashed in Lake Town. Sheesh.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 4:51 p.m. CST

    You've got the facts wrong Sparta2004

    by irritable

    ... or you're confused about the meaning of the word "extant" . Not that your mistake is relevant to Cody's slur on every country in the world other than the US.***Try Iceland or England. Both still have extant democratic systems. **** But get to the real point. Your blood was boiling because I pointed out to Cody reasons why the US has not always been "... "... the country the rest of the world aspires to be like." ***But the blood of lot of people starts boiling when arrogant simplistic comments like Cody's appear.*****Your response was to dump on other countries, like Brazil, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and a gajillion other countries that suck ass" and to start talking about "runts". ****We agree on one thing "all countries have heritages to be proud of, as well as things to hang their head about." ****But don't make up crap about me "not giving a rat's ass". to buttress your post. You want to play the insult game instead of debating the facts, I can play that game too. Logical?

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 4:53 p.m. CST

    Never answering questions

    by hildebrand

    Have you noticed that when trolls are asked direct questions, they usually don't answer. It is an interesting phenomenon. So, Frodolives, why do you use that name? Is it irony? Or is it that you are a closet Tolkienite, and wish to have some fun pretending to be a troll? Just wondering. Care to take a stab at an answer?

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 4:56 p.m. CST

    Mortenson Getting the part over Townsend...

    by John Anderton

    ... thank the GODS for that little bit of casting.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 5:04 p.m. CST

    People here will be enjoy you joke about "stroke victims" Sparta

    by irritable

    It's such an hilarious jibe you've come up with for people with relatives and friends are actually dealing with that issue.*****BTW, looked up "extant" yet you pitiful lamebrain?

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 5:05 p.m. CST

    slept like a knurfluggle of pelpherglabbin?

    by I_AM_SPARTACUS

    dude, you slept like a baby! But of course, I am a card carrying knurfluggleian. I would suggest you go to the pelpherglabbin website in the future to discuss this, since they will understand you better there. Here, though, references to a morgul blade are a-fuckin-ok, since it is a LOTR site and therefore only LOTR geeks abound. METAPHOR? SIMILE? must be based on real? WTF? Where did you get that rule? How about using "space alien" as a metaphor? no? ET? UFO? flying saucer? How about greek or roman myth? Atlas? Zeus? Adonis? as in "like an adonis, he doinked the babe" for example. No? should I go on?

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 5:13 p.m. CST

    elanor

    by hipcheck13

    1) Sorry. I don't know you from Greentree the Talking Dogwood. You can speak elvish, Elvis, Elroy or Elecrowoman and Dynagirl 'till your blade turns blue ('cuz of orcs), but ya just can't annoy me. You can sure BORE me if you do it, though. 2) Yep, we're all entitled to our opinions, so whoopeedeedoo if your parents read you Tolkien while you were in the womb. As these are community boards, I can and will comment, regardless if the LOTR zealots throw evil magic upon my head or not. 3) My point - which was lost by you zealots - is THIS is the reason you guys get razzed on the boards (and your over-reaction to said razzing). None of it's real, not the Moogoo-Blade, the Klingon Hug of Death, Aragon's left nut or wookies. Trying to "review" a movie by saying his heart got punctured by a Orc Veggomatic blade is akin to saying Star Wars made you feel as if you took a light saber to the sack. Both are equally stupid and lend themselves to the same criticism as those "speaking Klingon" or going to jury duty dressed in a Star Trek outfit. However - the last sentence of your post hints that you DO have a sense of humor somewhere in your methril/you thrill/we all thrill vest.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 5:13 p.m. CST

    Ha, take the point of view of a completely objective reader...

    by gil-galad12

    And compare the posts of the LOTR fans to the haters, like frododies and indiana clones. LOTR fans actually write using the well-known language called English. Guys like frododies use a broken, incoherent dribble of connected words like this:"lotr sucks fucking balls you all gay me no like you dumb", or something like that. Ha, I wonder who's winning the war of the words. And for the record, I also think Star Wars kicks major ass. The first three are flawless (even though some don't like ROTJ, I do) and the TPM was when I first watched it, just amazing. I hadn't seen Star Wars ever, and when I saw it, I was like a kid back in '77. "Holy shit, I've been missing out on this?". But since the ghastly AOTC, I've lost all faith in the third movie being half-decent. Think about this: when AOTC came out on DVD, did it make a big rustle? I'm sure a lot of fans bought it, but it came on the shelves, and sat there. I had to look it up on the Internet when it was coming out, because no one made a big deal about it. Doesn't that tell you something about that movie? Did you see a big craze surrounding AOTC like you saw with TPM? Not really. Think about it. And really, trying to bash LOTR is just hopeless. Give it up. Its one of the most universally loved movies ever, just like the original SW. Its impossible, you three or four dorks who appear on this board, give it up. You're wasting your time. You could instead be putting together your Millenium Falcon model in your basement. Seriously, just stop it. This board is for people who speak English, not spew pseudo-coherent, broken sentences and disgusting, pornographic language. I'm looking at you, frododies. And remember: Star Wars had a glorious run and will forever be played in our DVD players (well, in Sept. 04). But it's gracefully stepped back. It's LOTR's turn in the limelight. Be considerate and...recognize, beyotch!!! That is all.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 5:13 p.m. CST

