Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News


Father Geek here with the latest from Downunder and Latauro. He's finally suceeded in converting Peter's kids into full fledged AICN spies, if we cough up cash for their rediculous demands, sooooooo check out the coverage on THE EXTENDED RETURN OF THE KING he's got below, buuuuuuut ONLY if you do not mind spoilers, because... THERE ARE TONS OF SPOILERS in that part of this week's column...

How about ask him for a drink, and then maybe after twenty minutes casually slip into the conversation the fact that you love him totally and would like to marry him and have lots of sex and babies.


As I write this, there are six sleeps left until I’m seeing RETURN OF THE KING. That may not be exciting to those of you who have already seen it, but I’m giddy as not so much a school kid but something with giddy potential that still sounds cool.

I’ll be seeing it at Knox, near Melbourne, on the big V-Max cinema. Talkbackers feel free to correct me, but if water cooler whispers are to be believed it’s the biggest screen in the Southern Hemisphere. I saw MATRIX REVOLUTIONS there a few months ago, and wow, what a screen. I should go see STAR WARS – EPISODE III: BLUESCREEN HARVEST there so I can carry on the part-three tradition.

And I’ve seen a whole bunch of films lately, so enjoy reading my self-important opinions below.


* I’ve been secretly emailing Billie and Katie Jackson, trying to get them to start sending me some insider info. Billie, unfortunately, has felt some sort of curious loyalty to his parents and refused to spill the beans. Katie, on the other hand, claims that Dark Horizons was offering her two chocolate frogs and an orange lolly... that damn Lolly put it out of the budget range Harry allowed for the caper so it was then that negotiations broke down. Luckily, we still have top spies imbedded deep within Mount Doom, and here’s what they had to offer on the upcoming Extended Edition of RETURN OF THE KING...

(BEWARE... Spoilers abound)

- Word is that New Line are balking at the price for another Extended Edition, and may be farming out the FX to El Cheapo American FX House Inc rather than the high-quality excesses of WETA... our scooper (Toss the Dwarf) pointed out that this is strictly rumour-mill stuff, but remember who told you first.

- This one isn’t going to come as a surprise, but for the record: we’ll be seeing Gandalf and his Power Rangers confronting Saruman after the Helm’s Deep battle, followed by the multi-coloured one falling to his death.

- Merry will pledge his allegiance to Theoden in a scene similar to the Pippin/Denethor bit. Toss points out that shots from this scene have appeared in an early ROTK teaser, as well as a *very* early LOTR teaser from way back in the beginning.

- Following his acceptance of Anduril from Elrond, Aragorn uses the Palantir to reveal himself to Sauron. Sauron shows him a vision of Arwen’s sickness. This stuff was used instead during the dream sequence just before Elrond arrives at Dunharrow in the theatrical cut.

- From the horse’s mouth: ‘Remember the scene in which the Witch King is asked what he’s going to do with Gandalf, and he says I will break him? This pays off big time in a battle between the Witch King and Gandalf as Gandalf and Pippin ride to save Faramir from the pyre. At the end of the battle, the Witch King breaks Gandalf’s staff and then the Rohirrim turn up and the Witch King gets distracted. The beginning of this confrontation is one of the $$$ shots in the ROTK trailer: the Witch King’s fell beast landing on the ramparts in front of Gandalf and Pippin on Shadowfax.’

- ‘We see Gamling die on the Pelennor Fields theres a quick shot of Eomer bawling in the ROTK trailer.’

- ‘In the Houses of Healing, Aragorn heals Faramir, who then meets Eowyn and they fall in love. Aww.’

- ‘A disguised Frodo and Sam join a column of marching orcs on the way to Mt Doom. Their master is a ferocious orc captain with a whip. Remember the line heard over the sweeping shot of the orcs marching down through Mordor right after the Cirith Ungol sequence? That’s him, yelling Come on you slugs!.’

- ‘The Mouth of Sauron scene changes the emphasis of the entire final battle between men and orcs at the Black Gates. In the theatrical cut, Aragorn and Co. ride up to the gates, they open, and orcs come out to fight. In the extended version, they are greeted by the Mouth of Sauron (played by the Matrix’s Train Man, Bruce Spence), who has pointy teeth and a pointy helmet that covers his eyes (he doesn't need them, see? He's just a mouth). He rides out to show the heroes Frodos mithril vest, recently stolen by the orcs at Cirith Ungol, and to let them know that Frodo is dead and the ring is on its way to Sauron. Aragorn believes him, and the heroes despair. Going into battle at the Black Gates, the heroes have no hope at all it’s their last stand for sure, and Aragorn’s line for Frodo refers to his sacrifice, not to buying time.’

Well, there you go. I quoted Toss word-for-word there for the most part so I wouldn’t have to think too hard about the film before I saw it! More to chew on until November of next year...


* Centaur Enterprises (Sydney-based film production house, for those of me who don’t know), has put THE RIVAL into development, a low-budget feature about a female boxer training for her title.

* Bruce Beresford may direct THE WOMAN IN BLACK, a film that’s been in development for the best part of a decade. (Although, for Beresford it may have been the worst part of the decade. You’d really have to ask him.) The production will be co-financed by the United Kingdom. The ENTIRE United Kingdom.



The fool’s gold of awards festivals announced its nominations recently, and as always Aussies and Kiwis featured heavily in the list. RETURN OF THE KING is up for Best Picture (Drama), Cate Blanchett and Nicole Kidman are up for Best Actress (Drama) for VERONICA GUERIN and COLD MOUNTAIN respectively, Russell Crowe is up for Best Actor (Drama) for MASTER AND COMMANDER, Aussie Peter Weir and Kiwi Peter Jackson are up for Best Director for MASTER AND COMMANDER and THE RETURN OF THE KING respectively, while Anthony Lapaglia and Judy Davis picked up nominations for the televisual side of the ceremony.


The Zucker take on the Wayans’ series shot it to number one as school holidays kicked off, whilst Richard Curtis’s directorial debut managed to get fourth place on weekend previews alone.

Annnnnd the money winners are...
  • 1. SCARY MOVIE 3
  • 3. ELF


A surprisingly good cast makes for an unsurprisingly bad film, Latauro misreads an email and tries to go to a press screening a month too late (oh, and the film’s some Italian deal about something or other), a filmmaker tackles the issue of houses and those who ‘keep’ them, SPACE JAM sucked, the boy who couldn’t grow up directs the JM Barrie adaptation, SCARY MOVIE 2 sucked, and some European renovation show gets the big screen treatment.

Here are the new ones...



Peter Weir was pretty much the only reason I went and saw this film. I don’t have anything against Russell Crowe, but he’s not a major draw card for me. And the look of the film itself... I don’t know, there’s something about a big ship-set historical epic that felt too distant. Like I wouldn’t be able to relate.

