Cool News
6 Minute RETURN OF THE KING Expanded Edition Trailer Unleashed!
Hey folks, Harry here... Are you audibly panting for this dvd? Are you in agony pains waiting for it? Does it haunt your waking stare? Is life revolving around this singular release date this December? Check out this trailer below - then try to deny yourself the joy of ordering this film immediately by clicking on the image below!
Click here to Bask in the glory of what will surely be the best film of 2004 - though tragically not on a silver screen!
-
+ Expand All
-
Nov 29, 2004 4:20:58 PM CST
Didn't the last two Extended Editions come out in November?
by rev_skarekroe
I feel gypped.
-
I doubt it's because of ROTK. Most people on here would audibly pant if they had to walk up three stairs. Can't wait for the extended edition though.
-
Can't wait.
-
...the other EEs did come out in November. I seem to recall watching one of them with my in-laws over Thanksgiving weekend. Can't wait for this bad boy, though. Usually with film versions that incorporate deleted scenes, I can see why said scenes were axed. With these, however, I have felt every extra bit added something that must have been cut for time consideration alone. They've been very well worth my money.
-
I heard there was an added segment where Aragorn's father, Grando, is killed by Greedo, who shot first. How do you say "Peter Jackson raped my childhood" in elvish ?
-
This is it folks - the farewell to the greatest trilogy of all time (that wasn't subsequantly massacred and/or raped by George Lucas). The Oscars kind of felt like a farewell, but this is the last "new" LOTR product to look forward to. Now i'll have to wait until the local independant theatre has the inevitable "All Extended Edition LOTR back-to-back marathon" before I dust off my Dunedain cloak and head out into society to frighten decent folk.
-
Ooooh, can't wait-- waiting bad-- especially now that we get to see the demise of Saruman, the not-including of which was the one really big mistake I can pin on PJ in ROTK (my other concerns are mere quibbles by comparison). You'd think Saruman would avoid slapping around his not-wrapped-very-tight minions...
-
The previous two EE's were released in November. Of course with those, P.J. didn't have to track everybody down for the audio commentaries as the cast and crew were still working on LotR, while in this case the work was finished. Ah well, only two more weeks from tomorrow.
-
Nov 29, 2004 4:57:59 PM CST
Will Moriarty be correct in suspecthing ROTK will benefit the mo
by oberon
I suspect so - the cuts in ROTK's theatrical run were the most jarring of the three. You could feel the omissions at times. Not just Saruman's absence, but Frodo and Sam's sudden loss of their orc-gear, a lot of Aragorn material (to help better demonstrate his rise to leadership in Gondor), and the Eowyn/Faramir storyline - all we see is them together at the coronation. Or the choppiness at points in the last half of the movie. The delay in release is no doubt not just due to the greater amount of material here - or just Peter's work on King Kong - but the lack of any need to get it out in advance of the theatrical release of the next movie. Looks like it will be worth the wait.
-
Nov 29, 2004 5:10:15 PM CST
Remember the OTHER reasons the other EEs came out in November
by filker-tom
Two biggies: [1] They were trying to build hype for the December releases of the next chapters of the trilogy, and [2] this movie is even longer and with more new material than the first two. Frankly, I'm just thrilled they're gonna get it out in time for Christmas.
-
Made the theatrical versions of both Fellowship & Two Towers so he could make Return of the King so he could make the Extended Edition DVD's for all three films. Because they rock.
-
...i will have to wire my jaw shut before watching this (yes of course i will buy it - damn you Jackson). I hope King Kong is a lot tighter.
-
I am one of the few who left the theaters after TT and ROTK with more than a little disappointment. Disappointed because TT was soooo far from the book that it could scarcely be called an adaptation; it was more a movie "inspired by". But the EE went a long way to fixing the problems; if Faramir's cinematic transformation into a bad guy could not be rewritten and reshot, at least we got understandable story reasons as to why it was done that were not in the theaterical release. FOTR also greatly improved the story (which was the closest to the book of the three in the first place, regradless of the elimination of Tom Bombadil). The footage looks very promising. Alot of great bits that were cut seem to be in now: the Mouth of Sauron, Faramir and Eowyn's courtship, Aragorn and the Palantir, the Houses of the Healing, the confrontation with Saruman, Eomer finding Eowyn on the Pelennor, and best of all, some sort of encounter between Gandalf and the Witch King in Minas Tirith, although clearly it will not be as written in the book (instead of having the Rohirrim charge in at the crowing of the rooster, cutting off the conversation between Gandalf and the Witch King in front of the newly demolished gate, Jackson chose to have Theoden arrive slowly and spend 10 minutes arranging his troops and giving one of the film's several "Braveheart"-like exhortative speeches). But I do have faith that this will go a long way to restoring my faith in the movies. As it is, I would never allow anyone to watch the theatrical releases as opposed to the EEs; the theatrical releases are not the real adaptation, but the extended editions come as close as humanly possible.
-
does anyone know about a region 2 EE boxset coming out next year? i saw listings for it at different sites, but not much in the way of descriptions. i was hoping that there'd be an EE boxset coming out here in the states with the soundtracks also.
-
absolutely must be brought up in every talkback. It's in the website charter. We simply can't allow a rapist to walk free among us, even if his raping was metaphorical, and of our childhood memories, rather than our anuses.
-
AWesome!
-
Sorry.
-
Thankoo
-
http://progressive2.stream.aol.com/newline/gl/newline/lordoftherings/ReturnOfTheKing/videos/NoMansExtndCut_300_dl.mov
-
Nov 29, 2004 7:29:44 PM CST
I'd say this would make a lovely gift for the wife to buy me...
by tv casualty
...but who am I kidding, I'm buying it (and watching it) the day it comes out. No way am I waiting until Christmas, though that's a good weekend for the ALL-EXTENDED-VERSION MARATHON. Huzzah!
-
with extra scouring power! with the EE they also do my tub!
-
I can't wait to watch this. Did I hear some special new extended edition music in the preview??? Might have to get my hobbit costume out of storage for this.
-
480x268 QuickTime, just because I love all of you so much... ;-)
http://progressive2.stream.aol.com/newline/gl/newline/lordoftherings/ReturnOfTheKing/videos/NoMansExtndCut_700_dl.mov -
I. CAN. NOT. FREAKIN'. WAIT. This is it folks. The end. The last new LOTR stuff. It's a weird feeling. With our last bit of new Star Wars movie stuff coming out next spring it makes for a weird time/ feeling in general. I am counting my blessings by making sure to enjoy every last bit of this time. I hold optimism for Episode III. I hope it will bring me back to the Original Trilogy- movies that impacted my life in an uncanny way. And I thank God for LOTR and what its meant to so many of us. These movies came at a time when I needed them most. I cannot wait for ROTK EE. I simply cannot wait!
-
And would you people shut. the. fuck. up. about Lucas in one thread? Just one, that's all I ask. At least he didn't make the main villain just FUCKING DISAPPEAR in the third act and make you buy another version of the DVD to find out what happens to him.
-
Everyone's losing. Oh wait. I've had this invincible ghost army that has to do my bidding up my ass this whole time. Let me get a stick and fish 'em out of there. What the fuck? I just hope the falling action after the climax is longer. An hour isn't long enough. And make the death speeches longer. As they are they make Hamlet's death seem like Obi Wan's but they need to be longer. The goodbyes too. More crying. I swear to Christ the whole saga could have been a slim 4 hours, max. Thanks Pete. And Kong's going to suck, you previous anti-remake two faced AICN bitches. Sorry, just pissed that I have to buy this thing and sit through it again because of the gf.
-
Nov 29, 2004 9:28:09 PM CST
Now with a 40 minute ending full of hugs, tears, laughter and lo
by tall_boy
Good lord, no.
-
Hey people:
Moriarty himself will be on the live television show "The Screen Savers" on G4techTV tomorrow (11/30) at 7pm Eastern, 4pm Pacific.
Just letting you all know! -
Panting?? well that's not quite polite now is it! But yes, I am very excited, and sad, about the upcoming EE release. I mean.. YEs!! FInally! I want! but... nothing new this year?? Oh well. Like many, I regret there is no reckoning, however, I do work in film, and I realize full well the majesty of what has been acheieved with these novels. I hate it when people compare novels to their supposed movie counterparts. About the only way to fully completely be truthful to an adaption is to do animation. Its just not possible to make a film exaxtly as a book says. I jsut take it that it was a dmaned, damed good effort, and I am pelase at that. Yes I will buy it the day it comes out and watch it. And look very much forward to the first EE trilogy showing that comes my way!
-
please take a moment to visit "www.dragonwarsmovie.com" You would be disappointed. Does anyone know when is this movie going to be release, the whole thing is in korean which I can't understand.
-
This must be a land speed "god to jackass" record. "Oh boo hoo a ghost army how lame..." "oh boo hoo no shire..." "Oh it's not what IIIIII would have done!" To quote Grandpa Simpson, "oh bitch bitch bitch." It's not what you would have done but it's a lot better than you could do, will ever do, and could ever deserve based on your attitudes. Jackasses
-
There are at least a dozen "Lucas is worse than Hitler" posts in every thread on this site, no matter how irrelevant the topic but anyone who isn't swallowing Pete's load and asking for seconds is a whiner. The movies were good. They also had their problems. Sorry for having a dissenting opinion. Here's a Kleenex.
-
Nov 29, 2004 11:30:49 PM CST
I wonder how long the "jumping up and down on Frodo's bed" seque
by tall_boy
I can hardly wait!
-
Nov 29, 2004 11:51:58 PM CST
Well, the trailer looked decent. What's the word on this movie?
by hung-wei lo
You'd think a website about movies would have more than one story on this upcoming film. I need info.
-
Nov 30, 2004 12:31:05 AM CST
Oh great I hope not another gay hobbit orgy extended ending for
by ashesofdonnie
either way i am anxiously awaitng the EE. but as my mandatory bithching, the exclusion of the scouring of the shire will always bug me.
-
Nov 30, 2004 12:35:21 AM CST
so will PJ digitally insert saruman at the end of ROTK?
by ashesofdonnie
and will there be added scenes of rivendell and the shire celebarting the downfall of the empire,i mean sauron while the Minas thirith celbartion scenes include an Orc being surfed through a crowd and hobbits playing happy "jub jub"music using orc helmets as drums???oh but PJ will probably change the music to bettr go with the celbrations scenes.
-
Man, everything about Saruman when he's saying "You're all going to die..."...Watching that part of the trailer, i was thinking "what the hell does that remind me of so much", and then I realised, having bought the DVD and watched it again recently, it is totally a Zulu reference/homage. Chris Lee in full Mr. Witt(the priest dude who keeps telling the troops of their doom) mode. That has to be intentional, seeing how Peter Jackson drew from/homaged Zulu quite a bit in The Two Towers for Helm's Deep. That's awesome :). And my favorite character from the books is finally back, woot! (Mouth of Sauron). Not to mention I always wondered what happened to that orc general dude, the Yoda one...
-
Nov 30, 2004 1:06:57 AM CST
Yes, AshesOfDonnie. The gay Hobbit orgy will be re-inserted so t
by i dunno
The huge, pulsating, evil vagina collapsing at the hands of two Hobbits who lie spent amid a river of viscous fluid, later to frolic playfully in bed together while a man in a white dress looks on with staff in hand was too subtle. The Super Ultimate Extended Rigid Throbbing Edition will actually show Hobbit penetration. That may drive the point home for those not into the whole innuendo thing.
-
... when Gandalf says "Go back to the Abyss". Ha!
-
Nov 30, 2004 3:26:00 AM CST
Oh, joy, MORE of it. Does this mean the Hobbits have sex in the
by triumph poops!