    England?

    by sparta2004

    Some Democratic institutions does not a domcracy make. In 1789, the King of England was still the Head of State AND the Head of Government. Having an unelected monarch who has real political power is hardly a Democracy. Iceland has the same problem, despite having the oldest democratically elected parliment in the world..........As far as me dumping on other countries, Brazil had death squads hunting homeless children in the streets less than 20 years ago, Venezuela is still not stable, and Saudi Arabia, come on! There are a gajillion others like them, that objectively qualify as "suck-ass"....And just for the record, I was calling *you* a runt, not your country. I don't even know where you come from, and don't care. You, and other runts, kick others rightly when they piss on other countries, but you do the exact same thing in your response. Yeah, I pissed on Brazil, and I'm really happy about that. I pissed on you, and I'm happy about that too. I'm not the hypocrit, see? You are the one jumping Cody and then doing the exact same thing. I'm just defending my country from your bullshit rants.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 5:15 p.m. CST

    Yeah, I got irritable about "stroke victim" jokes...

    by irritable

    ... and typed too fast. The heading should have read " People here will enjoy your joke about "stroke victims" Sparta2004". I've lived with a stroke victim, Sparta2004. I'd call you a scum bag for that ugly joke, but that would be unfair to bags full of scum.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 5:22 p.m. CST

    Irritation

    by sparta2004

    I think you had better quit worrying about the issue of people dealing with strokes and start dealing with the issue of you getting your ass kicked. Iceland wasn't even independant until around 1945, idiot...........

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 5:29 p.m. CST

    I think you're "stroking" right now!

    by sparta2004

    If you know what I mean. Let me spell it out real slow for you, lamebrain (is that a "clever jibe")........The fact that you were a stroke victim in my "offensive joke", candyass, was not the source of your stupidity. It was that you move your lips when you read. That would make things slow enough, but the stroke makes you "move your lips real slow". GET IT!?! HA! I'm sure you do now. So you can take yourself off the cross, you are not the victim that you think you are. I wasn't "oppressing" you, and anyone who was similarly offended by my joke is as stupid as you are.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 5:29 p.m. CST

    Irritable

    by I_AM_SPARTACUS

    hey, you are da bomb an all, but you did rip on the US, and you did rip on US citizens, and you did rip on it's leaders. Perhaps unintentional, and that was not the point you were trying to illustrate, but you did. You used the "lucky enough to be born there" to take away any credit-taking of americans, then also used the US history of slavery as a mark against living there now. Why? it's not current americans fault they were 'lucky enough' to be born there? - You also said (albeit with indirect sarcasm) the country was full of ignorant, arrogant, simpletons like...(cody). "full of" meaning most americans are ignorant.. etc. To top it off, the only compliments you listed FOR america you chalked up to having been stolen (not the word you used, sorry, bad memory) from western europe. ------- like I said, you are da bomb. but the way you posted was (unintentionally, I dont doubt) an insult to 'all' americans. ---- not that it's anything to lose sleep about, after all, we're it's just a talkback, not a UN dabate.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 5:30 p.m. CST

    Sparticus

    by hipcheck13

    How nice you

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 5:47 p.m. CST

    It just gets weaker and weaker for Hipcheck

    by FluffyUnbound

    So now you're claiming that when the reviewer said the film pierced his heart like a Morgul-blade, that you DIDN'T understand what he meant? You DIDN'T know his intended meaning, and the general sense of his referent? You're lying. It's that simple. I have to believe that you are lying, because no one is that stupid. Everyone who read that sentence - EVERYONE, including retarded people - understood it. Every last soul. And yes, had the reviewer said, "It felt like I caught a lightsabre in the sack" anyone of reasonable intelligence should be able to deduce the meaning. I mean, really. If the final claim you make in defense of your argument is that you personally could not understand a sentence where someone compared an emotion to a knife to the heart, then I suggest you avoid the works of John Donne and any and all sonnets. They will get you into a great tizzy with all of their SIMILES and METAPHORS. And, actually, the fact that people can take an invented language - like Klingon - and FORCE it to be an employable form of communication, just because they like the notion of it, is actually very significant for the study of the philosophy of language. But I would assume that is way over your head.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 6:13 p.m. CST