Very happy to be proven wrong. Very happy. This is one of those left field surprises that is about something completely different to the thing you think it’s about. In the same way that a show about a girl who slays vampires can deal with issues of death and communication better than any ‘real’ drama, a film about an 18th Century sea battle with a privateer in the employ of Napoleon deals with unspoken class wars better than any wrong-side-of-the-tracks kitchen sink melodrama.

There are so many complexities and layers going on here, it’s a matter of minutes before you’re completely sucked in to the world. It’s those mundane details on screen that echo the mundane details of real life, and give a sudden edge of reality that’s lacking from most blockbusters. The sort of thing you get from a Peter Weir Film instead of a Jerry Bruckheimer Production. Don’t get me wrong, I love a good Bruckheimer tent pole (so long as it isn’t shit like ARMAGEDDON or BAD BOYS II), but I never believe the world. I never believe Sean Connery breaking into Alcatraz or Nicolas Cage getting shot in the arm and not flinching. But maybe those are the wrong examples. Maybe I should be drawing comparisons with, say, THE PATRIOT, a film which was more comfortable glossing over any sense of historical complexity to tell an overly-standard tale of revenge fantasy.

It’s these details that really make the film, and complement the surface story... a story which is, in fact, a very engaging tale. Or, rather, a simple tale engagingly told.

Crowe does a good job, but it takes about fifteen minutes before he gets there. His performance starts off as a high school student doing Shakespeare. To show they understand the material, they rattle off each line with a sly smile to show that they’re interpreting it. It’s completely disingenuous and quite annoying. Luckily, though, it soon disappears and Crowe gives the sort of multi-layered performance we’ve come to expect. A performance that seems to be derived solely from the tone of the script that from the direction or the other actors. That’s not a criticism, it’s just a style of acting I’ve not seen from anyone else.

It doesn’t surprise me that the marketing has been so hum-drum. Yes, the film is being sold in completely the wrong way. Aimed at the wrong audience. Focusing on the wrong things. But I wouldn’t know how to sell this film, either. The element that made this film so brilliant is Weir’s masterful control of a myriad of layers. And how do you sell that in a thirty second spot?


The Slow Burn genre has been gaining momentum over the past few years. Inspired (in atmosphere more than structure) by two separate entities: the big Kael movement of the 1970s headed by Scorsese and Coppola; and Altman’s incidental long-lens style. Steven Soderbergh, p.t. anderson, Wes Anderson... there’s an interesting laid-back-ness to their films that seems as real as any of the raw dramas created thirty years ago.

It’s fitting that Francis Ford Coppola’s daughter is also included in this group. Sofia C made the astonishing VIRGIN SUICIDES only a couple of years ago and in one fell swoop obliterated the naysayers who assumed she was trading off her father’s name. It was an amazing piece of work, and it made me desperate to see her follow-up, LOST IN TRANSLATION.

Bill Murray is also a big draw card. Hilarious though he has always been, his recent career renaissance has been extraordinary. Falling in with the Slow Burn filmmakers who grew up watching him on “Saturday Night Live”, he simultaneously played against and played up to the baggage he’d built up over the years. After two (soon to be three) films with Wes Anderson, there’s something natural about him working with Sofia Coppola. To watch them combine their dramedic pathos (oh, how I’d love to see those words up on a sign in a Blockbuster) and forge something that doesn’t necessarily have a plot but doesn’t necessarily need one... it reminds me of films like BARAKA and KOYANAASQUATSI: aesthetics crafted into a whole.

The fish-out-of-water story is applied in this film to both Murray’s character and Scarlet Johannsen’s character. They are not the only foreigners in the film, but the only two who don’t seem to fit in. But it’s that fish/water story – usually a cliché reserved for broad comedies – that is used to new depths. Rather than a contrived construct used to get some laughs out of Murray’s deadpanning, it’s the very basis of their characters. Two people who simply cannot communicate with anything around them, who cannot understand the life they’ve built for themselves... this isn’t a film about Aren’t The Japanese Kooky With Their Cer-razy Customs?!? These characters would be just as lost in any setting, any locale. This is what they’re like at home. The languages they don’t understand and the cultural differences they try to work past are simply their fears embodied. This is how they see the world, regardless of where they are.

All the elements – production design, actors’ performances, and a cool but strange soundtrack – are all top notch, and the film itself is something to marvel at. But it’s not for everyone. I’ve found that in life you can pretty much divide people into those who get p. t. anderson and those who don’t. (By ‘get’, I don’t mean ‘understand’, I’m not trying to patronise people who don’t like anderson by saying they don’t understand him... Equate ‘get’ with ‘enjoy’ or ‘empathise’.) If you’re in the latter category, there’s a chance this film isn’t for you. If you find these Slow Burn films to be intellectual exercises in pretension, then that’s probably what you’re going to get here.

But if you do enjoy these films, if you do think that there’s something more at work and it’s something you love watching, I can’t recommend this film highly enough.


There are few people who do the rom-com well these days. Off-hand... well, I can’t think of any. I don’t think the Nora Ephron has made a particularly good film yet (her scripting on HARRY MET SALLY was fine, but ultimately over-influenced by Woody Allen), Allen himself is moving away from the genre, and most other attempts are star vehicles with no discernable structure. I mean, SOMEONE LIKE YOU? Really? HOW TO LOSE A GUY IN TEN DAYS? This is what the genre has been reduced to?

Richard Curtis is just about the only person worth a damn in the genre today. Sure, he wrote the same film twice and slapped a different title on the second one, but both were brilliant. Bottom line: I ain’t complaining. I was curious to see him attempting an ensemble for his directorial debut. Moreover, I was curious to see that number of characters in the film equated the number of minutes in the running time. He really keeps them coming.

Hugh Grant’s Prime Minister is probably the most entertaining plotline of the bunch (and a big shout-out to Billy Bob Thornton’s uncredited US President... absolutely brilliant), yet I don’t think he has more than five scenes. There’s just no room for them. Curtis isn’t making a film about people in love – he’s making a film about love itself. He shows us as many relationships as possible, and the one continuing strand is the concept of love, be it romantic or platonic.

It *sounds* schmaltzy, and it *sounds* like it’s been done a million times already, but it feels new. I mean, yes, it’s schmaltzy, but schmaltz isn’t necessarily a bad thing. It’s just done so badly in so many things that it’s built up its negative connotations. Why can’t we have a film that wears its heart on its sleeve, collar, cummerbund, pants leg and bow tie? The concept of love isn’t taken to its extremes like it would be in, say, an Almodovar film. The film is simply a series of vignettes about a selection of witty English people whose primary concern (above running a country, running an aide organisation, running their lives in general) is how love works for them.