Seriously, I thought the movie was ok and as an overall genre fan will buy and watch this extended edition. Maybe NOW it will make sense why a core villain that I had spent 6 hours watching and investing time in just suddenly up and disappeared without a trace. And maybe the extended edition will fix some of the other pacing problems -- such as spending hours upon hours, movie upon movie, building up to a final stand battle, only to watch a bunch of green ghosts wipe out the villains in the time it took me to blink. Talk about deus ex machina at its worst. Of course, if Jackson was really going to fix anything, he'd add more action and REMOVE some of the over-padded endings that faded in and out, in and out, and went on and on and on and on and on for fucking forever. Really, admit it -- the scene of the hobbits laughing and giggling and jumping in bed together, pillow feathers flying over their happy faces as music swells and plays...GAYEST GENRE MOVIE ENDING EVER. Talk about a scene that was so bad and so hammy that it was cringe inducing to watch in the theater.
-
Nov 30, 2004 5:26:46 AM CST
"Talk about a scene that was so bad and so hammy that it was cri
by judge doom
- Master, sir. I heard Master Yoda talking about midi-chlorians. I was wondering, what are midi-chlorians? - Midi-chlorians are microscopic life forms that dwell in all of us, and we are symbionts with them. - Symbionts? - Life forms living together. - They live inside me?
-
Nov 30, 2004 5:49:59 AM CST
Sweet jesus.....you people are pathetic....enough with this 'GAY
by snake-eyes
I find it almost unfathomable to comprehend how the majority of people on this talkback STILL imply there are GAY overtones in this movie. GET A LIFE YOU FUCKING LOSERS!!! Why is it the literal second any man shows any hint of emotion towards his fellow man, companion or closest friend he is seen as being gay. Why do u people find it so difficult to comprehend that these scenes simply convey a true bond of friendship between a group of people who have literally been through hell and yet, by slim chance, have survived where so many other brave men and women fell. I for one would jump on any bed with joy having gotten thru the nightmare they did!!! Christ, I jump up and down when my footy (soccer) team scores a goal, so put it in some context you idiots!!! They were all overjoyed!!
Also please don -
Time will remove the rose colored glasses everyone seems to have for these films. And here we go dragging SW into this again. That's not how the dialogue went anyway, Judge Doom and no, the NINE YEAR OLD didn't speak like a 4th year biology student. Just as the 19 year old raised by virgins didn't speak to Padme like James Bond or even Han Solo would have. The pretentious pseudo-olde English dialogue in LOTR made me want to fucking strangle someone. "Pray, what tell you of these lands, your elven eyes, oh he who appears to belongith in band of boys?"
-
I CANNOT WAIT!!!!! I
-
Nov 30, 2004 6:08:20 AM CST
'I dunno'..... (a very apt username for someone who is clearly a
by snake-eyes
Its a pity that the when you felt like strangling someone you didnt think to strangle yourself and rid us of your stupidity!!! :) Seriously though, what kind of english did would you have liked to have seen in LOTR? Something like...... Aragorn: 'Whooa dudes...look at fucking huge Orc army', Legolas: 'Oh, thats weak dude what the fuck we gonna do now man?', Gimli: 'Let kick their fucking asses!' Aragorn: 'yeah dude!' *then they all high five eachother, before gettin on their skateboards and heading off to the battle*......WHAT A MORON U REALLY ARE!!!!!!!!!!
-
I haven't read anything on here that's homophobic, only observations that the series is very, very, incredibly gay. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
-
Have you read the books? The English language that Tolkien used in them was simply phenomenal - its a lost art as far as I am concerned. As I read them I realised how sad it was that we don
-
...doesn't mean it wasn't irritating.
-
If you were kidding, then I apologise for my rant, (though worryingly, I suspect you werent joking at all). Its just that on top of the 'LOTR IS GAY' remark (which really winds me up), to then have someone bitch about the dialogue being 'too heavy and ye olde english'.... GRRRR!!! Both comments begger belief. Though, I suppose, eveyone has a right to their own opinion. Even if everyone else thinks that opinion is wrong. :) Each to their own....
-
That is pretty much how the dialogue went in TPM, and it was nauseating. I hate the way these things always turn into a debate about teh relative merits of LOTR Vs Star Wars - and you've dragged me into it!! By saying that Judge misquoted the film - he didn't! The problem with talkbacks in the last 3 years or so has been that everyone and his uncle feel that he is qualified to speak at length on any subject to do with films - even films they've only ever seen once, or worse still, never seen at all. Sometimes the crap i read on this site makes me sick, it's just that every once in a while you read something genuinely exclusive, or hear about a new project for the first time, so I have to check it at least twice a week. I don't let myself get dragged into TBs too often, but I really felt i had to chime in. Oh, and yes, there are frequently racist and homophobic remarks on thes talkbacks, it's disgusting that the mods don't ban more people, when i know people who've been banned simply for casting doubt on some of Harry's more outlandish claims. This place has become like a secret club which isn't so secret anymore, in fact they let anyone thru the doors so long as you don't rock the boat to the extent that you openly disagree with something which Lord Knowles and his sidekick Weiner Man have said. In fact, I'll probably get banned for writing this post. I know Harry's always wanted my username for himself, so it wouldn't surprise me at all......
-
...some of my favorite things in the world are the Star Wars/LOTR/Matrix talkbacks. I love all three series, but the verbal bitch-slapping by various franchise warriors has brought much laughter into my life, from "Scrubbing Bubbles Ghost Army" and "Comet Denethor" to "Meesa fucking gay!" and "Bitchikin Skywalker" -- it's all good. On a side note, I love the creepy look and sound of the Mouth of Sauron, and the whole Judge Death vibe going on there. Cannot fucking WAIT to see this thing.
-
Nov 30, 2004 11:45:14 AM CST
Did i read that right? Did Harry really say "best film of 2004"?
by otto parts
Um no. No no no no no. You look a right "Mr Confused", Hazza. Best film of 2004: Old Boy. Best website: this one - http://pages.123-reg.co.uk/sumon-262452/ I promise, you will be laughing so hard you'll be having difficulty breathing. But be patient, and read all the material.
-
Nov 30, 2004 12:12:22 PM CST
I just hope that they made the big bads scary this time
by miserableraingod
because they weren't frightening in the theatrical cut. The Nazgul, who were extremely frightening in FOTR, made me laugh in ROTK. I felt no threat from them. Certainly, the witch-king didn't live up to any expectations. Hopefully, with the added fight between him and Gandalf, he will feel like the bad ass he should be. Oh yeah, I didn't like Shelob either. Or, I didn't like the editing during the entire Shelob sequence. I can't wait for the Voice of Saruman and the Voice of Sauron!
-
Nov 30, 2004 12:54:06 PM CST
"By saying that Judge misquoted the film - he didn't! "----Yes h
by i dunno
But it doesn't matter. I'm not the one who drug SW into this thing. In fact, I cringe every time I look at ANY TB, no matter what the subject matter because all roads invariably lead to Lucas and how much SW sucks. Well there are a hell of a lot of editing decisions that Jackson made that Lucas would not that would have made it a better movie. And if it's the dialogue you're bitching about, maybe those of us who have experienced the situation find an awkward, inexperienced kid delivering cheesy dialogue to an older more sophisticated woman a little more realistic than common infantry rabble spouting off prose as if they were reading Shakespeare. Now my (our) largely tongue & cheek remarks about LOTR having gay overtones pre-dates the actual films by decades so don't scream "homophobe" for something observed since the book was released. So enough already. I'll hold my tongue while I watch the new 7 1/2 hour version ($60 for one film in its 3rd edition for all of you calling Lucas Luca$ for releasing one version of the entire OT for $35 but I digress) and enjoy the good parts of it and just look foreward to the pussy I'll get afterwards, during the rest of it. So truce.
-
Nov 30, 2004 4:45:18 PM CST
How much longer will the silent meaningful glances of war buddie
by tall_boy
I don't think its gay, I just think its cheesy and dull. "We've been through hell, lets stare at each other."
-
Which ending of the four or five would you be referring to, Snake-Eyes? The multiple-endings in ROTK was one of the worst things about the trilogy.
-
Well, maibe Forgot a Line or two, but that's as close as it was. Meaning that Darth Vader believes, Obi wan tales and yoda powers are not but the merits of GODDAMN FUCKING mitochondria! That's worst then green ghosts in my book!
-
Actually, you know what? Me writing an answer to your question doesn
-
After the first one the bad guys emanated absolutely zero threat for me. The fell away as if made from paper machete. If you wanna get me excited the opposing force has to feel, well, opposing. In this regards the books definitey succeeded where the film, IMO failed. But again, I thought the first one was good.
-
Nov 30, 2004 10:45:37 PM CST
I'm glad there are others out there who do not like these films.
by iamjacksuserid
I'm soooo glad I am not the only one that did not get into LOTR movies. I thought I was out here all alone. I have written countless reasons why I don't like this film (my blog's latest entry contains one such writing) so I won't go into any more detail here. I will say however that I did think the first one rather enjoyable in some parts, and the one scene where Frodo declares his intention to take the ring back to Mt Doom or wherever to have it destroyed and the expression on Gandalf's face, it's mix of sadness as he realizes his friend will be in peril, as he hears Frodo saying "I will go" is a wonderful scene. But that's about it. The Two Towers was plain boring and ROTK was overdone and overlong as well as boring.
-
...and it was as amazing as you expected.
Have a friend orking with DVDs here in Sweden and they got the box yesterday.
My thoughts:
The Sauruman piece made much more sense to the whole Palantir-thing, the battles where extended but got even more tense and the path of the dead much more exciting.
The only disappointment where that there still was not much made out of the Faramir/Eowyn story and the house of heeling.
With several new scenes between Aaragorn and Eowyn, the beautiful warrior maiden seemed a bit slutty turning to Faramir after one look from him...
But well. That's a minor flaw.
The best movie of 2003 may also be the best of 2004...
-
Just don't set your sights on citing anything from this site
-
Though I agree that it was stretched out a bit. Swede, is there any difference in the movie after Frodo wakes up in Minas Tirith?
-
From Frodo wakes up and forward there are no new scenes at all.
I'd estimate the last 25 minutes or so are intact.
All five endings are the same...
=)) -
Dec 01, 2004 7:03:25 AM CST
I dunno: not entirely sure why you insist on making yourself loo
by barrelrider
But if you're gonna refute a quotation from a film, how about telling us what you think was really said. Oh yeah, that would mean admitting that you are COMPLETELY WRONG. If that Judge Doom's extract from TPM is wrong - HOW is it wrong, why don't you give us a verbatim quotation of the scene, and let's see who's wrong and who's right. If not, keep your dimwitted views to yourself. Jeez, I had no interest in talk ing abolut star wars, but please! I can't just sit there and read HORSESHIT. You're wrong, tyhe rest of us are right. Just leave it at that and do some fucking research next time you wanna sound like you have even half a clue what you're talking about.
-
http://members.aol.com/PrinceG0R0/script.html
There's the script buddy, why don't you go and see just how wrong Judge Doom was - then come back and tell us what his quotation SHOULD have said. -
Hello Swede! Looks like we are the lucky ones on this tb. I got it last night and watched the whole wonderful thing. It makes me so happy to see it, and yet sad, too, because this is it, no more versions - until the 25th anniversary (LOL)! I don't like to reveal SPOILERS so I will just say this: There are several wonderful surprises - really nice character moments and a some interesting emotional twists. Denethor, Faramir and Eowyn benefit a good deal as do Pippin, Merry and Aragorn. Frodo and Sam get some additional scenes, but I wanted even more of them! Tolkien's original language gets a great deal more screentime and it is wonderful having Christopher Lee back to make the most of it. And yes, he and Brad Dourif get their own illustrations at the end. Some minor disappointments are that some of my most anticipated
"missing scenes" are in but get shorter shrift than I would have liked, but that is made up for by the overall yumminess and the several unexpected treats. I will try to listen to one of the commentaries tonight! Hooray! I am a very happy hobbit lass! -
I will not look at the ROTK SEE preview, because I'm trying not to spoil myself. Why am I doing this, you ask, when I already know everything that is to be included? Call it an explorations of the limits of my masochistic streak. Anyway, glad you enjoyed it. That puts my mind at ease a little.