    Ha, star wars-ites are about as funny as Hayden Christensen on..

    by gil-galad12

    oh wait a minute, nobody cares about that guy anymore. Does the average person even know who he is? I guess he didn't become the star he was supposed to be. I guess Ep.III will fix all that. Yeah, when it gets a Best Actor nod. And to the guys bitching about each other's countries, that's not cool at all. Don't get into an international fight, no one will win. Unless you're fighting a Frenchman, then he'll just surrender! (Okay, so France is the only country suitable for mockery. Why? Well, come on, look at the damn place.)

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 6:17 p.m. CST

    "Stroking" "lamebrains" "runts" "moving lips" ad infinitum

    by irritable

    The worthless debate on "first democracy" can be examined by anyone who wants to find out what happened when Colin Powell made the same statement recently. It's OT bullshit here, which you started Sparta2004, but the facts and the arguments (including the democratic history of Iceland) can be found on a dozen other net boards not to mention the local library. We can continue our flame war about that topic and our mutual perceived personal deficits privately or elsewhere if you're feeling particularly energetic.*****As for gratuitous insult swapping on this anonymous internet board, sparta2004, we can go at it hammer and tongs, night and day and bore everybody shitless and neither of us will win or take a backward step or stop till we're banned. So I accept we're equally capable of thinking up nasty insults and equally able to pursue this indefinitely. It's stalemate. Let's move on and get back to the movies.*****I_Am_Spartacus, I wasn't suggesting what you said and I'm not kicking US achievements. I've been there long enough to meet plenty of great people there. I have a problem with Cody's arrogant statement. We've covered that in boring detail so lets move on.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 6:23 p.m. CST

    "And really, trying to bash LOTR is just hopeless. Give it up. I

    by Indiana Clones

    If abstaining from reminding you that these films are fucking shit will help you to forget the fact, just say so dude.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 6:27 p.m. CST

    FluffyUnbound

    by hipcheck13

    Again, it

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 6:32 p.m. CST

    hipcheck

    by hildebrand

    What I wonder about is why you feel the need to alert folks to the fact that fantasy and reality are two different things. Do you really think that the vast majority of those who take the time to be a part of the discussion regarding LOTR have difficulty with the concept? Really? Have you never heard people, when describing a movie or book in a review or article, appropriate language from the book or movie as a part of their text? That is fairly standard practice, and does not belie the writer's inability to discern the difference between fantasy and reality. Do you find that this is the case? How many articles on Star Wars incorporate phrases or comments from the film to flesh out their writing? Probably quite a few. How many reviewers waxed poetic about toys during their reviews on Toy Story? Do you see the correlation? I am certain that you do. It is a well-worn trope with which to bludgeon those who enjoy fantasy stories that they have a difficult time differentiating reality and fantasy. So the writer of the review used flowery language, my guess is that he or she knew their audience well enough to put the phrase into the text, figuring that most would get the point. Honestly.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 6:42 p.m. CST

    Welcome back...

    by hildebrand

    We missed you Mr.IndianaClones. The talkback was starting to try to find its footing in discussions about interesting things, and then you showed your happy, smiling face. How did therapy go this week? Any progress? Still working out the attic full of repression issues? Good, good, nice to hear that your Dr. will be able to make house payments for the next 20 years. She just took advantage of the low interest rates, refinanced, and because of your excessive amount of disfunction, has been able to steer the money she saved into a Tuscan villa overlooking some wonderful vineyards (they may have a few olive groves as well). Now, the question remains on how you will do when she decides to visit her new villa. I am sure she has remembered to up your medication that week, but just in case, she has left some fairly strong sedatives with your guardian, and has left permission to use them as she wills. So, make sure to brush your teeth tonight, and sleep well. Granted the meds do tend to give you odd dreams, but then again, living your life as you do, that's not really that much different then your waking life. Good luck, nice to have you around.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 6:47 p.m. CST

    Wrong, hipcheck.