The weirdest part, though, is who gives the best performance. In a film featuring Hugh Grant, Alan Rickman, Liam Neeson, Colin Firth, Emma Thompson and Rowan Atkinson, the best performance comes from Thomas Sangster. Yeah, the kid who plays Neeson’s stepson. He’s adorable, but not sickening. He’s to this romantic comedy what Haley Joel was to his supernatural thriller. Every line delivery is perfect, every expression is nuanced and impeccably timed. It’s freaky – no kid that age should be that good.

With the exception of one plot line which (unless I missed something) was left with a big hanging question mark, it’s a very satisfying film. It’s one I look forward to seeing again. And any film that has Shannon Elizabeth and Denise Richards playing slutty American sisters gets instant full points.


Let’s be clear: I’m a big fan of Pan. I’m a Pan Fan. What am I not a fan of? PJ Hogan. I’m sorry, I just don’t like his films. MY BEST FRIEND’S WEDDING was an uneven mishmash that had an inventive title sequence and little else. MURIEL’S WEDDING is a film I loathe, notable only for giving Toni Collette and Rachel Griffiths much-deserved career boosts.

But I love the book, so I had to go along. Also, people I know who worked on the film said it was exceptional. It’s a sentiment I would love to share.

First of all, let’s not kid ourselves: Rachel Hurd-Wood – the girl who played Wendy Darling – is one hell of a find. I challenge all twelve year old boys to watch this film and not fall in complete punch-drunk knuckle monkey love with her. She’s one of the most photogenic actors to ever be photographed, and she clearly has the talent to back it up. I sincerely hope we’re seeing the beginnings of a long career. The boys who play Michael and John almost look perfect, and were almost perfect for their parts, but felt lacking. And, of course, Jason Isaacs is brilliant.

But why did Peter have to be American? He’s got the only American accent in the film, and it never stops being distracting. It was obviously a conscious decision, designed so the US audiences will have someone to relate to. Lord knows they need it. Note my use of the word ‘Lord’ there. Can you think of any recent wildly-successful films that have contained ZERO American accents? It’s not that I have a problem with American accents in and of themselves, but it’s completely wrong in PAN, and one of the film’s biggest misfires.

But the major problem comes in the scripting. Hogan, who worked on the script, obviously did so with his direction in mind. And, as a director, he’s clearly someone who loves the big moments. Loves the big payoffs. But he never earns them. Resolutions come without build-up, without the necessary setups and establishing moments. As a result, these Big Moments that Hogan is pushing so eagerly have no emotional impact. And it’s frustrating, because with a little more work, these moments could be incredible.

Then there’s the theme. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a film so confused in what it’s trying to say, ever. At some points it seems to be saying that kids need to move on and grow up, and at other times it seems insistent that everyone should always remain a child. That’s the overall muddle – each individual scene has its own muddles: arguments are without direction, sequences without point. The script appears to conform to the adage that if two people are mad at each other, it doesn’t necessarily need to be clear about what. It’s very irritating.

It’s not all bad, though. The production design is mostly impressive, the music is (more often than not) very good, and the effects are self-conscious but work. Richard Briers makes a good Smee (in a very similar performance to Bob Hoskins’s).

But then you have Tinkerbell (Ludivine Sagnier). It’s really good getting low-budget filmmakers to make big-budget films: Raimi was a perfect fit for SPIDER-MAN; Jackson was the only person who could have made LORD OF THE RINGS. It seems like a logical progression for someone like PJ Hogan to do a big family literary classic... but it ain’t. One of the many things that turned me off MURIEL’S WEDDING was how ridiculously over-the-top it all was. I love over-the-top when it’s used to great effect, but in MURIEL it was forced and unnecessary. That sensibility has been transferred to the character of Tinkerbell, who looks like she escaped from a really bad pantomime.

It’s a pity, because it epitomises everything that’s wrong with this film, and how much potential it had to enter Big-Time Classic Status. For now, it will have to rely on its biggest strength: the ability to mercilessly break the hearts of every pre-pubescent boy who sees it.


- Universal takes a chance on CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY, a series of films following the chase for international monsters (part one will show the capture of Saddam, part two will follow the chase for Bin Laden, and part three will feature the general public whipping Rick Berman’s naked body with birch twigs)

- Bob Dylan and Tom Waits to play brothers who discover that aliens have replaced their voice boxes with bags of gravel in GRRRHNNNNHHHNN MMHHMBLLLLE

- Paul Schrader has been replaced by Renny Harlin for reshoots on EXORCIST: THE BEGINNING ...oh, wait, that actually happened.

Peace out,


Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Dec. 19, 2003, 1:13 p.m. CST

    i'm not first :o(

    by perryfarrell

    time to talk back!

  • I've heard more than one reviewer attack the script of the new Peter Pan, and that upsets me a bit because it was Moriarty's enthusiasm for that "awful" script that gave me any hope for this Peter Pan movie in the first place. Excerpts from it sounded magical and nothing like a comparison to Miyazaki to get your hopes up. Are these people just a bunch of clueless apes, or did the script change, or did the movie just not live up to it? I want to see the movie for myself, I want/hope to love it as much as I think Moriarty loved the script (which I want to read as well, by god). But I at some point I would be really interested to hear what Mori thinks of the finished movie and what he has to say about these negative script comments. ****************** Dangit, I was all set to call Bruce Spence "Mr. Trilogy-capper" being as he was in Matrix Revolutions, will be in Star Wars Episode 3, and was to be in Return of the King. His scenes are cut? Shit! Glad I read it here first or I'd have been thrown good in the theater. They need to sell DVD editing machines so we can cut out the shit we don't like in the Expanded Versions but keep the two or three good scenes that *should* have been in the theatrical cuts (mainly the Faramir flashback).