-
Hello mellyn. I just hopped over to the link in Orionsangel's post. I STRONGLY suggest you NOT read it until after you have seen the SEE for yourself. His/her review is full of factual inaccuracies, misunderstandings and is also very poorly written. As Orionsangel warned, this reviewer didn't like the other two extendeds and in fact holds an opinion that it is "wrong" to create them at all (no matter that, at least with LOTR, having extended versions were director's idea in the first place). Once you have seen the extended for yourself, reading his/her review will be good for a laugh.***As for the "Gay Orgy" scene, I want to clear something up. I know I already said there were no changes after "The Eagles Are Coming" but that's because I was in denial over he VAST improvement of the Fellowship reunion scene at the end. I am going to break tradition and tell you about changes to that scene. It is no longer a gay orgy scene at all! Frodo wakes up and sees Gandalf. Gandalf says "whoop" and Frodo jumps up and they hi-five each other. Then Pippin and Merry come in and they each yell "Huah" and hi-five Frodo and Gandalf and each other. Then Merry lifts the bed and tips it over, breaking Pippin's leg in the process. Then Gimli comes in with a can of beer and smashes it against his forehead. Then Legolas comes in and dumps a cooler of ice over Gimli's head. Gandalf grabs several handfuls of spilled ice and throws them at the three hobbits and at Legolas, breaking a few windows. Then Aragorn comes in with a video camera and films them all, dodging to avoid tossed ice and cans of beer. Gimli and Merry bend over to moon the camera. Then Frodo punches Legolas while Aragorn and Gandalf playfully pour beer over all their heads. Then Sam comes in and tosses a chair at the group of them giving Legolas a concussion and Frodo a bloody nose.***So, it's better, don't you think? At least it's not gay.
-
Glad you got to see the movie! I have just a few questions about it, if you have the time. 1.) I've read the books, so *I* understood why Frodo and Gandalf had to go to the Grey Havens, but in the extended version do they explain it better so that people who haven't read the books can understand? (I had to explain it to A LOT of people.) Like, does Gandalf reveal that he's a ring bearer? Does Frodo say any more? (In the book, it made sense why he had to leave. But in the movie, all he does is say his shoulder hurts and he's been changed by the war. But no talk of NEEDING healing. No talk of the Ring still having a little power over him.) 2. Do we finally get an explanation for why Arwen is mysteriously dying? That made no sense. 3. The scene where Arwen gives up her immortality always felt truncated. Is there more?
-
Snif, why are ya booin' poor, poor Tinfang ye gurt ninnyhammer? Elanor, I like that much better and, no, it doesn't sound at all gay now. Phew! C'mon Dec. 14th!
-
Unfortunately, the answer to all of your questions is no. However, truth be told, due to the lateness of the hour last night I fast-forwarded through the last non-extended chapters so I don't know if some additional Voice over explanation might have been added. If so, there is no indication of it in the printed menu that comes with the DVD.
***However, regarding Arwen's dying, in the book Arwen's mortality kicks in when she and Arwen wed. This is a problematic concept to portray on film (not the least of reasons Tolkien always felt his book was
"unfilmable". How substantially different could it have looked
than the way the filmmakers presented it? When Arwen abandons her ride to the Havens she has physically committed to Aragorn, come what may. Perhaps the same as saying "I do". That's when her mortality begins. Would it have been better if they had waited to show it until after the wedding?***And as for Frodo leaving, I , too had to explain what happened to my non-read friends, which I thoroughly enjoyed doing. (And chance to talk Tolkien!) They all seemed to understand, however, that it was touching and sad that Frodo had to leave his friends.
***Poor Tinfang! Yes, mort owes you (and Miami and perhaps Snake Eyes) an apology. But you'll neer get one. He is a cranky old fart.
8~) heh heh -
Dec 01, 2004 3:28:45 PM CST
And behold who enters into the Talkback....the token SW idiot...
by snake-eyes
Grow up you blithering idiot.... *yawns*
-
Dec 01, 2004 4:39:48 PM CST
"The huge, pulsating, evil vagina collapsing at the hands of two
by king_midas
I Dunno
-
...is it true what Pallando said about the orc pods? If so, I am curious as all get out on that one. Just this one spoiler madame...pleeezzz {[:^)
-
Never fear!
-
I agree with PJ's decision to have Arwen become mortal early on in the movie. I meant that I don't understand why she suddenly falls ill, why she is suddenly "tied to the Ring" and she will die if Sauron isn't defeated...further motivating Aragorn to take Anduril. I remember a scene in the trailer for the theatrical edition where Elrond says to Arwen on the bridge of Rivendell "you gave away your life's grace, I cannot protect you anymore." (That *could* explain it... Arwen is dying because she gave her life's grace to Frodo at the Ford in Fellowship. But I need to see the scene to know if my theory is correct.) That scene isn't in there?*****As for Frodo and the Grey Havens, too bad that they didn't explain it better in the extended edition. I think non-fans would have liked the ending better if they had understood it. But I think I can live with it so long as we at least get to see more of Frodo's deterioration pre-Mount Doom.
-
Which pretentious pseudo-olde English dialogue in LOTR are you talking about exactly? Surely not the dialogue written by that Tolkien hack who was a Professor of English and Anglo-Saxon at Oxford University?
-
If you say "pseudo-pretentious olde English dialogue" that makes a lot more sense, and your other post was funny, so you're tight bro.
-
Dec 01, 2004 8:44:26 PM CST
Tinfang: "Oh, and would someone send a clue to poor Triumph Poop
by triumph poops!
BLAH, BLAH, BLAH. Oh, gimme a fucking break, Tinfang. If you like the movies, fine. If you want to suck Jackson's cock for making them, fine. But don't give me this utterly bullshit, splitting hairs stray line of dialogue to explain away how after TWO films...after 6 HOURS of running time...Christopher Lee just up and disappears completely from the films. For crying out loud, even FANS of the movie have noted it was a MAJOR mistake by Jackson not to keep the Lee footage in ROTK. Even CRITICS who gave the movie solid reviews knocked the fact that Lee just up and disappeared (as well as noting that the repeated endings DID drag on too much). I don't need to find a "clue" to spot the obvious: Jackson made a bad call on cutting Lee entirely out of the third movie. Hell, even Lee HIMSELF was pissed by it and avoided the press premieres. And fans and critics -- pro and con alike -- all felt it was a mistake. So really, the ONLY ONE needing to find a clue is you because you soooooooo want to defend this movie, you can't take ANY criticism of it. Instead you want to take a stray line of dialogue and say "Yup! That covers it! I'm content that a major character just VANISHED from the story!" Oh...and the jumping on the bed ending in slow motion, feathers flying? Hobbits looking longingly at each other? STILL THE GAYEST GENRE ENDING IN HISTORY.
-
You are wrong again. Lee is magnificent in the movie and it was a shame that his final scene was cut from the theatrical film. BUT the only people who consider this editorial decision a MISTAKE are whiners and those who hate the movies anyway who are are just looking for a less
"geeky" incident to hinge their pathetic losership on. Lee was not in 6 hours of film. His character was used brilliantly in the first two movies as a substitute for the real villain of the story, Sauron, who was far more difficult to portray on film since he HAD NO BODY. In a perfect world, the filmmakers might have had time to foresee how things played out, and might have re-written the scripts to give us both. Of course the esteemed Mr. Lee was unhappy about it. What actor wouldn't be? Of course he did not appear at the premieres. He WASN'T IN THE MOVIE. Can you name a recognizable actor who has shown up for a film premieres when his scene has been cut? The decision was made for the overall good of the movie. It was not made lightly or maliciously or negligently. The Return of the King needed to focus on the evil power of MORDOR which means SAURON, the Witch King and Gothmog. Saruman was never supposed to be a part of the third movie. His defeat was supposed to have been dealt with in T2T. But no-one had ever shot three films back to back, so they were forced to deal with the needs of EACH FILM in the cutting room rather than on set, which is what they did. You may not like their choice, I certainly don't, but refusing to see how it is better for the film is just obstinance on your part. YOU WANKER! -
Dec 02, 2004 1:51:12 AM CST
Ok! I see we can add Elanor to those who need to cut back on the
by triumph poops!
Calling me a wanker in capital letters? Ah, such a great debating style you have. In other words we have one more diehard LOTR fan who needs to realize their geekdom days of living in their parent's basement draws to a close, and that it's not normal to spend their life 24/7 rolling playing an elf or going out in public dressed in fake ears or spouting overly flowerly Middle Earth english. You said "BUT the only people who consider this editorial decision (ie. removing Lee) a MISTAKE are whiners and those who hate the movies anyway who are are just looking for a less "geeky" incident to hinge their pathetic losership on." Nice try, babe, but not even close. So I'll REPEAT what I said before so that people like you who have NO sense of proper film criticism -- that is, all you want to do is praise, praise, praise your LOTR movies and REFUSE to accept anything but -- can get a clue about the reality that there ARE faults in your beloved trilogy. So once again, snap out of it, wake up to reality, and since you didn't get it the last time, read again: If you like the movies, fine. If you want to suck Jackson's cock for making the movies, fine. But don't give me this utterly bullshit, splitting hairs stray line of dialogue bit to explain away how after TWO films...after 6 HOURS of running time...Christopher Lee just up and disappears completely from the films. For crying out loud, even FANS of the movie have noted it was a MAJOR mistake by Jackson not to keep the Lee footage in ROTK. Even CRITICS who gave the movie solid reviews knocked the fact that Lee just up and disappeared. And, Elanor, you KNOW from talking to your fellow fans of the films that this was a bitch they had as well. By criticizing the Lee "disappearance" I'm not saying anything or bringing up a point that lots and lots and lots and lots and LOTS of other people haven't said as well. You just don't want to accept it.
-
Masturbator is more like it. The full horror of PJ's incompetence in cutting the Saruman death scene from the the theatrical release seems to have evaded the notice of the Academy when they handed out the Oscars for Screenwriting and Editing. It's safe to say that some of them know a bit about moviemaking and may have even read the book. Perhaps they thought it was a reasonable judgment call in adapting a very long and detailed book to the screen - just like the umpteen millions of people who liked the film and knew the book.
-
Sorry, but I think it was a huge misjudgement cutting Saruman's scene. This character provided the backbone of the previous movies and ROTK suffers badly from him his absence. His disappearance is extremely abrupt and jarring. It is a very disappointing ending for such a brilliant villian. The fact that PJ chose instead to lumber the film with a series of shockingly poor endings - needlessly prolonging the movie - shows just how erratic his judgement had become by the end of the series. This has been carried through to the extended versions, where you have brilliant additions competing with utter garbage. And the argument that a shower of Oscars bestows a badge of quality on ANY movie is utter nonsense. The Academy rewards tripe. It always has done.