    by FluffyUnbound

    You started out with a general rant about people worrying about, and making reference to, things that weren't "real". Because other people bashed you for this, and gave you any number of examples of cases where people concern themselves with matters not directly related to eating, finding shelter, and fucking, you backed off to claim that your ACTUAL complaint was the fact that the reviewer said that a certain scene pierced his heart like a morgul-blade. I pointed out that the test of a metaphor [and you're quite right, I should have said "simile", although it is a distinction without a difference, as far as I am concerned] is whether or not it is understood. I did not specify understood only by the speaker. Naturally, it would have to be understood by the listener as well. And you DID understand it. You simply can't deny that. If he understood what he meant when he said it, and you understood what it meant when you heard it. [And you did. You know you did. If you are too dishonest to admit it, there really is nothing to talk about.] That makes it a perfectly valid SIMILE. I am right, and you are wrong. Sorry. Just like I was right and you were wrong when I told you that a "real" language is one that any two people can speak to each other and understand. ANY TWO. Not you and hildebrand. It does not matter if you don't understand it. It also doesn't matter if the language is spoken in daily life in any geographical area. That determines if a language is living or not. Not if it is "real". You are adding all sorts of baggage to the concept of "real" [organicity, historicity] that doesn't apply. And, IN THE CONTEXT OF WRITING A REVIEW OF A WORK OF FANTASY, it would certainly be appropriate to make reference to elements of that fantasy. Why wouldn't it be? There was no Excalibur, but if in reviewing a movie based on the Arthurian romance, if I said, "The Director really pulls the sword from the stone here," would that indicate that I had lost track of the difference between fantasy and reality? Or would it indicate that I merely wanted to tailor my writing to the material under review? Or would that not be "real" enough for you? Would it not pass the test of making enough concessions to the knowledge-set of the listener or reader? Should I hand write a letter to each potential reader first, asking if they had prior knowledge of a checklist of "fantastical" references I might make? Maybe that is what we need to do.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 7:40 p.m. CST

    hipcheck - Indiana

    by I_AM_SPARTACUS

    first, irritable, stop using "hammer and tongs" in your posts, since it is obviously a LOTR reference and dorks here might not understand it. >;< ----- HIPCHECK - clean the wax out of your fucking ears, dumbass. You went off on a tangent because I said this is a LOTR site. YES IT IS. I'm obviously referring to this talkback, not the whole damn site, as any fucking moron would realize. Therefore, it's obviously okay to reference a geek "simile" to other geeks who get the referrence. If you dont get it, then ask a question or get the fuck out. Stop changing your story. You said metaphors and similes had to be based on reality, not fantasy. You avoided my examples because you know you were taken to the woodshed on that one. -------- Indiana. Hey sport, back so soon? why don't you go to the local pub and try your smack so you can get the shit kicked out of you. No? yeah, that's what I thought, pussy

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 7:43 p.m. CST

    sorry Indiana, I meant to say FRODODIES

    by I_AM_SPARTACUS

    can't keep you retards separate

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 7:48 p.m. CST

    Did n-e-1 understand wut the hell thiz guy wuz saying, cuz all o

    by gil-galad12

    Geez, it's like you're trying your absolute hardest to sound horrible. For the love of God, crack open a dictionary or a thesaurus every now and then. And the lowest form of geek is the kind that makes bogus screennames just for the purpose of attacking a film. Wow. And to that other guy, you know what, go ahead, remind us how much LOTR sucks. Because it just makes you look like more of an idiot. Face it, near universal acclaim from critics and audiences alike, staggering box office records, Oscar noms and wins. Tell me, what was the average review for Attack of the Clones? How many Oscar wins? Oh, but I guess all of that doesn't matter, as long as you're right. I guess the dialogue wasn't robotic and cheesy, nor was the battle on that red planet CGI crap. Hey but don't worry, when Ep. III comes out, I'm sure it'll be the top contender for Best Picture. Keep fooling yourself.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 7:59 p.m. CST

    And no, nobody's telling you you can't cuss...

    by gil-galad12

    But if you can't make a convincing argument without a salvo of "fucks", "shits", and "pussies", that shows a good deal about your intelligence. For example, look at these LOTR guys. Some don't have a cuss word in their entire post, and they still whoop your ass in an argument. The best you can do is say,"you guys are fuckin' lame, bunch of tolkien loving fags". Yeah, that's the way to win an argument. Watch out for "frododies", master of the written word, articulate beyond reason.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 9:01 p.m. CST

    better get to it IndianaClones, you have competition...