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 1:56 p.m. CST

    Extended cut.

    by Route66

    I came back from seeing ROTK last night.I felt angry.That is the only way i can describe my feelings after seeing the film.Now,I had heard that the multiple endings dragged on a bit.That did not bother me before i saw it,after all,the more time I can spend in this world watching the conclusion to the best cinematic experience i have ever had ,then the better.I think FOTR is near perfect in its theactrical form and even better in the extended cut.Its just a marvel of film making and a joy to watch.The same almost goes for TTT though i did feel the extended cut improved greatly over the theatrical cut,just adding a bit more warmth and narrative flow to what was already a stunningly good film.Now ,while watching ROTK my I was overwhelmed,maybe i still am.I have never seen imagery like it.I have never heard a soundtrack that fits so beutifully to the images on the screen.I have never seen ANY of the actors do any finer work on any other film.Basically what i am trying to say is that i loved it.I loved NEARLY every minute of it,all apart from about 15 minutes if it.The last 15.or 20,i cant remember really.If it had ended on the rock when the eagles picked them up followed by a small montage and narration by Blancette i would have been left stunned and in awe and i would not have left my seat until the credits had rolled.As it was i was the first person out.I really could not believe the amount of sugar heaped on these ending.Aragorn being crowned , looking clumsy and betraying the image he has garnerd in all films right up until this horrible seen just gave me such a sick feeling in my stomach.Sam getting married,after a powerhouse performance which would have left a beutifull lasting memory of Sam carrying Frodo up the sloaps covered in dirt and sweat with a passion in his eyes.Instead I am left with sickly sweet image of him at his wedding.I dont want to go into the other fifty or so endings becuase its just making me angry,though i did love the ship to the grey havens part,it was genuinly moving.So th extended cut.All of the stuff in the AICNDU post sounds fantastic.But Peter Jackson,for the love of god please do not extend the ending,please trim it.I cant beleive i am saying this about a LOTR's film.

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 2:05 p.m. CST

    Route66, you whore of Hollywood.

    by Jean Racine


  • Dec. 19, 2003, 2:24 p.m. CST

    No WETA?

    by zacdilone

    Tell me it ain't so.

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 2:41 p.m. CST

    Re: ROTK EE

    by alvinsimadeer

    I hope the thing about New Line not wanting to spend too much money on the extended edition is untrue. That's both unjustified and well, quite frankly, a smack in the face to the people who are making them billions of dollars. But it says its a rumor, an AICN one at that, so I wouldn't believe it until we hear otherwise. As for this stuff, all of this sounds really sweet, adding both cool new stuff (God, the Gandalf-Witchking stuff will rock) and expanding what is there, such as the Arwen stuff (I quickly forgot about what Elrond said to Aragorn about her). And I forgot how the Mouth of Sauron throws out Frodo's vest claiming he is dead. This guy is right, that will completely change the dynamic of the last battle when Aragorn says "for Frodo!"

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 2:48 p.m. CST

    New Line Better

    by LordCrispy

    Let WETA fuckin do the effects. Now that they made their money they want to pull out and go cheap? What a fuckin way to ruin this shit. If they do this they will pay. Not only is WETA compentent, they worked hard and deserve it. What a way to shaft someone in the ass.

  • It doesn't sound British, or Aussie, or Kiwi or what have you. It's just a very nondescript American accent that happens to not call attention to itself (possibly because of all the time he spends speaking Elvish, which just makes his natural accent sound Elvish as well).

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 2:54 p.m. CST


    by Route66

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 3:07 p.m. CST


    by Johnson McGregor

    I shouldn't have read that. That added stuff is just going to cement this film's godliness!@)$( I cannot fathom waiting 11 months for that!!!!!

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 3:16 p.m. CST

    The Scouring Must Make The EE

    by Alkohal

    The scouring of the shire must make the Extended Edition it has to, It would be a mishustice to not do it. I can live without it being in the theartical version due to him wanting the happy ending, but damnit I want to see this realized on film.

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 3:32 p.m. CST


    by Ioreth

    they SHOULD let WETA do it! IF this rumour is true - a STUPID STUPID STUPID move by New Line ... IF true - internet uproar anyone???

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 3:59 p.m. CST

    I haven't seen RoTK yet, but it's obvious Jackson still doesn't

    by rev_skarekroe

    No Witch-King vs Gandalf? No Saruman? No Mouth of Sauron? It's just like the last two flicks. Jackson cuts out the parts that really matter (Faramir, the song of Beren and Luthien, Galadrial's gifts, etc.) for useless extended sequences of people jumping over stairs and elves recapping what we've already seen. What dull and pointless scene did he leave in this theatrical cut? Lots of shots of Arwen pining away? More Dwarf tossing jokes? If I wasn't an impatient man I'd just wait a year for the DVD. sk

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 4:09 p.m. CST

    Awright! Sounds great to me!

    by morGoth

    The "Real Editions" as I like to call 'em. Let the howling begin and the bleating of the sheep commence. I think the RoTK EE will probably need the extended treatment less than Fellowship or TTT. I'm doin' a Homer J. SImpson happy dance on this one!

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 4:12 p.m. CST


    by MiserableRainGod

    Hey Rev, how're ya doin? In this movie, we have plenty of time wasters that really drag and steal time away from things needed to go in. We get shot after shot after shot of Frodo, Sam, and Gollum climbing that stairs of Cirith Ungol. We got so many shots of this, that the Shelob battle happens 2 hours into the movie. And btw, <<SPOILERS>> she isn't scary, and Sam's battle with her is over before it begins. She runs away, barely scratched. Ooohhh. Anticlimactic, it was in spades. The Nazgul in this film are also pretty tame (though their fell-beasts are very cool), and their witch-king is killed in about 2 seconds and no one in the audience gave a damn. <<END SPOILERS>> Anyway, I see it again tonight at a more decent hour of the day, maybe I'll like it more. Maybe it will give me an emotional response, unlike my first viewing. RainGod out.

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 4:12 p.m. CST

    Smooches Latauro! And Happy Birfday Miami

    by elanor

    What great news to receive on your birthday! Go you!

  • In both the screenings I attended, Eowyn got applause. You saw it with a sad, sad audience Miserable Rain God...

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 4:22 p.m. CST

    morGoth - I disagree

    by MiserableRainGod

    Hey there. I think that ROTK needs the extended treatment MORE than the other movies. As I watched it, I couldn't help but think that Jackson left too much to squeeze into the final film. Everything suffers because of it, in my opinion. It's all rushed, though his horrible pacing makes it all drag. There were a ton of scenes which were alluded to in the movie, but we never saw, and I think they were needed to give this movie some heart. Pippin befriending Faramir. Gandalf vs Witch-King. Merry befirending Theoden. More nazgul evilness was needed in general, to make me care when <<SPOILER>> the witch-king meets his end. <<END SPOILER>> The fell-beasts were great, but the nazgul who rode them were tame and lame, and their ultimate evil did not shine through at all. Shelob needs to be erased and made, I don't know....scary?? Climactic?? I got zero chills down my spine from this movie, and maybe 1 tear in my eye. All flash, no heart, and too dragging. I felt like, on a whole, ROTK's theatrical cut was just an long trailer for the extended version, which might actually instill some emotion in me. Flame away! RainGod out.