-
Dec 02, 2004 4:47:54 AM CST
Oh, this is such utter horseshit. Elanor and Irritable, give Tri
by commando cody
For crying out loud, his core point of contention is that the Lee sequence shouldn't have been cut from ROTK simply because it was bad storytelling that Lee and his character should just suddenly vanish from the movies entirely. And you know what? He's RIGHT. That was a definite low point in the movies and a BAD call on Jackson's part, pure and simple. You guys need to get off your high horses -- like porcupines, you need put down your overly defensive spines -- and you just need to realize (as Triumph was pointing out correctly) that the average moviegoer sat through 3 hours of FELLOWSHIP, sat through 3 hours of TWO TOWERS and became convinced that Lee was a core story point, that he was a strong secondary villain, only to suddenly be left scratching their heads early on in ROTK and then whispering to the person next to them, "Wait a minute. What happened to the other Wizard in the tower? The guy from the old Hammer movies that was helping the flaming vagina? What, he's just GONE? Is he locked up in the tower or something? What, we don't see him again? That's IT? How did he get locked in there? What, is he supposed to be dead or something? I don't get it. I thought he was supposed to be a bad-ss villain!" Triumph's right. There were PLENTY of people who bitched about Lee just disappearing from the overall story without a trace. Furthermore, I'll second Triumph's post and notion that the defensive excuse that Lee's vanishing is ok because a character tossed out a stray line is ridiculous at best, or simply a cheap cop out. Somewhere in this thread, recalling it off the top of my head, someone said it best when they noted it would be like sitting through STAR WARS and EMPIRE and then getting to RETURN OF THE JEDI and simply having a stormtrooper say "Oh Vader's ship hasn't docked yet, so you won't be seeing him anymore" to explain his sudden disappearance from the trilogy altogether and THEN having Luke and the Emperor go at it simply because that's the ending that now works best for that moment in time. Sorry, but had Lucas done that you'd be all over his ass the same way Triumph -- and, yes, MANY OTHERS -- have gone after Jackson for suddenly cutting Lee out. Hell, go back to when on this site Harry first announced the confirmation that Lee was being cut out and see how many people howled that it was jsut flat out stupid, a bad call on Jackson's part. As Triumph noted, fans and critics alike ultimately DID find it to be a bone to pick with the movie. And addressing Irritable's silly defense (namely, that it couldn't have been THAT big a deal since the Academy still gave the movie an Oscar) is equally eye-rolling. Come on, let's be clear on another thing. ROTK won for Best Picture simply because the Academy decided to award Jackson and the franchise all-for-one Oscars at the end (thus allowing ROKT to win for film, directing and screenplay). Taking that into account, you have realize that people DID have assorted problems with ROTK, but the movie won Oscars just the same because the Academy wanted to honor the achievement of all 3 having been made well. Yes, let me repeat that. The movies were made well. But even though they were made well that doesn't mean there WEREN'T flaws in the movies still. And Triumph was right, to this day even FANS of the movies zero in on the Lee disappearance as a weak point in the trilogy, much as they do the Ghosts too quickly ending the final fight and making the movie seem to reach a screeching halt. Meanwhile, others bitch about things left out from the books (such as the scouring) or conversely people bitch about the multiple fade in/fade out endings in ROTK -- which again, go back and actually READ the reviews of the movie and you'll see that many CRITICS likewise pointed to those as being too much and too dragged out. I mean, come on, let's get real here. To try and place the LOTR movies above ANY criticism is just plain silly. And far too naive if you actually want to discuss film in an intelligent and critical manner.
-
Lawrence of Arabia, A Man for All Seasons,The Godfather Part II, Unforgiven,Titanic The Last Emperor, Gone with the Wind, From Here to Eternity, On the Waterfront, Gandhi, Amadeus, Tom Jones, Midnight Cowboy, The French Connection, Platoon, The Bridge on the River Kwai, Lawrence of Arabia, The Godfather I, Patton, The Sting, Schindler's List, Shakespeare in Love, A Man for All Seasons, Star Wars, How Green Was My Valley, Doctor Zhivago, Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?,In the Heat of the Night, The French Connection, One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest,The Deer Hunter, Raiders of the Lost Ark, The Silence of the Lambs, Braveheart, Saving Private Ryan, American Beauty, Gladiator ....
-
Dec 02, 2004 5:31:28 AM CST
Right then.....time for an overdue retort......'Triumph poops!',
by snake-eyes
Triumph poops, you said........."So I'll REPEAT what I said before so that people like you who have NO sense of proper film criticism
-
An B
-
Oh christ, even
-
But that's because he's the ONLY one who sent me straws so I could eat after I broke my jaw last spring. For that act of kindness, he'll always be aces in my book.
-
I understand: it means nothing that professional, experienced moviemakers in the Academy voting on Screenplay and Editing thought that the film worked fine: No, what really counts is "the average moviegoer" (as invented by you) "PLENTY of people" (known particularly to Your Omnipotence) "yes, MANY OTHERS" (err..still a little vague there sport) - yes,all these mysterious, innumerable persons whose minds are scannable by you - believed that cutting out the death of Saruman was an epic blunder.*****Well, that's your argument. A pathetically unconvincing argument, but an argument, I guess. **** Try reading the posts again knucklehead (you know, scan your montior, move your lips laboriously) - nobody here - not me anyway - is suggesting ROTK is the perfect, flawless movie or that it's above criticism. Any fool can see that some parts of the film worked better than others and that some adaptation ideas were weaker than others. Not unlike many other excellent movies. If your value judgment is that the omission of the Saruman death scene was an egregiousl flaw, fine. Other people, have different value judgments about that. Your value judgments have no special merit (and that's being ridiculously polite).
-
This 'Saruman death scene' ppl are referring to....I'm assuming they mean the Scouring of the Shire chapter...as its there that he meets his fate, not whilst being held within Orthanc, (from which he later escapes and heads to the Shire). Now as cool as this chapter was in the book, no-one here can suggest that it would
-
Myself included. That is all. So un-boo to Swede as well.
-
You must have known the dangers of coming back to AICN? When has a Talkback ever NOT descended into random abuse and pigheaded refusal to see another's point of view in almost every post? I begin to believe lots of you MISS the confrontation now that we have a Club of our own where everyone (more or less) gets along, even when they don't agree! Just to throw in my two cents, I think the Saruman sequence understandably fell into the cracks around the beginnning/end gap they had to wrestle into the films. The book (note the singular) really doesn't have any definite ending/beginning breaks between FOTR and TTT, and TTT and ROTK. They solved the beginnings problem by starting each film with a flashback that segues into the action nicely. The end of FOTR was relatively easy if you strip the first chapter of each of the two halves of TTT (books III and IV) and attach them to the end of FOTR, giving just enough closure to the enormous and hgorrifyingly abrupt cutoff from the end of the FOTR book (I've never once been able to finish reading FOTR without imediately picking up TTT and reading at least a chapter). However, with the complex nature of the TTT and ROTK books (alternating Books of Aragorn and co, III and V, and Frodo and Sam, IV and VI), and the juggling and editing needed to interweave the two (or more) storylines (from four Books) together into two films, it all got a bit more complicated. Thus you have Helm's Deep made the climax of TTT, and Shelob moved to (a more chronologically accurate, in terms of the timeline Tolkien invented, yet different from the structure of the book) partway through ROTK, getting enough of the drawn-out ending of the TTT book into the post-climax bit of TTT(film) or the set-up-and-get-going bit of ROTK without rendering either film boring at the end(TTT) or beginning(ROTK) was seemingly very complex and difficult. Originally the Saruman sequence was intended for the end of TTT, but the end of that film was getting too long after the climax of Helm's Deep (it didn't affect the book, because after Helm's Deep, you could have plenty of wind down before you covered the Frodo/Sam storyline and climaxed the story with Shelob), so they thought it would go better at the start of ROTK (first thought wa the TTT EE, but even the ending of the slower longer richer version of the film was going to get ovberdone at some point, and there was already LOADS more added to the post-climax end of the film already). Eventually they decided that Saruman's story had had enough closure in the fact that a)his massive(pun intended :^) ) army was eradicated and him rendered impotent, and b) Gandlaf had already had his rematch for his FOTR beating when he trounced Saruman in the battle for Theoden's mind in TTT. So with them wanting to get over the events of TTT (concerned with Isengard and its threat to Rohan) and onto the events of ROTK (concerned with Mordor and its threat to Gondor) speedily, they found there wasn't room to spend time finishing off TTT in the midst of starting ROTK. I missed the scene, but (although I haven't seen it yet) its abscence seemed to me to help the film (as a single movie, if not for the entire trilogy) more than hinder it, getting things moving speedily along to the major plot of the siege of Minas Tirith. -------------- Phew! I'm going to repost this at the Club, so any Tailenders who want to respond with find me more likely to see that response if they head back there, the hatred in this place is getting me down, as always.
-
SCOW won't let me go! :^)
-
...I suppse we tolerate it because it all started here at AICN and I, for one, intend to play it out to the very end. Besides, meeting and talking to folks here that are civil, such as yourself, has made it all worthwhile.
-
Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow.
-
I heartily agree with your full treatise and thanks for the props.***Dear bean - yea verily I DO miss it! I honestly couldn't resist.
-
Incidentally, not that I condone rudeness and verbal abuse, but there is a reason Star Wars fans are amongst the most vicious bashers: defensiveness. As a Star Wars fan myself, it seems to me that the bashing and hatred for George Lucas and the Prequel Trilogy films that goes on here is more intense than for any other franchise (this site a has a horrendous reputation with SW fan sites), so it's not surprising how many Star Wars fans turn into franchisist, embittered trolls. Being in both the LOTR and SW fan camps can be very depressing, getting abuse from both sides, but even I have to laugh at the Matrix ReTarded apologists. ;^)
-
And mort, I trust you know I was teasing you.***
-
I think it's unfair to say that only 'a mere handful of people' accept that PJ's LOTR films are not completely without flaw. Personally I could name half a dozen flaws (as I see them) in the films off the top of my head, ranging from minor to quite severe (as it happens, the lack of Saruman in ROTK wouldn't be one of them; I thought his storyline was quite well finished in TTT, between Gandalf proving himself stronger when they fought over Theoden's mind, Aragorn and co. finishing off his army at Helm's Deep, and the Ents storming Isengard). The real point is, all of those flaws combined might amount to about 20mins of film time. Out of a total of over 682 mins! Not to mention the fact that I could easily name 20 or so moments of pure genius and perfectly achieved translations from great bits of the book, off the top of my head. And that I couldn't name a single film off the top of my head with no flaws at all, and not very many at all that bring me anywhere near as much joy to watch as the LOTR films.
-
Dec 02, 2004 9:35:59 PM CST
The fact that you all are arguing about the Lee "disappearance"
by big dumb ape
...only makes me hope William Shatner will stop by some of your homes soon, bitchslap you upside the head and yell "It's just a movie! GET A LIFE! You! Have you left the house lately? You over there! Have you ever even kissed a girl?" Seriously, get a grip people. Though stopping by and skimming through to the tailend of this talkback, I do think the Tolkein defenders are more guilty of angry mud slinging than Triumph ever was. He started off simply saying the complete disappearance of Lee in the films was jarring and a bad call on Jackson's part (and face it, it pretty much was). Then people pounced on him, he got defensive and reposted, and at one point Commando agreed with him and then some of you pounced on him too. I mean, really, get a grip. They are entitled to their opinions as well. Or have Tolkeinites reached the point where they are bristling over any retroactive criticism now? Because the days of their franchise are over while other things -- yes, like Star Wars for one -- still continue to march on? Which is another point that can even be brought up (or should I flat out say, is another match tossed into the gasoline drums). Face it, for all the Oscars and money they made at the box office, I still don't see any signs that LOTR impacted society at a cultural level nearly the way STAR WARS has perpetually left its impression. Me thinks the Tolkeinites really loved that their movies and that the source of their geek fan love was center stage for 3 years, that it got the spotlight, but now they're suffering a bit of an emotional "morning after hangover" as they realize the party's over and people have completely moved on to newer things, pushing LOTR back out of the spotlight...