    by hildebrand

    Yep, Frodolives is coming up fast. His wrinkle, of course, is the complete lack of skill in using any known language (alive, dead, or completely fictional). Well I am quite sure that there is enough room for both of you at the clinic. Although I think Indiana you may want to keep your distance, certain reports concerning frodolives various infections have sounded a bit creepy. But nonetheless, post away Frodolives, I am quite sure that it is good for you to work out your aggression in a safe place. Blasting completely anonymous strangers has seemed to help Indiana quite a bit, so step right up and make yourself feel better. Lastly, you are quite right that we act superior to you, that is because we are. In every realm of life that you can imagine. Thus, we tolerate (and sometimes even encourage) your antics on these talkbacks, because we have been trained to allow you that one small thrill. Pity is the only other feeling we have for you. Enjoy your entertainment, we certainly do.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 9:33 p.m. CST

    I was the 1st reviewer

    by GoBucks

    ...on this page, and I have never read any spoilers for the movies and didn't know the Non-Scouring was common knowledge among 'LOTR geeks' (I'm using that term in a good way, lol). I read the book finally after seeing TTT last year, and admittedly I am not a huge fan of the books, I love the story, ideas, and concepts, but not the style of writing. When I saw FOTR, I went in clean and innocent...I hardly had a clue about anything in the movie, but being a Movie/Sci-Fi/Fantasy Geek myself I felt obligated to go opening night and honestly I came out of FOTR VERY disappointed. I felt there where too many sweeping shots, close-up of the ring, etc. But still, I bought the DVD: SE and being a newbie to Middle Earth, I picked up many things on the expanded version and my second time around. I went to see TTT, opening weekend, and came out of it in amazement. I loved it. I started reading ROTK earlier this year, off and on, and finished it a few weeks back. Now, if I hadn't read the book, I probably wouldn't mind no Saruman or scourging. After knowing what's "supposed to happen" and seeing what didn't, I felt the ending was lacking. I think had I not read the book, I would also, it made it seem like the hobbits could have stayed in Hobbiton and nothing would have changed, no one cared when they returned, when the whole point of the story was about them going and saving the World. Instead they go, fulfill the quest and return to the status quo. The Shire seemed untouched, no one seemed to care, even though a sampling was shown in the mirror, if they'd have returned and everything was in disarray, and Saruman was behind it, and his wrath is over I felt the story would have better completion, more meaning to the whole journey. I don't think that it is anti-climatic at all but climactic. instead we get shots that don't really add to the story, i.e. Smeagol's transformation (We pretty much know, already) the drawn out endings, I think the scourging of the Shire/and Saruman's demise are a lot more central to the overall story than Sam's Sex life, they are nice scenes (for the DVD:SE) but not as central to the overall story, IMHO. Not to mention the over use of slo-mo, PJ could have saved a good 15 minutes by not slowing as many scenes down, The lamest part of the entire franchise, I think, is the slo-mo scene involving Frodo waking up and greeting the entire cast in slo-motion. The ending as it is now I found painfully long, and personally I'd have rather seen some of that done in voice over and/or montage like the beginning of FOTR (good way to end it and crate a nice book end scene) we don't need to see the guys at he bar, Sam getting up to ask the barmaid out, marriage, seeing off Frodo and Bilbo and returning home. It seemed tacked on, especially at over 3 hours already. Still, Scourging or not, flaws or not, this trilogy makes it in my top 5 movie series of all time. Probably top 3. Hell, I'm a huge Star Wars fan too, and it is FULL of flaws... I am so sick of hearing the resident Franchise geeks fighting over whose dick is bigger. Of course since they aren't being used they have plenty of time to bicker pointlessly... Face it, both series are great, flawed yes, some more than others

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 9:51 p.m. CST

    SW imperfections vs LOTR imperfections

    by Indiana Clones

    The thing about SW's imperfections is that they make the already great films better because the series is a fundamentally comedic and surreal B movie, whereas the cheesy parts of LOTR stand out a mile in what is a portentious gloomy ultra-straight-played piece of "epic" seriousness. My franchise's imperfections are better than yours! Eat shit, you spellcasting fuckers.