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 4:37 p.m. CST

    JTylor, I hope you're right

    by MiserableRainGod

    I'll see it again tonight. Hopefully I'll like it more. I first it at a Tuesday 12:01 showing, and I thought it would be full of movie geeks who'd cheer and cry. I certainly wanted to. But maybe we were all tired movie geeks...ROTK didn't touch me in any emotional way, until the reunion scenes at the end, and I was very, very disappointed by that. I never felt an excited (or frightened) chill go up my spine. Partly, I blame the music. It was composed wonderfully, but its use was uninspired and not-at-all-emotionally-stirring. It was a rehash of theme-music from the previous 2 films (where I loved the music and its use). My exception is Pippin's song, which blew me away. And as for the geeks in the audience...people laughed as ending 4 popped up, and they just got up and left the theatre for ending 5. I love Peter Jackson for what he did with LOTR, but I'm not going to blindly praise him. This final installment was flawed and disappointing. And that's just one RainGod's opinion. Like I said, hopefully I'll feel differently after my second (more awake) viewing tonight.

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 4:43 p.m. CST

    Yanks and Limeys

    by LewMoxon

    Name a recent blockbuster without an American accent? I don't recall any Americans in either of the Harry Potter movies, and both were highly successful (I belive the 1st film broke $1 billion, worldwide). Personally, I don't understand this particular peccadillo with accents. Would you have been happier if Sumpter did Pan with a lousy Cockney accent or a bad Liverpool lilt? I'll tell you what, you get over an American Peter Pan, and I'll get over a British Bruce Wayne. Deal?

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 4:50 p.m. CST

    Flux Capacitor

    by Phildogger

    Thats what we all need, is for Peter Jackson to go back just 3 months, and tell himself that 1) we dont need any more Liv Tyler, 2) Christopher Lee NEEDS to be in this film. 3) The ending is 10 minutes too long. Btw, I saw this on a Friday afternoon, and never in my life have i seen so many geeks in one room! Guys, if you are gonna go see this movie with your best friend (Also a virgin, I bet), for the love of GOD, Leave the sweatpants at home. Repeat, LEAVE THE SWEATPANTS AT HOME!!!! End Rant.

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 4:54 p.m. CST

    The Scouring

    by zacdilone

    My understanding is they didn't even shoot it.

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 4:55 p.m. CST

    L'Auberge Espagnol

    by Bold

    Just go and watch the spanish apartement!!!! Good time!!!!!

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 5:15 p.m. CST

    What does your heart tell you?

    by DocPazuzu

    There is absolutely no way the rumor of New Line being reluctant to foot the bill for an ROTK EE is true. These films have made obscene amounts of money and the DVDs have been big sellers as well. Any amount they spend on the EE will with all certainty get a huge return. If there's one company which is synonymous with quality products when it comes to DVDs, it's New Line. We will all be slavering that midnight sometime next November when it hits the shelves. Rest easy.

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 5:23 p.m. CST

    The Scouring of the Shire was not even filmed

    by Splicer it will not be in the EE. The actual shot of Saruman falling was done some time ago. Completed, but not included as the whole scene was deleted. Mouth of Sauron: The Mouth tries to play mind-games with the heroes. In fact, they do NOT believe him. The scene has a cool pay-off which I won't reveal. Then the Orcs come. Eomer does bawl in the trailer, but the person he is cradliing is NOT Gamling. Yes, there is a cool Gandalf vs Witch King confrontation. There are also some other cool things not in the released version. I don't see New Line putting corners with the FX. These films are going to make tonne of money. Why **** it up now? No chance. P.S. ROTK is one FUCKING AWESOME MOVIE! P.J. and Weta Rule!! Cheers.

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 5:29 p.m. CST

    Oh yeah, Master & Commander ain't bad either

    by Splicer

    Bit of a boy's film but very, very well done. Attention to detail, scary battles, real sense of being on that ship. Cool film. PS I typed 'putting corners' above when I really meant 'cutting corners'. Cheers.

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 5:41 p.m. CST

    The book was not designed to be read in one 3hr sitting

    by Splicer

    But the film has to be. Therefore the film cannot possibly follow the book exactly. There was never any 'Scouring' scene filmed i.e with the cast, dialogue etc. Could they slip in a couple of FX shots just to fill in the gap? Maybe. Can't see it working very well, though.

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 6:10 p.m. CST

    New Line should not even thing about farming out the effects!

    by Jon E Cin

    If they do..i call boycot!haha seriously..fuck them! Weta deserves to do it and thats that.

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 6:52 p.m. CST

    Couple of things...

    by JimmyTheHand

    I dont understand why Eomer would be SOOO EMOTIONAL over the death of Gamling, I dont even think they had a scene together. The one he must be weeping for is Eowyn who was hurt by the Witch King, its the only person he would feel that much emotion for. Also, WETA better be doing the effects for the EE!!!! I think NL would be smarter than to get some hack visual effects artists to do it.

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 7:24 p.m. CST


    by the swede

    What an absolutely horrible thought that New Line wouldn

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 8:20 p.m. CST

    Denethor's Palantir?

    by Luther007

    Any word on whether Denethor's Palantir will be in the EE? I thought that he didn't make much sense in the theatrical version--no one knows what the hell is wrong with him. Sure he's sad about Boromir, but the Palantir scene is crucial for understanding why he's gone insane! Definitely happy to hear about the Aragorn/Sauron faceoff, I was really missing that from the movie. Overall I thought the movie was good, the ending WAS awkward though, too much slow-mo. Maybe PJ can fix it up a bit for the EE. Oh yeah, and what about Aragorn re-planting the white tree? damn there's so much I hope they include... should be like an hour longer....

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 10:27 p.m. CST

    OK, which of the endings do you cut?

    by FluffyUnbound

    MAYBE Sam's wedding, since you seem him with his family in the "final" ending anyway. But you need Aragorn's coronation, you need to return to the Shire, you need to say SOMETHING about how Frodo feels when he returns to the Shire, and you need to go to the Grey Havens, and you need Sam to "be back". There really can be no discussion of this. If any one of these elements had been missing from the film, I would personally have burned every last print in North America at the head of an army of crazed freak-dorks.

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 10:37 p.m. CST

    Question: How was Super Troopers different from every other come

    by FluffyUnbound

    Answer: I fucking actually LAUGHED at Super Troopers.

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 10:57 p.m. CST

    Viggo's "American" accent

    by kingnat

    That's no American accent. That's a derived accent based on his Danish accent to represent the Nordic roots of the languages of Tolkien.

  • Dec. 19, 2003, 11:26 p.m. CST

    Farming out effects

    by kingnat

    That New Line would cut corners with the EE DVD is quite frankly the silliest rumor I've heard, and when it comes to Lord of The Rings I've heard a few. But people need to cool it. Sure, there may be fx work farmed out to other fx houses (because it sure as hell was done in FotR, probably also in TTT, and I wouldn't be surprised if it had been done in RotK either) but that would be the decision of Jackson and Weta, not New Line.