-
There's been nothing 'angry' about any of my posts here, as I'd hope you've noticed, but I continue to quietly and calmly disagree. :^) ----------- Also, I think you may be in a little denial about LOTR's popularity and the scale of its impact on the popular culture. Don't forget, it's had much less time to worm its way into the culture than the nigh on thirty years of Star Wars, but I would argue 'My preciousssss....' can't be too far behind 'May the Force be with you' as a pop culture reference/quote these days. It's impossible to say whether LOTR's influence will last as long as Star Wars's at this time (and somewhat pointless speculating on it, not to mention rather juvenile to argue whose franchise is more popular), but as food for thought, no doubt many said the same about the LOTR fad back in the day the *book* first became a phenomenon, and it didn't fade quietly away then. -------- Anyway, this is all completely frivolous; contrary to your assessment of LOTR fans, I for one couldn't care less if a year or two down the line no-one gives a damn about LOTR anymore - I'll still have my DVDs. :^) --- Just as I'll still have all six (roll on May 2005!) of my Star Wars DVDs, no matter how many people malign the newer films whilst still viewing the originals with the rose tinted spectacles of nolstalgia. It has to be said, the public adulation for Star Wars is not what it was, more's the pity.
-
Oh for chrissakes. Yeah, I know you are only trolling so I hope you thoroughly enjoy the attention I am now giving you. Your Big Dumb post has added nothing to this debate. You are only rehashing irrelevant and insipid accusations against people who are demonstrably your intellectual superiors. At least it looks that way judging by the content of your posts and our posts. You might be a smarter fellow than you appear, fully
capable of actual debate but you have proven nothing of the sort with your Big Dumb Post. You're right about one thing, though;
I have never kissed a girl (the way you mean) but that's because I am a heterosexual female. I've kissed plenty of boys and men, though. And I'm sure I'm older than you and more respected in my line of work than you. In addition, morGoth, Tinfang, raw bean, irritable, snake eyes and I are all perfectly aware that ROTK is just a movie but it happens to be a movie we love and a movie for which the extended edition is about to be released which makes our passion for it move to the forefront of our minds at the moment, which causes us to take time from work and studies to post on THIS TALKBACK which is about the anticipation of that very extended edition. So, Dummy, it appears that we all have a very logical reason for being here. What's your excuse? I have been frequenting this website for over four years and have heard all the same garbage over and over. I have never said ROTK is perfect. But these guys Triumph and An Beal and Commander Cody (who actually knows better) are using a totally bullshit claim about the Saruman editing decision. None of them give a shit about the movies. They are no more outraged than I am that Gigli got bad reviews. They were never invested in these films and it is TOTAL BULLSHIT for them to make claims as though their movie-going experience was ruined by Lee's scenes being cut. They hate these films because they turned out to be more popular and critically acclaimed than even we die-hard fans thought. They hate these films because they perceive it is a threat to Star Wars. It ISN'T. And I am not responding because I'm angry about these trollers; I am just sick and tired of seeing talkbacks about a movie I LOVE be swamped by this tiny group of cry-babies. None of you know how to debate. None of you know how to support an argument. If you think you do, try it. I'm waiting.***And as far as to what level the LOTR movies have impacted society, well, personally I don't really care whether they do or not although I find it interesting; what I care about is that they have impacted me (as the book did before them). You are blind if you don't see the influences
already but none of us knows how long that will last or how deep it has gone. Star Wars came out in 1977. Ask me again in 10 or 20 years. -
Elanor, you crack me up. Simply because you so desperately want to come off as sounding so literate, so intellectual, and most of all you want to project the image that you might (accent on MIGHT) know what you're talking about. Yet it's clear you possess a thinking capacity that is (as Dave Barry once brilliantly described his dog) akin to a loose BB pellet rolling around in an empty tuna can. I'll give you a perfect example of your misquided thinking, not to mention your now-on-display delusional ego. In your perpetual tirades to defend a movie (a simple movie, mind you) you just had to sneak in and state: "And I'm sure I'm older than you and more respected in my line of work than you." OH REALLY? Based on a simple talkback about a movie where people are trading quips about an editing decision, and based on my ONE post, you can suddenly now magically deduce my age versus yours AND can deduce my occupation AND taking it even further compare it against your own AND even come to the conclusion you are "more respected" in your line of work than I am in mine. Other than the fact that that's a laughable assertion on your part, I just have to ask the obvious: Do you get many dates walking around with that swelled head on your shoulders? In fact, why even bring such laughable assertions into a MOVIE debate if not to simply try and bolster your own weakened self-image? In fact, tell us, O'holier than thou, just how much respect in your field of busing tables at the diner are you getting these days? You also wrote: "I am just sick and tired of seeing talkbacks about a movie I LOVE be swamped by this tiny group of cry-babies. None of you know how to debate. None of you know how to support an argument." Well next time, Elanor, let that BB pellet roll around a few more times...let it gain some momentum so an actual thought emerges...and then READ what you actually wrote. And take note of it. The idea that you would place your egotistical, non-valid, and unsubstantiated claims into a MOVIE debate is nothing more than you trying to beat your chest and drown out others by declaring, "My opinion is more important than yours because I'M personally more important than you." And you know what? THAT'S the point you lose any and all arguments and THAT'S the point where you prove to all that you are a crappy debater -- not to mention you come off as sounding pathetic and sad by trying to claim you are above others without offering any proof. But even more laughable was to do all that, and then end your post by saying "none of you know how to support an argument." Hmm...seems to me someone needs to brush up on their comprehension skills because now you're not even following your own advice anymore.
-
So let
-
To claim LAST?!? Seriously folks, I love these movies. I will not defend PJ's decision to excise Christopher Lee, because in my mind it is indefensible. But I firmly believe that anyone who says it ruined the movie for them is merely looking for a reason to bitch. Now, if someone wanted to debate whether or not PJ's excision of the Gandalf vs. Witch King or Aragorn vs. the Mouth of Sauron scenes hurt the movie, I could talk about that. If someone wanted to discuss whether the Aragorn Cliff-Diving scene should have been cut from TTT to make room for the Voice of Saruman I could do that as well. But, even if the wrap-up of Saruman's plot was rushed and awkward, the fact remains that his presence wasn't needed in the third film. And even if PJ followed the book and included the Scouring of the Shire, the opening scene could have been left EXACTLY AS IS and still would have worked, because it would have left Saruman locked safely in his tower, seemingly of no threat to anyone. Your arguments are groundless. And I'm still last. Bitches. Whip-tash.
-
I just wanted to report that I got a chance to watch the easter eggs on the extended DVD last night. They are both hysterically funny. Someone ought to write a TV series for Dom Monaghan (other than Lost I mean) He is quite brilliant. And I never knew Vince Vaughn was funny at all. Something else for y'all to look forward to.***And now for Dummy: Oh my, now it's my turn to laugh at you. Yeah, I was on my high horse a bit last night and I usually keep it reined in a bit more than that but overall I'm glad to see it bugged you. But if that's your idea of debating then I have clearly wasted my time. Big surprise.***The comments I made about my age and reputation were to refute the tired refrain YOU placed in your post about LOTR fans living in their mom's basements and not getting laid. Don't make it out like my comments appeared unprovoked. Also, I made it quite clear that I WAS making assumptions based entirely on the content of your post and I acknowledged that you (or Triumph, etc) may be deliberately hiding your true intellectual talents. I gave you a chance to reveal them, and now the world has its answer. I rest my case.
-
...right, it IS tough being in both camps here. And, I think the fact that it devolved to "camps" is sad. The bottom line is, you know folks like myself and elanor AREN'T SW trolls yet everytime someone comes on here bashing LoTR and we respond, that's the first thing we get accused of is bashing Lucas. Look at Cody's response to elanor where he said she'd go right out and bash Lucas for something Jackson would supposedly do. That's so much oliphaunt doody as you know elanor doesn't do that. See what I mean? BTW, I hope you don't think we're abondoning the Club or anything! Bless my Sooty Buns but that is CERTAINLY not going to happen! Like I said, this is just the last hurrah here at AICN, warts an' all {[:^)
-
"I don't care about these movies"? What a bizarre thing to say. This person doesn't know anything about me. I don't know what has induced him/her to make judgements on my taste. Very strange indeed - but I guess that's all part of the bracing talkback madness. Well, let me say that my opinion of the movies is very simple and straightforward: FOTR: excellent - a five-star movie. TTT: very good. Not as good as FOTR, but still an impressive piece of work - a four-star movie. ROTK: a potentially good movie fatally crippled by CGI, plaqued with plot holes, and almost completely ruined by a bafflingly shoddy series of endings. Yes I know, it's in the book! I've read it twenty times! But there are no books in a cinema! It's about movies! Nothing more to say there, really. I wish TTT had been a tiny bit better but I'm not really complaining; I wish ROTK had been a lot better. As for the extended versions: well, I care enough about them to have actually bought them! They contain loads of fascinating material in the "making of" disks. Also: some of the additions to the movies themselves are very welcome. However, you would have to be a blinkered cultist to ignore the redundancy and even outright awfulness of most of the extra footage. "Squirrel droppings", indeed! The Oscars are, of course a joke. In the last twenty-five or so years the only Best Picture oscar that may have been deserved was Unforgiven. I was relieved when FOTR lost out, because that to me was confirmation of its quality. And by the same token, I was disappointed when ROTK won because this confirmed the opinion I had already formed - that it was a piece of mindless, forgettable drivel. Now pass me that Chicago DVD...
-
...for proving my point about LoTR fan bashers. Good work and you can come by and pick up your check {[:^)
-
Dec 03, 2004 1:37:13 PM CST
It's funny that you say elanor doesn't know you, soft mouth
by mortsleam
Especially after you so deftly impersonated her not long ago under the guise of Elanor(.) and tried to smear her name and the names of her fellow tailenders. I'd say that's pretty intimate. *** You know, I was watching Return of the King on Starz the other day, (What? I was folding laundry and it was on, shut up) and I noticed something amazing during the charge of the Rohirrim. They cut from a shot of the horses in the middle of the orc army, to a shot of the Mumakil walking through the dust, and back to the Rohirrim for a reaction shot. And even though I know it's impossible for an elephant to grow that large, there is no way to tell that they are CGI. They completely and totally intergrate with the scene, their textures, lighting and shading are perfectly natural, and match the realism of the actual human actors perched on live horses. And once again I was astonished at the level of accomplishment that PJ & Co achieved. And even though I have problems with the pacing and editing decisions in ROTK, I thought the theatrical version deserved all the accolades it recieved and deserves to stand next to Fellowship. And I'm sure that the SEE, just as the TTT SEE before it, will fix nearly all of the problems that I do have. And I feel sorry for people don't share my opinion, because they're missing out on real beauty. But that's their problem. Along with disassociative personality disorder...
-
If I sit here and quietly and calmly offer my opinions and points of discussion, I can actually say anything I want, because no-one pays any attention. Ah, the secret to posting whatever you want without getting flamed is discovered at last, but no-one else will ever know it, because this post is rendered virtually invisible by my lack of sensationalism, caps lock, random verbal abuse or confrontational argumentativeness. I feel like Jack from 'Fight Club', the Zen Master, the calm, little centre of the universe. Or, possibly, merely insignificant. Oh well. :^)
-
You're more like the penguin-totem-animal hanging out in Jack's safe place. Or, to bring another franchise into this: "Bean, you're turning into a penguin, stop it."
-
I'm curious to know how you think, An Beal Bocht, ROTK could have been made without the CGI that you say 'fatally crippled' it? I suppose, given the website we're all on, the only sensible option would be to suggest the Oliphaunts should have been done 'MAN IN SUIT!!!'. :^) ------- It's been far too long since I saw a good Godzilla film. I'll always remember fondly the neighbour friend of mine who introduced me to the joys of Gaiju films. But I digress.