  • Dec. 12, 2003, 11:23 p.m. CST

    RE: Clones

    by gil-galad12

    The thing is, "your franchise's" flaws are so huge that they've completely dashed anyone's hopes of the prequels being good movies. I think you're fooling yourself,pal. Face it, Star Wars is dead. I'm sure when the OT DVD's come out, they might be the biggest selling DVD's ever (hell, I'm buying them) but do you think a three pack of the prequels would sell very good? Hmmm, probably not. The first prequel created a retro-SW craze (I loved the first one and still do, I don't care what anyone says) but did the second one? Ughh, of course it didn't, because it sucked. Sorry, it did. And really, think about this. Most SW fans think Empire is the best of the bunch, then A New Hope. But a lot of them really didn't like Jedi at all. So that makes 2 actual great SW films. And it looks like all three of the LOTR films are going to be awesome as hell. And about your earlier post, yes, SW does have a lighter mood. That's because SW is just a great popcorn movie. Awesome action, cool weapons, and exotic locales. That's what it was supposed to do. But LOTR is much deeper than that. I don't want to make it seem like High Art or something, but its just a lot weightier. Its about nature vs. industry, friendship, loyalty, courage, bad choices, corruption, I could go on. The bottom line is, Lucas wanted to make a fun movie that rocked, and he delivered. But LOTR, while having bad-ass battles, isn't about that. It's the underlying messages that people really like about it. I know I'm wasting my time with such a stubborn person as yourself, but what the hell. Oh yeah, and what ARE you doing in these TB's? If you don't like these films...shouldn't you be somewhere else? What is your purpose here?

  • Dec. 13, 2003, midnight CST

    Bee, apparently I made Irritable actually irritable by saying "A

    by Commando Cody

    I'm sorry that quote somehow offended you, Irritable. Perhaps you just misunderstood me. What I MEANT to say was "America has always been and will always be the ONE country the rest of the world MOST aspires to be like -- and if you don't like facing the truth, feel free to bury your head in the sand and delude yourself into believing otherwise (with the exception of France, in your case you ARE irrelevant and EVERYONE knows it.) Also feel free lose our telephone number the next time you expect us to financially or militarily bail you out of whatever shitfest trouble you stupidly got yourself into." Yes, I'm sorry, Irritable, for confusing you earlier. That has such better clarity to it. Bottom line: everyone WISHES they were as fucking great as America since we DO control the world and when we put our minds to it, we can easily top ANYONE at ANYTHING at ANY time. Oh, I'm sorry. Did that statement of fact piss you off too? Well, what can I say except...Heh heh heh...good!

  • Dec. 13, 2003, 12:20 a.m. CST

    Hey Commander Cody

    by irritable

    Okay, you win, I promote you from Village Idiot to National Idiot.

  • Dec. 13, 2003, 12:27 a.m. CST

    I just got the Battlestar Galactica DVD set and the original pil

    by Big Dumb Ape

    Oops. Wrong thread. Ahhhhhh, well as usual for an AICN talkback, this one's rambling all over the place between arguments about LOTR, SW, MATRIX, POTTER, box office figures, speaking elvish, men crying in movies, geeks being fun geeks, geeks being TOO geeky, franchise wars, Harrison Ford, world politics and the greatness of America, so what's one more off-topic comment? So all I can say to all that is I hope VAN HELSING rocks. Hugh Jackman should do John Carter of Mars next. He'd kick major martian butt in that role. There, that should spin us off in a whole new direction...

  • Dec. 13, 2003, 12:29 a.m. CST

    I like your username frododies,

    by djinnj

    because, of course, Frodo does die. It can be said that there are several layers to your ID. For example, if we take it to be a straight forward attempt to rile Frodo groupies who write Frodo Lives! in bathrooms, then it is an exercise in irony. Its apparent iconoclasm would then mask what is actually a deep philosophical appreciation of the source material, which taken in conjunction with your recent posts suggests attempts at wit. Of course, if you were ignorant of the fact that Frodo dies, well then I think it is even funnier. But I don't really like laughing AT people, so I hope it's the former....

  • Dec. 13, 2003, 12:49 a.m. CST

    last try on hipcheck before I bore him to death

    by elanor

    Alright, hipcheck, if I can

  • Dec. 13, 2003, 1:57 p.m. CST

    I was kidding, morGoth

    by mortsleam

    Guess I forgot to include a winkin' walrus emoticon. But then that would have confused hipcheck, as it's merely a metaphor, and there's not really a sea mammal with an eye twitch inhabiting this talkback. I just can't win. And Gobucks? Dude, appreciate the review and all, but if you're in the design field and don't think that LOTR's design at least rival SW designs, perhaps you need to rethink your occupation. Take a look at any of the documentaries on the FOTR SEE (is that what we're calling it now?) and look at the tiem and effort WETA put into designing different modes of weaponry, armor, clothing, art and decoration for each race featured in the movies. Hell, they even created tapestries showing differing cultures WITHIN Rohan. So much attention to detail went into these designs that they too are currently traveling in a museum exhibit, and John Howe (quite rightly) claims that some of his designs could actually be mistaken for authentic Norse/Viking creations. It really just comes down to personal preferences. You like Science Fiction futuristic design better than Fantasy/historical design. Hell, I personally like contemporary design better than either. But that doesn't mean I can't appreciate both. Except of course to say that the exemplary design work in the SW prequels were overwhelmed in the choatic noisiness of every overly busy poorly directed underwritten and haphazardly performed scene...