  • Dec. 20, 2003, 12:34 a.m. CST

    Mouth of Sauron

    by Lavaman

    The "Mouth of Sauron", in the LOTR Novels, is a Black Numenorean(A group of Numenoreans that worship Sauron), and the Lieutenant of Barad-Dur. The name "Mouth of Sauron" means that he is the one who speaks for Sauron. I don't get it, the description of "The Mouth of Sauron" in the Extended Cut, says he needs no eyes. Since he is a Human, he would need eyes, he is not literaly Sauron's mouth.

  • Dec. 20, 2003, 12:47 a.m. CST

    Thanks Splicer and Kingnat

    by elanor

    I agree. It is amazing what some people will believe.***But what do you mean Viggo's Danish accent? He's American. He doesn't speak with a Danish accent. His accent in the film is what I'd call "continental" sort of slightly upper-class British.***Lavaman: I guess we'll have to wait to see what the Mouth looks like.***Hey Splicer, you got any news about whether Denethor's palantir makes an appearance? Thanks in advance.

  • Dec. 20, 2003, 12:56 a.m. CST

    Cheapo ROTK FX? Yeah right. FUCK these stupid-ass bullshit inter

    by exit272

    For chrissakes. New Line wanting to go bargain basement with ROTK effects? Willing to deliberately ruin the quality of their MOST SUCCESSFUL FILMS EVER? Yeah, and last week I did Paris Hilton. Come on people. We're supposed to believe that WETA, whose people have slaved over these movies for years, and who love these movies like their own children, would deliberately price themselves out of the market for the DVD edition of the last film? Or that New Line would balk at anything PJ wanted at this point? Puh-lease. These movies have been so colossal for the studio that Peter Jackson could march right into the office of the New Line CEO and say "I wanna fuck your wife." And the only thing the guy would say in reply would be "Pussy or ass?" Get a grip, people. The ROTK EE is in good hands.

  • Dec. 20, 2003, 1:43 a.m. CST

    Aragorn revieling himself to Sauron

    by exPFCWintergreen

    This scence would have improved the theatrical cut more than any other single scene, in my mind.

  • Dec. 20, 2003, 1:57 a.m. CST

    must... see... parlay...!

    by djinnj

    MUST! I'm already inserting its existence into my reading of the actors' performances at the Morannon! Already, I'm thinkin' "OK they all think that Frodo has been captured and is either dead or being tortured, and that they are all going to die horribly in the next twenty minutes." *whimper*

  • Dec. 20, 2003, 3:53 a.m. CST

    what could have been cut from endings?

    by captain_aubrey

    Shorten the first reunion scene. No bar scene in the shire. No Sam's wedding. Trim the hugs, kisses and goodbyes at the Grey Havens. No slo-mo. Tightening the ending by 10 minutes would have prevented a lot of the laughter/groaning I heard in the theater tonight. Loved the film though. And now I know why Gandalf wasn't carrying his staff in the final battle!

  • Fact: The Two Towers EE DVD moved nearly 1 MILLION copies in the US ALONE on its first day. (The theatrical cut moved 9.4 million copies in its first 4 months). How could they not release an EE of ROTK? And yet: according to USA Today, New Line's Matt Lasorsa says "The triple-release DVD strategy may or may not continue for Return of the King." Mind boggling - and hard to believe. Moriarty is right: ROTK may benefit the most from an Extended Edition. In the end I have to think New Line will do the right thing - which is, after all, the profitable thing.

  • Dec. 20, 2003, 9:14 a.m. CST

    About New Line "chickening out"...

    by Latauro

    My source made it very clear that this was the biggest "if" rumour of all. All of the other stuff he reported (on the EE scenes) is closer to fact, some of it he's seen with his own eyes. Is it likely New Line will go down this path and do the cheapo option? I don't think so. The source doesn't think so. And a lot of you don't think so. But that's what's being rumoured, and we're simply here to report it.

  • Dec. 20, 2003, 9:20 a.m. CST

    Thanks, Latauro

    by Oberon

    I expect that once ROTK breaks the 1 billion dollar mark, whatever edginess the guys in accounting may be feeling will dissipate rapidly. If not I expect fan outrage will force it to happen - though, I hope, with WETA effects. The real question may be whether Jackson has time to do it, given how much of his time King Kong may be sucking up next year. In the end it just seems bizarre to contemplate having done EE with the first two movies and not the last one - especially given that it had the most material excised from its theatrical release.

  • Like you said

  • Dec. 20, 2003, 10:45 a.m. CST

    Thanks Latauro

    by morGoth

  • Dec. 20, 2003, 12:25 p.m. CST

    by simpsonite

    Ian McKellen appeared on Friday Night with Jonathon Ross in the UK last night, and hinted that the EE of ROTK could be up to 5 hours long. Ross also questioned him about filming 'The Hobbit' to which McKellen replied that he hopes the film will be made and he can reprise his role as Gandalf. On a seperate note, I'm getting sick of people moaning about what's missing in ROTK theatrical. I'm a big fan of the books and can fully appreciate what has to be sacrificed in getting this movie down to a feasible running time. Can you imagine a modern audience sitting through a 5 hour film? Also with regard to the endings, I can't imagine the film without them. A great conclusion to a wonderful series, and anyone unmoved must have a heart of stone.

  • Dec. 20, 2003, 2:23 p.m. CST

    What Simpsonite said

    by Red Giant

  • Dec. 20, 2003, 11:44 p.m. CST

    My reaction...

    by Treadhead

    NOTE: This post is full of SPOILERS!! I saw ROTK opening day with a very appreciative audience that clapped and cheered at all the major points (and moaned in dismay when Shelob stung Frodo). The biggest cheer was when Gandalf coup-de-tated Denethor. My own reaction was oddly subdued, for two reasons-- 1. I have an odd reaction sometimes with really great films (eg Aliens and Raiders of the Lost Ark) in that I am so overwhelmed that I can't take them all in on the first viewing-- it takes 2 or 3 times for me to get it. 2. I'm a Tolkien fan, which means I inevitably had expectations that inevitably were frustrated by PJ's choices on how to do things. This is where someone who hasn't read the books is at a distinct advantage. However, as the days have passed, I'm finding myself lingering more and more on the really good stuff in the film (Legolas and the oliphaunt, Gimli's reaction, the charge of the Rohirrim, the stunning Minas Tirith) and once I've seen it couple more times I'll probably come to terms with the compromises PJ made and understand how really great this film is. And maybe I can keep my eyes open when Shelob stings Frodo (I knew what was coming...damn near broke my wife's hand holding on...). Sorry, IMO, the spider rocked.