-
You look upon a hobbit. 8~)
-
AN' the Gaffer will brook no denial! ** Nyah-nyah beansie, you used CAPLOCK!! Hmmm, I've tried that technique before too and still got flambe'd(sp?). Now, now...put away that SCOW! ** mortsleam, I had to watch it on Starz too just for the novelty of seeing Tolkien on broadcast television. Hey, it was broadcast from a satellite!
-
Mortsleam......what are you talking about? I fear you have me confused with some-one else. Smearing? Intimate? Good luck to you, my friend; if I have to get involved with every mad thing that is said to me on this site, then I will end up going daft in the head myself! Raw Bean! Some one sane at last! Well, to answer your question - I am not saying that special effects don't have a place in ROTK. I think that in this day and age they are a necessary part of creating Tolkien's world on film. However, the effects should be as low-key as possible so as not to detract from the story and the characters. In ROTK, the everything-plus-the-kitchen-sink approach has strangled the story and the characters. I can see what happened: FOTR and TTT were so successful that the studio gave Peter Jackson carte blanche to do anything he liked in the post-production of ROTK. He was allowed to spend as much money as he wanted on the special effects. This was a serious mistake in my view. Jackson needed the studio to reign him in here - not to give him free reign. The exact same thing has happened to George Lucas. He has complete freedom nowadays to include anything he wants in his Star Wars films - so he does exactly that. But I think everyone will agree that Episode 1 and 2 are vastly inferior to the original films - which were made under considerable technical restrictions. I strongly believe that if the effects budget for ROTK had been greatly reduced, the resulting film would have been far better. Jackson would have been forced to concentrate on the storytelling and the characters - rather than getting carried away with the possibilities of his digital paintbox.
-
So, everyone else is insane except for raw_bean? Gee thanks...whut'd I ever do to you?
-
Wasn't referring to you - or indeed to any other posters who are able to control themselves. Of course, we don't need to be friends or like each other - but it's better if we respect each other's views if we want to have any kind of discussion.
-
The old tailender mob lift their filthy heads, see that the coast is clear and start spreading their particular brand of bile all over again. I see all the old names - and all up to their old tricks. Ah yes: foul-mouthed Elanor takes her office-bully persona onto AICN; pretty soon she'll start hosing the TB order and spoiling it for everyone. You never got over that mid-life crisis, did you, Elanor? And you want to make everyone else pay. Like poor Triumph poops - you really revealed yourself for what you are, Elanor: a despicable thug who throws her (considerable) weight around. Well, Orson hasn't gone away, you know. I chased you scumbags out of here once - and I can do it again. People of your ilk are not fit to post on this forum and I will see to it that you don't. And you, Mr Bal Bocht, don't say I didn't warn you: I offered you the hand of friendship and told you to stay away from these biggoted zombies. But you're just as much a half-wit as they are - letting them walk all over you. You deserve everything you get. Idiot.
-
Well, "Mister" Orson, you are obviously quite mad and in need of some strong medication. I recall that you were stalking me some months ago and ranting about conspiracy theories and hidden agendas. It is you who are "foul-mouthed". You may not use bad language, but you have nonetheless resorted to vulgar name-calling and personal insults. In doing so, you have stooped to the level of those you claim to repudiate. If you continue your harrassment, I shall ask the administrator of this website to ban you.
-
Whoah.
-
The assholes! The crackpots! What have I been missing!? Off to make some popcorn and PRAY the "conversation" continues...
-
so I don't see how it's success can have seriously impacted the subsequent films. ---------- More to the point, :^D !! ------------ "You're a liar, and a thief!" - "I'm not list'nin', not list'nin'!"
-
I take back whatever I said last week about having doubts. This is schizophrenia on such a humongous scale that I'm not sure whether to be shocked or amused. I suppose I'll stick with amusement for now. [Giggle.]
-
I mean, I know that I'm crazy, or at least slightly mentally unbalanced, I men, I think I'm a talking walrus, fer chrissakes, but really...yikes. And fer the record, let's check the stats...hmmm, time spent at working not working vs. total amount of posts on AICN...skrinkle skrinkle think think...uhm, no, doesn't look like I've been chased away from here. Or that I'm getting any work done. Or that ROTK didn't deserve all the awards and accolades that have been heaped upon it.
-
Ha ha, well that's it! Of course, i am An B
-
C'mon, Bocht! Defend your honor!
-
"No wonder you pour your bile onto me just because I've got a different-sounding name" Huh? Do you actually *believe* that these personal attacks happen, Orson? ----------- You really need to learn to be less defensive all the time Orson, this insistence on accusing people of attacking you all the time (when in reality you seem to dish out a lot more of that kind of thing than I've ever seen directed AT you) makes you come across as quite the drama queen. In fact, and rather ironically, the person who seems to have had the nastiest things to say to you on this TB was 'An Bael Bocht'. :^D ------------ And last of all, in response to "You hate people to be different, just like I've said all along. And now I'm proven right - which is why I gave myself another name and personality-change to lure you into the trap.", I think it would be more accurate to say that *you* were always the one to become angry when others wouldn't imediately change their minds to agree with your opinions, and I let you back into Club Angband (having, I thought, made it pretty clear in the emails we exchanged that I knew exactly who you were - see the one where I referred to An Beal Bocht as 'a Smeagol to Orson's Deagol') in order to prove to *you* that we weren't the ignorant, elitist meanies you make us out to be (interestingly enough, you wee the largest enemy to Tailender inclusiveness, when your 'Trollking' idiocy rendered my free and open self-registration to Club Angband untenable). I was only surprised you actually managed to resist the urge to troll for so long, actually contributing in a positive way, before the contentious issue of politics came up and you seemed unable to help yourself. At which point you started up with the time honoured method of trolling: make inflammatory statements, with no justification or explanation, that are too vague or nonsensical for anyone to actually address and dispute, but have just enough connection to topics of relevance or importance that you can get all defensive when confronted about them and claim that you were trying to discuss sensibly not offend, and anyone asking you to cease making such statements is unfairly picking on you and denying you your right to present your opinion. --------- And lest your ego get too big, in terms of my decision to build Club Angband and speak with the Tailenders away from AICN, you were the merest speck in an ocean of reasons, and yet I STILL come to this site rather frequently, even if I post a lot less here these days. --------- As a final note, if you ever feel like talking sensibly you know where to find me, although if you ever turn up at Club Angband again now An Beal has been 'outed' I think certain Tailenders would probably need to hear some sincere apologies before they would listen to you again. If nothing else (even though I 'outed' you to a few Tailenders when we had a gathering in Boston), your propensity for inventing 'personas' and pretending to be other people could be seen as somewhat rude. When it isn't funny. :^)
-
I meant of course, that I referred to An Beal Bocht as Smeagol to Orson's *Gollum* (not Deagol) in an email.
-
Dec 08, 2004 10:06:18 AM CST
I'm kind of sad neither one of "them" responded to my post
by mortsleam
Wherein I said I would be glad to discuss the relative merits or weaknesses of excising "Gandalf vs. the Witchking" or "The Mouth of Sauron" or how getting rid of the cliff dive and moving "the Voice of Saruman" to TTT would have greatly improved that movie. I guess "they" just aren't fans of rational, intelligent debate. Sniff.
-
Dec 08, 2004 11:00:15 AM CST
Orson, you are obviously a very erudite and subtle individual fo
by an b
Excuse me, am I right in imagining that you are claiming to be me posting under a different name? If so, then you are smearing me maliciously and rather unconvincingly. It is perfectly outrageous to suggest that I have any association with you. I would not stoop to your level under any provocation. You are not worth my time and your tactics are pathetic and childishly transparent. I shouldn't even dignify your posts with a reponse. You are a symptom of the anarchy which exists on these talkbacks and a product of your mother's basement. On another note: Raw Bean - I very deliberately referred to "post-production" when talking about the special effects in the movies. Although you took great pains to explain that all three films were filmed together, I was in fact already aware of this. In return I shall take the trouble to explain to you that the year's interval between the release of each movie was spent adding the special effects - as well as additional shooting. If FOTR had been less successful or even had bombed, then I guarantee that the effects budget for TTT and ROTK would have been greatly reduced. My argument is that this would have been to the movies' benefit.
-
Oh yeah. That's the stuff.
-
Enough said. :-)
-
Actually I mentioned it rather briefly and casually. You seem somewhat prone to hyperbole. --------- Anyway, I personally don't see CGI effects work as being so crucial to whether a film is good or bad as you seem to. I judge TTT and ROTK more on the (I think) rather excellent acting, and the (for the most part) wonderful translation of the beautiful themes and words from Tolkien's book, on which criteria I find them at least on a par with FOTR. The fact that I also find most of the effects work stunningly beautiful and very effectve makes as little difference to my opinion as those effects shots/scenes that I consider gratuitous, ill-advised or imperfectly executed. I guess I don't see how post production work can negate any inherent quality in the production material.
-
THIS, Orson, is the real reason I grew to detest posting on AICN, compared to which your ridiculous attempts at bothering Tailenders ('running us off the site') was merely an occasionally amusing annoyance.
-
Hello everybody! Jesus, I take a couple of months off the internet and everything goes mental. I shall be careful to never be away for this long again, as clearly the future of the free world depends on it. I really don't give much of a toss about trollery and sockpuppetry, but I am kind of interested if a) anybody other than Elanor has their EE yet and b) what did they think of it? I haven't received mine yet, and since you know my tastes, should I be a)dreading it b)full of giddy anticipation c) swearing it will never darken my divida in this life or the next? P.S. I played the LOTR 3rd Age game on the PS2 and feel my InnerPurist (TM) has been violently buggered and then left for dead in a dumpster (it culminates in fighting Sauron's flaming eye on top of Barad-Dur, no less...)
-
"Been a long time, been a long time, been a long lonely, lonely, lonely, lonely time." Welcome back Alice. According to the current tally of spoiler whores at clubangband: elanor, djinnj, and Elaine have gotten their SEE on. elanor loved it (natch,) djinnj never actually gave her opinion, and Elaine was somewhat disappointed that certain additional scenes weren't longer. At least, that's what I gleaned as I was peeking through my fingers whilst trying not to look. *** Man, do I hate it when advertising agencies try to shortcut brand recognition by using well known songs. I recently had to change my cellphone ringtone from "Should I Stay or Should I Go?" to "Rock the Casbah." Sharif don't like it.
-
mortsleam's filled you in on the EE status amongst Tailenders already, and I've nothing to add except that mine shipped yesterday and I should hopefully be watching it myself pretty soon (fingers crossed!) ------ The Third Age? I thought my Inner Purist(TM) had taken some abuse from the ROTK action game, and was going to need hospital treatment after playing the upcoming Battle for Middle Earth war game, but fighting the Eye atop Barad-Dur? Ouch, my IP(TM) is wincing in sympathy. And yet, masochist that I am, I have to ask: is the game any good? I've seen some screenshots of the PC version and it looks graphically fantastic, if nothing else. ------- Fancy popping in to Club Angband, to say hi to some more folks? I can think of a few who'll be pleased to see you. I've really gotten too used to a non-hosing site now, I'm all out of practice at these fractured conversations! :^)
-
Hey bean, fancy meeting you way up here on the Top o' tha Tailend. It's just one of the many quirky charms of AICN. Like Harry's overuse of exclamation points and the constant presence of insidious, mentally and emotionally damaged, borderline paranoid schizophrenic trolls. I love the Club, I'm forever grateful for the time and effort you've put into building it. But sometimes it's good to come back to the quirk. As for purists: Tolkien himself said he liked the idea that these stories could be retold in different ways, such as the (nearly) complete Narn I Hin Hurin in Unfinished Tales vs. the shortened version that appears in the Sil. Just as PJ's version of LOTR is yet another telling, where much is right, much is great, some parts even better than I dared to imagine, and others full of strange added nonsense, even if some of the strange added nonsense is very good strange added nonsense. So when I play the games, I just think of it as yet another, slightly more interactive and less nuanced version. Of course, I don't have the Third Age game yet, so I can't really judge that one. And fighting a flaming slit...I think I used to have nightmares about that as a teen. Yeah, "nightmares."