  • Dec. 13, 2003, 2:53 p.m. CST

    Hey Mortsleam, this is getting kinda tricky

    by irritable

    I thought Chewbacca REALLY WAS speaking Wookie in SW. But apparently you can't talk about that if your listener doesn't have a SW frame of reference. IN THE SAME WAY, you're not allowed to talk to SW fans about Mongo blades, ONLY to Tolkien fans. Go figure. But then things moved on to hearbreaking Palantars and Klingon Studies Departments and I was just floundering:-)

  • Dec. 13, 2003, 3:12 p.m. CST

    hiya cutest

    by djinnj

    How's every little thing? Confusing, this skipping back and forth btwn TBs trying to find TEs. And when y'do find 'em, they are all embattled with Olog-hai!

  • Dec. 13, 2003, 3:18 p.m. CST

    of course Star Wars was bigger, retard

    by Rupee88

    It made much more money (adjusted for inflation) and it was a huge phenomenon. LOTR are successful films but Star Wars was a major phenomenon that pretty much took over the nation and the world. Harry Potter has been a bigger phenomenon than LOTR>

  • Dec. 13, 2003, 3:48 p.m. CST

    How to determine if LOTR (as movies) have been as big a cultural

    by Big Dumb Ape

    ...Give it time. Arguing about it now is essentially pointless. Because all you can really go by is box office figures, and this talkback has already had a good, healthy debate over that and the bottom line is that numbers can be twisted any way you want. Going PURELY by numbers, then everything still trails Cameron and TITANIC. I mean the worldwide box office for FOTR and TTT combined TOGETHER still don't add up to TITANIC's global revenue (which when you think about it, is pretty damn staggering. It's still pretty fucking amazing the amount of money Cameron's movie made.) So arguing numbers is pointless. So going to the question of outright cultural influence, in terms of SW, there's NO QUESTION that it effected pop culture and became a true part of daily life lexicon. Look, you can jokingly make your voice husky and say "Luke, I am your father" and an amazing number of people will get the gag and reference point. You can jokingly drop a term like "Jedi" into a sentence and quite a few people will recognize it. You can jokingly say "I'm going to go Darth Vader on your ass" and everyone gets it. I mean, in that recent survey that was done, Darth Vader came out as the number one movie villain of all time. So CLEARLY Star Wars is ingrained into the mass culture. So as far as LOTR being big NOW as a movie fad versus how big it will be later (ie. how much it will equally become ingrained into mass culture)...get back to me in 10-20 years. I mean, seriously, if 20 years from now you can walk up to someone and jokingly say "I'm going to go Sarumon on your ass" or "I've been walking so long I feel like Frodo" or "My blind date was as butt ugly as an Orc" THEN you'll know it became a true cultural phenomenon versus simply being a hit movie for it's time. Truth be told, 20 years from now it will be interesting because KIDS who are the most influenced by these things will now be adults. So what will be interesting to see is if the kids have a fonder memory of the LOTR movies OR of the POTTER books/movies. Personally, I think the latter is the far larger influence and is new "star wars" to the current generation. In the long run, I think the LOTR trilogy will always be regarded as film classics ala THE WIZARD OF OZ, but I also think the perpetual Potter-mania that continues to this day (given that J.K. Rowling is now officially the richest author in publishing history and considered the most READ author by today's children globally) will turn out to have been far more influential than LOTR.

  • Dec. 13, 2003, 5:26 p.m. CST

    hmm

    by djinnj

    This Ape isn't so dumb! Yep, complicated thing innit? Then, there's the original source which complicates the 'measure' of LotR's impact as a film. Ah, thank heavens for the internet, though, and pre-ticketing. Standing on line for SW all those years ago was a real drag! That, and finding someone to talk to about them!