  • Dec. 21, 2003, 1:21 a.m. CST


    by Runelord

    Guys, come on, this is one thing they didn

  • Dec. 21, 2003, 1:22 a.m. CST


    by Runelord

    Anyway, despair does funny things to people.

  • Dec. 21, 2003, 1:46 a.m. CST

    And just what the hell was wrong with Armeggedon? Seriously?

    by TheGinger Twit

  • Dec. 21, 2003, 7:38 a.m. CST

    Another scene I hope to see on the EE

    by Miami Mofo

    is Pippin visiting Shadowfax in the Minas Tirith stable. I'm not even sure that they filmed this, but I sure hope so. The way that Shadowfax came to Pippin's rescue at the pyre by dropkicking Theoden. After my second viewing, I'm still not comfortable with that scene, so I hope that some sort of Pippin/Shadowfax "bonding" scene will better explain the kick, or rescue as I will now refer to it. ***More importantly, the second viewing was GREAT!!!!!!!!! So much better than the first time as I was able to put the book-changes away in the file cabinet rather than having them cluttering up everything. SEEES (Special Extended Edition Expectation Syndrome) was still there, but fortunately to a much lesser extent -- however I must add that THIS ARTICLE DOESN'T HELP FIND THE CURE FOR SEEES, LATAURO! ;~) ***I still dislike Comet Denethor, and have thought of a slightly different end for The Steward of Gondor -- after Shadowfax rescues Pippin, Denethor, on fire staggers out into the courtyard, falls against the White Tree, which in turn bursts into flames. [Also, in Pippin's Palantir scene, I remember him saying that he sees the White Tree, so just add the words "in flames" if you desire.] ***I love that P.J./F.W./P.B. inserted the "...and the crownless again shall be King" poem in that Arwen scene. ***Next viewing: Christmas Day.

  • Dec. 21, 2003, 7:48 a.m. CST


    by Miami Mofo

    Boy did I ever butcher that third sentence. Please combine the third and fourth sentences thusly: "I'm still not comfortable with how Shadowfax came to Pippin's rescue by dropkicking Denethor, so I hope that some sort of a Pippin/Shadowfax "bonding" scene is included in the EE to better explain the kick, or rescue as I shall now refer to it." Thank you.

  • Dec. 21, 2003, 7:58 a.m. CST


    by Miami Mofo

    Duh, of course I meant how Shadowfax dropkicked DENETHOR (not Theoden). Silly me. ***Speaking of Theoden, Bernard Hill's delivery of Theoden's speech before the charge of The Rohirrim just kicked ass. Unfortunately, I thought that Aragorn's speech before the Black Gate was kind of pale in comparison, but I did like it more this time around.

  • Dec. 21, 2003, 8:01 a.m. CST

    Not as bad as I thought

    by Miami Mofo

    I see that I did correct my Denethor/Theoden mistake in the first rewrite. Whew.

  • Dec. 21, 2003, 9:20 a.m. CST

    Makes sense to me Rune

    by morGoth

  • Dec. 21, 2003, 9:27 a.m. CST

    Gaffer sends scowl to Miami at The Golden Perch!

    by morGoth

    Bosh and pifft Miami, why d

  • Conan, don't know if yer lurking but trust me in that our fav chapter, The Battle of the Pelennor Fields, gets the uber-royal treatment and you will be happy, happy!

  • Dec. 21, 2003, 9:55 a.m. CST

    "Gandalf went to the door, and there he turned. 'I am in haste,

    by Miami Mofo

    "'Do me a favour when you go out. Even before you rest, if you are not too weary. Go and find Shadowfax and see how he is housed. These people are kindly to beasts, for they are a good and wise folk, but they have less skill with horses than some.'" ***'Shadowfax whinnied as Pippin entered the stable and turned his head. "Good morning," said Pippin. "Gandalf will come as soon as he may. He is busy, but he sends greetings, and I am to see that all is well with you; and you are resting, I hope, after your long labours." Shadowfax tossed his head and stamped.' ***morGy, the "bonding" doesn't have to happen at the stables - it could happen during the ride, but I saw no evidence of that happening in this, the theatrical cut. ***Another thing I hope to see is an explaination for on the EE is why Pippin was along with Gandalf on Shadowfax when they rode out to save Faramir's retreating Osgiliath forces from the Fell Beast riding Nazgul. Because he was already at the stable "bonding" with Shadowfax, perhaps? ;~)

  • Dec. 21, 2003, 1:05 p.m. CST

    Extended ROTK = Chinese water torture + H20

    by Sea Bass

  • Dec. 21, 2003, 4:13 p.m. CST

    Hmm, the great hosing continues

    by djinnj

    A few of us are wandering over to the Beaks interview that has most recently dropped off the board. 'Tis quieter there, and shorter. Course, it's hosed too!

  • Dec. 21, 2003, 4:48 p.m. CST

    Peter Pan soars!!!

    by Cartoonist

    Having seen 'Peter Pan' yesterday down her ein Oz, I have to wonder what your beef is? Okay, so I don't mind PJ Hogan's films - but I've also read three or four different versions of Pan, a couple from JM Barrie and other retellings... and this one rocked! As for the US accent - yes, news for those of you who live in what must be the centre of the known universe - it does get boring hearing the Americans invade everything. But in this context, where Pan is so different to everyone else in the film, I think it worked. The actor had just the right degree of impish delight! Hook was superbly played (okay, so he did come across as Lucius Malfoy in a dark wig sometimes) but Richard Briers as Smee was superb. The sets were stunning, the story telling captivating. Not quite 'Harry Potter', but way above the fare that parents have as alternatives to drag their kids out to these days. The oddest thing for me was, having just identified mermaids as being potentially evil, we see that each of the web-clawed wonder sis Asian in appearance? What's with that? One last adjoiner - as a gay man, if I had raved about how attractive the actor who played Pan was (eg. "every 12 year old same-sex attracted lad will want to fly off the walls with the hunky young Peter in this film") I reckon I may as well paint 'Paedophile' on my forehead. To most of us, someone that young just looks pre-sexual... they're children for God's sake. How come different rules apply when straight men go all 'Lolita'?