-
There are some telling details on the ROTK EE which show just how much the FX budget rocketed between each of the films. In FOTR there were 540 FX shots - which is a lot; in TTT there were 799 effects shots, which is just staggering; but in ROTK there are an unbelievable 1488 FX shots!!! Is it a coincidence that FOTR is the best of the three movies - the one with the best writing, the best performances and the one which is closest to the spirit of Tolkien? __________________ I'm also pleased that Peter Jackson, Phillippa Boyens and Fran Walsh are very frank about the scenes in ROTK which are awkward, unintentionally comical or which just don't work. This is extremely refreshing when you think that some of the extremist fans refuse to aknowledge the movie's faults - even when they are glaring. At least the film-makers have the confidence to admit that mistakes were made and that some scenes were not successful. On the other hand it's a pity that Fran Walsh is the only one of the three who understands the problems with the multiple endings. Boyens and Jackson seem irrationally attached to them._________________ As for the EE itself: maybe I'm getting old, or have lowered my standards, but it seems to me that most of the extra material doesn't damage the movie. The scenes that detract are obvious and are aknowledged by PJ and team. Most scenes fall into the "unneccessary but entertaining" category. The scenes which impressed me the most are as follows: (1) Voice Of Saruman: Christopher Lee's portrayal is a joy to watch and Saruman is given the spectacular send-off he deserves. However, much as I love this scene, I have to agree with the film-makers that it is somewhat shapeless and undramatic. I am forced to concede that cutting it from the theatrical release was probably the right decision. A talkbacker CHANGES HIS MIND! Call the newspapers! Alert the President. Switch to Defcon One! (2) That one extra line from Pippin when he meets Denethor - "The mightiest warrior may be slain by one arrow..." Denethor's shocked reaction reveals the depth of his grief and horror. This would have been enough to explain Denethor's despair and madness - it should have been in the theatrical cut. (3) Gandalf relates the history of Minas Tirith, and Pippin asks to leave. Completely unneccessary - but very nice indeed. Fabulous delivery from Ian McKellen here. (4) The Witchking Vs Gandalf. The scene starts far too abruptly but plays out very nicely. However, I accept the opinion of PJ, PB and FW that the Witchking flying off at this moment is somewhat uconvincing. Worked in the book; but not really in the movie. So it goes. (5) The ride of the Rohirrim: now plays as one continuous charge. An improvement, I'd say. (6) Mouth Of Sauron. Very nice. I think it adds to the movie. But I think Aragorn's apologetic " I don't believe it! I Won't believe it!" defeats the whole purpose of the scene. The Fellowship SHOULD believe that Frodo has been tortured to death. It makes their last stand all the more desperate and heroic. (7) Any of Denethor's extra scenes. John Noble brings terrific nuances to this performance. Great stuff. (8) The statue at the crossroads. Beautiful moment. Should have been in the theatrical cut. _____________ Things I didn't like (apart from the obvious): (1) The appearance of Boromir - some very nasty work here from WETA. It's jarring and clumsy. (2) They've left in the endings. Surely this was an opportunity to clean up the endings a bit. (3) Any extra stuff with Merry and Pippin. These scenes offer conclusive proof that Boyd and Monaghan are bad actors. Let's say it out loud: these roles were miscast. (4) extra fighting scenes. Yawn. The theatrical cut already suffered badly from battle fatigue. The last thing this movie needs is more sword-swinging. And that's it for now - I still haven't watched all the extras. At least Orson seems to have gone away.
-
Ah, I see. I got the impression that you were being facetious in explaining to me that the LOTR movies were filmed in one continuous shoot. This is, after all, common knowledge - particularly if you own all three EEs, as I do. If you think the FX are gorgeous, then fair enough - I understand why you find it all so watchable and I envy you. My experience is that a lot of CGI interrupts the movie for me, rather than complementing it. For example, in ROTK, some people watch in amazement as Legolas athletically runs rings around a giant elephant, finally bringing it to a crashing halt. I, on the other hand, find myself yanked out of the story and forced to watch a CGI rubberman jerking his way up a videogame "boss" character. Then some bluescreened stuntmen are jarringly dropped into the mixture. All this whilst a texture-mapped battlefield streams beneath them on which are superimposed identikit synthetic agents. I experience this kind of thing all through ROTK. However, I agree with you that there are moments when the FX are highly appropriate and gorgeous to watch - i.e. the moth in FOTR, the smokey ship and some of the seamless scaling effects (perhaps the most effective is when Ian McKellen is simply standing on a box and putting his hand on Pippin's shoulder. Before this was explained on the EE commentary, I was asking myself, how on earth did they do that? - imagining that it was some elaborate combination of CGI, a body double in a gimp suit and painting stuff out etc. Nope, a simple trick performed in camera. On a general note, I find real lanscapes to be very wholesome and engaging to look at, whilst digital matte paintings feel flat and alienating - they look fair but feel foul, if you will. Which is one reason why FOTR is a more watchable film for me - because so much of it takes place in the real outdoors.
-
Are you gonna dance back at An Beal, or what?
-
Pardon me, didn't see the hosery, thought nobody's posted for a couple days. Still, Orson, I can't believe you're backing down from Bocht like that. *** Heya, Alice! I'll pop a couple buttons off the top of this silk shirt in your honor. ...There we go. Frees up the moody, stubbly glare of desire nearing the boiling point quite nicely, doesn't it?
-
You prefer FOTR for it's lack of gigantic (excessive and unecessary in your apparent opinion) spectacle, as I understand you, and for it's more restrained and beautiful depictions of nature and less emphasis on all-consuming battle scenes. If you feel this makes FOTR a better film than TTT or ROTK, that's all well and good. Presumably then, you also find FOTR a better *book* (or part book) than TTT and ROTK, as the differences in style and content that so bother you in the later films seem to me totally consistent with how the later parts of Tolkien's book differ from the earlier (including the increasing numbers of special effects, which reflect the increasing numbers of necessarily digital creatures - and I hope you won't argue that point - such as Gollum, the Ents, Fell Beasts and so on, and the increasing number and scale of the battle scenes, in the book). Yes, Legolas has his ridiculous action moents, in all three films (I find the awful CGI moment where he leaps on the cave troll's shoulders in FOTR infinitely worse in execution than the scene with the Mumakil in ROTK, probably because the effects budget was lower and Weta more limited, but never mind), but I overlook them, in all three films, and appreciate all the other stuff in them that is good. As far as I'm concerned, the changing nature of the films that has caused some (like yourself) to find TTT and ROTK to be lacking restraint or charm compared to the first one, I think causes some people (including some film reviewers I had read or seen reviews by) to prefer them (or one or other of them) over FOTR for opposite reasons, finding their epic scale and bombastic conflict (involving men, which said reviewers made the films easier to connect to) more interesting than the 'boring' Elven and Hobbitish nonsense in the first film (making no judgement on which *subjective opinion* is more 'correct', and my own resting somewhere in between). I think this all goes to show how faithful an adaptation of the *whole* of the written LOTR PJ's trilogy is, as Tolkien himself had noticed similar things about his readers in the foreword to the second edition (to try not to offend you again as I did when reminding you - as I thought of it - as to the nature of PJ's shooting method, I'm going to assume you've read it and know what I'm talking about unless you say otherwise). Seeing the films as three parts of a whole, as I do the book/s, I don't like to choose favourite films or parts, so much as favourite moments. It has to be said, most of my favourite moments (in both the films and books, which is no coincidence because mostly they are the same moments in either) come from ROTK, and fewest from TTT, I think, though not by much. All this said, I stand by my judgement that PJ did as good a job (or at least very nearly so; as I noted in my earlier post regarding the rather unusual structure of the book after the breaking of the Fellowship the adapting of TTT and ROTK must have been vastly more difficult) of adapting TTT and ROTK as with FOTR, and just because you (or anyone else) vastly prefers one or other of the films and finds the remaining two wanting is more likely a sign *confirming* that than denying it. Or, I'm full of shit, and this entire (and very long)post is a total waste of my and anyone-who-reads-it's time. :^)
-
without getting bogged down (I haven't got the EE yet to form my own opinions on any of the material you mention from it, and don't feel much like going into Boyd, Monaghan - not to mention Merry and Pippin, far from my favourite characters in the book - and the one long, but fitting ending to the Lord of the Rings), I just want to quickly mention that according to the chapter listing for ROTK:EE (which I HAVE seen), lists the Ride of the Rohirrim scene as unaltered from the theatrical release, and I personally can't remember a contrasting version of the scene to the 'one continuous charge' you say is in the EE. I'm a little confused.
-
I'm somewhat less optimistic on that point. And if there was an emoticon denoting extreme, sardonic sarcasm, I'd be using that here.
-
despite your scorn at my reminding you that the *writing* and *performances* of all three films where pretty much done at once, long before FOTR came out and post-production started on TTT or ROTK, you still said "In FOTR there were 540 FX shots - which is a lot; in TTT there were 799 effects shots, which is just staggering; but in ROTK there are an unbelievable 1488 FX shots!!! Is it a coincidence that FOTR is the best of the three movies - the one with the best *writing*, the best *performances* and the one which is closest to the spirit of Tolkien?". ------ As for that final subjective statement regarding the 'spirit of Tolkien', I disagree. As I said in my previous post, I feel the different aspects of the 'spirit of Tolkien' came across in the different parts of the film trilogy very much as they did in the different parts of his book.
-
Dec 09, 2004 6:31:15 PM CST
Flustered by PB! Denied by ROTK EE! Stymied by CA! Buggered by E
by aliceinwonderlnd
Pallando! How my heart has yearned for your white-shirted stubbly self, you inspirer of hackneyed romantic dialogue in normally quite cynical chicks! I'm currently trying to cozen my EE-less state with FOTR, to be followed by TTT if my base urges for exceptionally long DVDs are not gratified. I'm soooo pissed off, I thought for sure the damn thing would arrive in the post today. The sodding thing comes
out tomorrow! It had better show. At any rate, I should drop by Club Angband - at first, however, the talk all seemed to be about languages, and if I have learned anything in this world, it is, at all costs, to
avoid conversations I can neither contribute to or benefit from. If everyone on the internet were to do this the virtual world would be a great
deal shinier and happier. But anyway, yes, hello guys! Mortsleam, I am not normally a Psycho-purist when it comes to games. My favourite LOTR game is still Fellowship of the Ring, which has several notable
diversions from canon, up to and including Sam being seized by a flying Nazgul on Amon Hen and carried off. I was actually kind of bummed out by both the TTT and ROTK games, which whilst beautiful to look at, were basically just a lot of fighting. I swapped both of those back at the store. LOTR: 3rd Age is very similar and will meet a similar fate - despite claiming to be an RPG, you get a series of excuses to fight around a paper thing story - and I mean tracing-paper thin, largely constructed around having your characters traipse around ostensibly looking for the Fellowship, which of course involves them doing all the things the fellowship do in LOTR
and visiting the exact same places. During this, they meet various LOTR characters who repeat lines of dialogue out of the movies in different contexts, which is really very jarring. All of which is well and good, I suppose, if you don't want to fork out for the original actors who are all now very well-paid movie stars. However, the fact is that like all EA offerings it's extremely
Hobbit-Lite - poor Merry gets bumped from his role in slaying the Witch King, Frodo's quest is reduced to the sort of irrelevancy you might expect from the ending of the Bakshi movie, and you get pelted with 109 (count them, 109) "scenes" which basically involve footage from the LOTR trilogy, mostly of burning Rohan villages, angry orcs, and piles of dead
Gondorians - it would have been less onerous to just watch the sodding films again - whilst Gandalf (they'd hired Ian McKellan to do all the voice work) gives the people in the cheap seats a sort of potted history of the War of the Ring and drops vague hints about your absurd backstory. To be honest, (sorry, Silm fans) LOTR without hobbits is like jam roly-
poly without custard - nice, but too dry to enjoy so much on its own. And just as I had kind of got used to the idea the game designers wouldn't be doing anything particularly wild with their original characters - they'd hardly be in the position to be writing what was basically fan-fiction with that precious Tolkien license, so the story mirrors the story ofLOTR (only without Hobbits) except, after you've helped Aragorn out on
the Pellenor Fields, there is this completely surreal moment where you are suddenly and without explanation on top of Barad-Dur smacking fuck out of the Dark Lord's ginormous flaming eyeball with your combo moves, which are all suspiciously like the ones in the first two games. Seriously.