  • Dec. 13, 2003, 5:47 p.m. CST

    IAMSPARTICUS, Fluffy, elanor, Etc., ad nauseum...

    by hipcheck13

    ...a shame you unravelled like the magic bedspring of Globflor, Sparticus - read my posts, quote me correctly and don't get your kilt in knots because you said this was a LOTR site - and it isn't. It's not even a LOTR board - it's a movie board, reviewing said LOTR/ROTK. It's open to commentary from LOTR lovers, LOTR haters and movie lovers in general (of which I'm one). If you weirdos get so agitated over someone criticizing you for over-the-top obsession, then you play right into the hands of the pudwhackers on this board who go way over the top to insult you - but that's your gig. Maybe if they made methril for your feelings you wouldn't get so bent out of shape. Fluffy, swords exist - stones exist. Morlab blades don't. Common point of reference. Elanor, thanks for the invite but no, I have no desire to pretend to live in a Ren fantasy world where everyone speaks King James English (again, you seem like the only one with a decent sense of humor among the lot of those mentioned above). Hildegard or whomever, big words do not a smart man make. Finally - and this is my last take on this as this sparring could go on indefinately - Pete Jackson made these movies for everyone, and all you weird zealots should thank your blessed charm of Fugnut that he got them across to people who didn't know ANYTHING about the books or the backstories - you know, average, movie-going folk who enjoy a good 2.5/3 hours of escapism. I imagine most of the revenue for the flicks came out of their pockets. It reflects poorly on the lot of you that you adopt this snide "hah! Non-believers JUST DON'T GET IT" attitude about the movies (like the Matrix dickheads which are almost equally annoying with their "it's far too intelligent for the average person to UNDERSTAND"), acting as if these flicks were made for you and your kind and no one else, and anyone who takes offense with them deserves to feel your wrath. In other words? Lighten up. Take the criticism and quit crying about it. My views conflict with yours, BFD - Spartibust blew a blood vessel in his forehead over it for Juju's sake.

  • Dec. 13, 2003, 7:54 p.m. CST

    Wrong again, hipcheck.

    by FluffyUnbound

    Swords exist, and stones exist. But Excalibur was a "magical" sword, which could ONLY - ONLY - be drawn from the stone by the rightful king. That is why an allusion to someone "drawing the sword from the stone" means that person has accomplished a truly remarkable or difficult act. We aren't talking about opening a cold jar of pickles, here - the physical fact that the sword has been jammed into the stone is not relevant. But, apparently, even not knowing this background, you still kinda sorta understand the simile - because the meaning of similes can often be deduced from context and tone. In much the same way, you KNEW - KNEW - what the reviewer's simile meant, and the fact that you didn't know the full backstory was only marginally important. [Yes. I do have to have the last word.]

  • Dec. 13, 2003, 11:03 p.m. CST

    And hipcheck does a death-spiral outta here

    by elanor

    Can I say "death spiral"? That's a referrence to ice-skating, right, and this is a film site? Well, maybe real quick while noone's looking! Awwww, hipcheck, how disappointing! You can't defend your charges so you sign off with the most sweeping, over-used, shallow, stereotyped condemnation of geeks, just when you were just getting to know us on an individual basis. How lazy of you. I suppose it was a Legolas outfit hanging in your closet and when I guessed wrong it was too much for you? I see you have no interest in having your eyes opened to the diversity that exists in the Wonderful Kingdom of Geek. Fluffy and I do not think of these movies the same way, although I often find myself agreeing with him and I often find him very funny. Much funnier than I. I don't really know Spartacus very well but I think he and I differ in our opinions too. And you go and lump us all together as mere "weirdos". Ah well. Your loss. Have fun pretending to be really really smart on some other tb - oops, I mean film site.

  • Dec. 14, 2003, 12:40 a.m. CST

    Elijah Wood on SNL

    by GoBucks

    people are gonna have a lot more fodder to bash him unfortunately after tonite, considering he's played so far: a chior singer without descending testicles, a Queer Eye Guy, and Boy George..and there is still a half an hour to go...he did play Frodo too, so honestly I don't know if he's portrayed a straight charcter tonite ;) Sorry, I found it immature and funny.

  • Dec. 15, 2003, 10:45 a.m. CST

    Ooooohhhh, THAT'L teach me Frododie...

    by Skyway Moaters

    ... yes, quite a smack down there little fella... are you for real?

  • Dec. 15, 2003, 12:01 p.m. CST

    Erm, hipcheck...

    by Skyway Moaters

    ... How do you KNOW when something exists or doesn't ? What's your standard of 'proof'? Evidence provided by your senses? Fed through the filter of your personal perception? Pretty weak argument so far. Please elaborate...

  • Dec. 17, 2003, 10:08 p.m. CST

    Denethor's palantir! Those Kiwi muppets forgot to mention it!

    by hollycrumpets

    I thought Denethor's death in the book was much better, burning to death on the pyre the seeing stone forever cursed with the face of the dead steward in his hands. But then he could take a header off a big tower whilst on fire. But it's as much a taste thing as literary integrity.