  • Dec. 21, 2003, 8:29 p.m. CST

    I agree with Simpsonite

    by kingnat

    And just to clarify; I meant Viggo's "Danish" accent. (I've never heard him speak English with a Danish accent, but he is fluent in Danish as a language)

  • Dec. 21, 2003, 9:38 p.m. CST

    gandalf staff etc. **full of spoilers**

    by frodo-lives

    Evidence that the rumours about the Witchking breaking Gandalf's staff are true: - Gandalf doesn't have his staff when he goes to save Faramir. He has to borrow a pike from one of the soldiers and physically knock out Denethor, while Pippin gets Faramir off the pyre. Had he had his staff, putting out some flames should have been peanut for ole fire-spirit Gandalf! He doesn't have his staff at the council or in the final battle either. Though he regains it before the Grey Havens (why???) And he starts to look old and worn rather than shining with inner energy -right after that Pippin and Gandalf launch into their death speech. It does seem to come a bit out of the blue in the current version - I'm assuming that in the EE Gandalf will tell Pip that his time in Middle Earth will now end soon. It also provides the motivation for Gandalf leaving at the end (which remains a bit unexplained) - from this point on, Aragorn takes charge and Gandalf becomes a bystander - both in the council scene and in the final battle - It will also hugely increase the impact and significance of Eowyn (and Merry) killing the Witch King I loved the ending as it is. Hug scene is lovely - need some time to dwell on the bright side and have Frodo realize his achievement and the Fellowship be reunited -Sam's wedding is necessary not only because he reminisces about Rosie in what he assumes will be the last minutes of his life, but also because it provides part of the motivation for Frodo to leave: with his best friend engaged in another and stronger relationship, he simply feels lonely which adds to his difficulty to reconnect - Grey Havens scene is too beautiful to cut out any of it - personally I thought the hugging could have lasted forever. But hey, that's me - just gealous, I'd like to be hugged by Frodo too! ;-) -Sams return home is also necessary to wind up the story true to the spirit of the book -it's great that the film follows the book in breaking out of the narrative cliche of ending with a big bang and everyone living happily ever after. In the end it's that which makes LotR stand out from everything else in the genre - and makes it emotionally real and relevant. As Viggo put it in a recent interview with Empire magazine: question: "Why do you think Rings has been so successfull?" Viggo: "Because it's a true story" Go Viggo! The rumours about robbing the EE job from WETA have got to be nonsense- though they did farm out some of the DFX work to other companies in the other two movies already - eg to Oktobor, another Wellington-based company my 3 cents cheers, and sorry for babbling.

  • Dec. 21, 2003, 9:41 p.m. CST


    by frodo-lives

    <P>does this thing have html formatting <br> enabled??</P> <P>should have used it in my previous post. Sorry guys</P>

  • Dec. 21, 2003, 9:43 p.m. CST

    well it obviously doesnt (nm)

    by frodo-lives


  • Dec. 22, 2003, 12:18 a.m. CST

    farming out the FX

    by docmem

    A more plausible reason for this rumor: isn't Weta Digital currently gearing up to begin production on KING KONG? I can't imagine that New Line would second-guess Peter Jackson after he just made them $2 Billion (and counting), but it might be pretty hard to juggle that kind of workload, and it might be necessary to farm some of the shots out to other shops. This isn't exactly unusual: ILM, Digital Domain and lots of smaller shops toss each other their overflow work all the time...

  • Dec. 22, 2003, 1:32 a.m. CST

    I've a feeling that most of the fx are done already

    by djinnj

    Not just 'cause Kong is coming up fast, but because they were cutting to the last minute. Most of the extras we'll be getting were probably cut from the theatrical release fairly late in the process and only need a little more work (if any). They've still to do the revised scoring, though.

  • Dec. 22, 2003, 7:47 a.m. CST


    by Drath

    Ass theLastVamp, you crack me up!

  • Dec. 22, 2003, 10:59 a.m. CST

    Gonna have to disagree with a few things there

    by spideyman1218

    The bar scene in the Shire was totally necessary. Our heroes go from being bowed to by the most powerful man in the world to lost among the hype of a gigantic pumpkin! It shows that they saved the world and got nothing for it....extremely touching in my mind.

  • Dec. 22, 2003, 1:35 p.m. CST


    by Elaine

  • Dec. 22, 2003, 9:27 p.m. CST


    by brassmonkey48

    Frodo and Gollum going over the edge and that one last "oh no, Frodo's dead" moment...that is what sucked the most for me in ROTK. Did anyone else loathe this part as much as me? I love the movies, including rotk, and i love the books, and i understand that cuts and sacrifices had to be made for the film, but jeez...this part blew. It just felt like PJ had to have that one last stupid scene in which the audience gasps because they think their hero has been killed. All this other stuff being cut is dissapointing, but i know it'll be in the EE, but this added crap got on my nerves. Nevertheless, I still loved the movie, seen it four times now. (free movies for me for being an employee)

  • Dec. 24, 2003, 1:45 p.m. CST

    ILM should do the effects...

    by MisterGrimloch

    then, maybe for the first time in this trilogy, the effects would not be so blatantly fake in their appearance.

  • Jan. 1, 2004, 12:06 a.m. CST

    wouldn't it be Theoden who Eomer is crying over?

    by Niphredil bloom

    I've read in the comments speculation that it could be Gamling or Eowyn who Eomer weeps over in the battlefield, but wouldn't it make more sense that he's crying over Theoden? Eh well, as for this rumor over effects; I'm glad there's the EE of ROTK to look forward to, and as PJ has seemed pretty damn eager about ROTK's EE in interviews, I'm sure he'll make sure the quality of it is as excellent as that which he's maintained so far.

  • Jan. 18, 2004, 8:19 a.m. CST

    Peter Jacksons Return of the Jedi

    by badboymason

  • Jan. 18, 2004, 8:25 a.m. CST

    Peter Jacksons Return of the Jedi

    by badboymason

    As much as we all slag off ROTJ, the ending is much better paced than ROTK. If jackson had directed it, we would have had Luke talking to the ghosts of the Jedi for ten minutes. Fade out as music swells... Cut to Han/Leia getting married, the music builds, we think its ending...we see Luke don the robes of a Jedi Master, and begin training new students, for 5 minutes...this must be the ending. But no, now we cut to C3PO and R2D2 back on coruscant, wandering around talking about their adventures for 5 minutes, making some cod-philosophical point about the meaning of the trilogy. The film finally ends 20 minutes after it should have. Lucas cant make a film as good as Jackson, but at least he knows how to end them...

  • Jan. 18, 2004, 5:49 p.m. CST

    Peter Pan can have an American accent if they want

    by Nazzim O'Bazzim

    I would assume that Neverland links to anywhere in the world, and that England wouldn't have a monopoly on its access. The Lost Boys are probably a very global bunch.

  • Feb. 12, 2004, 12:21 p.m. CST

    Hose test (he wearily intoned)...

    by Skyway Moaters

    Alakazam! Treg... ah what's the point? I'm off...

  • Feb. 12, 2004, 12:23 p.m. CST

    One more time?

    by Skyway Moaters

  • Feb. 21, 2004, 6:45 p.m. CST

    raw_bean *heart* Runleord!

    by raw_bean


  • Feb. 27, 2004, 8:53 a.m. CST

    Oh, go away, Bean

    by Elaine

    Please. This is occupied territory. :-)