And you're like, "Is this my beautiful Perfect Mode meter? Is this my beautiful sword? How did I get here?" and then you kill Sauron and you've won. So, fuck you, Frodo. And you feel a bit dirty and your InnerPurist (TM) has a bit of a heartbroken sobbing fit. -
I forgot about the hosery, and how desperately, desperately annoying it is.
-
While I didn't mind the ROTK game (although it was extremely shallow, as you said. "Ea, it's in the game. Unless it's intelligence. Or depth. Or anything at all other than good presentation and shiny graphics."), I did only borrow it, not buy it myself, and I really think I'll be avoiding the 3rd age like the plague. -------- As a Silm fan myself (and not much of a pervy Hobbit fancier), I'm not so sure I'd go so far as to agree with your jam-roly-poly and custard analogy (although you're right that you have to have the custard, no question), but I thank you for it anyway, for reminding me of a once favourite dish I've not had in ages and the only saving grace of my school's dinners. :^) ------------ As for CA, don't mind Sabster and Elaine's incessant linguistics talk, just skip over it. They expect people to and occasionally apologise for being dull. While I'm usually interested enough to read what they're saying even when I don't join in, my mind refuses to even process the American football and baseball talk Miami and some of the other Yanks get into. :^) At some point I may spin off a couple of other forums for some of the less inclusive conversations, but in the mean time everyone pretty much says what they want and ignores anything that they don't care about.
-
I'm not really that much of a purist, I've no problem with different versions of LOTR and things like that. Reading HoME and Unfinished Tales taught me to reconcile contradictory versions of the same story being in memory at once. Hell, I once had a big debate with someone about how ridiculous the notion of Tolkien 'canon' was since LOTR not only lead to The Hobbit being changed, but that even that wasn't enough and it lead to the narrative of The Hobbit being regarded as innacurate by the characters in LOTR. But I can live just as happily without fighting the Great Eye atop Barad-Dur with combo moves as I can without the Hobbits meeting a wooden-footed Hobbit called 'Trotter' at the Prancing Pony on their way through Bree. Which is by way of saying, I'm all for alternate versions of the story, as long as they're *any good*. --------- Oh, and I forgot to say in my previous post, "You may tell yourself, this is not your beautiful Perfect Mode meter, And you may tell yourself, This is not your beautiful sword. Letting the days go by, waiting for my DVD, letting the days go by, They should send me my EE, I'm feeling blue again, 'Cause I haven't got it, Once in a lifetime, They should send me my EE."
-
Firstly, I can't argue with your appraisal of the three movies as it makes perfect sense and everyone's experience is personal. I confirm with you that FOTR is also my favorite of the three books. However, I would argue that TTT and ROTK do not really contain the equivalent of the movies' gigantic action scenes. I recall that the destruction of Isengard is told in flashback - and is fairly sketchy at that. The assault on Helm's Deep takes only a tiny fraction of TTT - and is thrillingly depicted in terms of effective character moments - rather than in terms of blow-for-blow action scenes. Also, the mumakil charge - and how they are taken down, is referred to briefly (and intriguingly) in flashback - as if Tolkien didn't see the need to stage the full encounter before our eyes. ____________ In answer to your question - though it''s very likely you know this yourself by now - the ride of the Rohirrim was interrupted in the theatrical version by a quick cut to Pippin telling Gandalf of Denethor's madness. Gandalf then pulls Pippin onto Shadowfax and the movie cuts back to the Rohirrim riding down the orcs. In the EE there is no interruption of the cavalry charge because Pippin now tells Gandalf about Denethor before the Rohirrim arrive. The charge is then much more satisfying - though there is a problem with the music, which needed some alteration to fit into the new edit. _____________ No, you're not "full of shit", as you put it.
-
Would you really accept major scenes being relayed in dialogue rather than shown visually in the movie version of LOTR? I believe you yourself recently said that what works for a book and what works on film are very different, in your disaproval of the long wind-down at the end of ROTK. Also, this kind of thing is not limited to TTT and ROTK: in FOTR, much of what happens to Gandalf (that Frodo and the reader of the book only find out about later, in discussion with Gandalf) early in the film is seen as it happens (or in visual flashback), as opposed to the book. Eg, ride to Minas Tirith, 'fight' with Saruman and rescue by Gwaihir. As for Helm's Deep and the Battle of the Hornburg being somewhat 'beefed up' in length, importance and action, this is to make it into the climax of TTT, which it is not in the book. See my earlier post on the complexity of manipulating the alternating structure of books III-VI of LOTR into two linear parts, with their separate story threads interwoven and that work as individual pieces. The book climaxes with Frodo's attack by Shelob and Sam's rescue of him, then ends on the cliffhanger of Frodo's capture (with the Battle of the Hornburg being most of the way through Aragorn's story thread, but less than half the way through the whole of TTT overall due to this thread being told first). Given that, in the chronology of the story as written, this actually happens roughly at the same time as the siege of Minas Tirith, this could not be the end of TTT in the film with the two seperate threads being interwoven. This left PJ and co with two problems; no climax to the film, and not enough Frodo and Sam story to keep their journey in synch with the rest of the Fellowship chronologically without giving them short shrift in TTT. Now, their respective solutions (the changes to Helm's Deep to make IT the climax of the film, with Gollum providing the cliffhanger, and the complication of Faramir's story and adding his taking Frodo to Osgiliath) may seem like less than ideal solutions to these problems, but I for one don't feel qualified to suggest a better way of dealing with them (nor can think of one off the top of my head) that would work as well for the film, and even if you feel the need to criticise PJ, Fran Walsh and Phillipa Boyens for writing these things, I think we should give them credit for managing to make films out of LOTR *at all*, let alone making them as good as they have. I find it much easier to imagine much more horrible adaptations of the book than any better ones (not least of which being one that filmed the book exactly as written, which would be virtually unwatchable even if every individual scene was perfection itself).
-
At least I'm giddy with fulfilled anticipation now! Hope your DVD has arrived. Oh, and I'm really sorry if our language talk has kept you from CA. Maybe Elaine and I should find some other place for these discussions :~(
-
I feel like I'm a very priviledged audience of one whenever you girls start going on about languages. If I can make constant none-to-clever and unamusing Beatles references, Bean and cutest can talk about the Dark Tower, and Miami and PB can talk about football, then the Guild should feel free to bring up whatever uninteresting suckiness they want. But don't be afraid Alice! If you look hard enough, you'll see that we do in fact occasionally get around to discussing LOTR over there. And all you have to do to steer the conversation back that way is post something. Who knows, you might even entice the currently absent Miami and morGoth and especially elanor back to club. Which reminds me: you're about 36 weeks behind in your elanor voting. Get to it! *** And to both you and bean -- I didn't mean to say I thought either of you were purists, at least not in a derisive, "psycho pedant" type way. All I meant to say is that MY personal inner purist, who is in fact a psycho pedant, can be calmed by thinkning of the various versions as just another telling of the story. I do agree that the games are very poor tellings of the story, but at least they're slightly more involving than Bakshi's cartoon. Although it does sound like I can probably skip the Third Age game. Sometimes my inner caveman overtakes my inner purist and just enjoys the feeling of accomplishment that comes with actually, permanently, slaying a few trolls.
-
It seems that all of my posts are being grouped together. Very strange.
-
True, true, I can agree with every one of your points - every one of them - and still find ROTK lacking. Yes, in terms of structure, these movies are very well adapted - and indeed, would have foundered if attempted by many other film-makers. But for all artists, there is the crucial question of when to leave your work alone and say, "Enough! It's as good as it's going to be!". And I think this line was crossed in ROTK. It was crossed and left far behind. Generally speaking, I believe that less is more. Give me quality over quantity any day. TTT is a fine film in my opinion. I can appreciate what the film-makers have achieved, and can enjoy the experience. It's true that I find certain aspects - such as the battle of Helm's Deep - intensely boring - but this is to do with their execution, not with their placement in the final edit. In fact, any problems I have with these movies are not at all to do with the editing decisions. They are to do with the quality of individual scenes. But generally, I find TTT to be much more satisfying than ROTK, mainly because my enjoyment is not overly interrupted by special effects. In ROTK, far too often I find myself watching a videogame, when I would rather be presented with some genuine drama.
-
I thought the moth (when in Gandalf's hand) was rather pathetically obviously 'not there', and thought the 'smoke ship' very cheesy and silly in FOTR. On top of this, I've already mentioned what to me is one of the worst digital effects in LOTR: Legolas on top of the cave troll. However effectively used, the effects in FOTR were nowhere near as good as they got as time went by. Also, in case I haven't expressed myself clearly enough, I'm convinced that the fatc that the three films used increasingly more digital effects shots was known to be necessary and planned for right from the beginning. Of direct evidence for this (apart from Richard Taylor's statement about people who'd seen FOTR 'not having seen anything yet' in terms of massive epics, at a time that surely must have been before mosty of the TTT effects work and before ANY of the ROTK work, but after the scripting and shooting - including background plates meant to include CGI enhancements), I have only the book.
-
Dec 11, 2004 9:46:43 AM CST
I got it - or, "That bloody game actually came in handy for some
by aliceinwonderlnd
Hello everyone! You mustn't mind me (well, I'm sure you don't, but anyway) and I didn't mean to make anyone feel self-conscious about what they post at Club Angband. I just got the feeling that that was what the conversation was largely about and it's not my cup of tea. If nobody minds me showing up and whingeing about my strange prejudices and what I had for breakfast and all, I may well pop by. Well, the divida didn't show up yesterday, and I was crestfallen. How could it be that I would be without it on the very night of release? When I had planned to do my hair and put a facepack on and cook a feast (well, a plate of tagliatelle carbonara and a Thorntons Alpini bar, to be honest, but it had fresh parmesan and pancetta which was more than sufficient saturated fat to render it a feast under the Trade Descriptions Act) and drink more Black Russians than was entirely necessary and possibly even chainsmoke out the backdoor with the divida on pause every few scenes so I could reflect upon the changes? Whither could I go? And then, as so often happens in these sort of stories, I glanced upon the discarded case for LOTR: 3rd Age and had a brilliant idea. I drew together all of my played PS2 games and took them to the Game store in Guildford to swap - where they totalled a whopping
-
Now go and sign up on Club Angband and post it so they'll actually have something to talk about over there. And bean, uhm, wsan't the moth in Ian MacKellan's hand a real moth? Didn't PJ describe how they stuck the poor little guy in a refridgerator so he'd be groggy and they could shoot close ups? Or are you talking about the shift from CGI moth to real moth and back again? I dunno, aside from Legolas on the Cave Troll I'm pretty much entirely convinced that everything I'm seeing in these movies is actually happening anymore. *** Bip-Bweeeooo. That is all. Bip-Bweeeooo.
-
Thot you'd been et by trolls or sumpfin. How's the leg? Stil got your dance routine going? Entertainment at The Club is pert near dried up and only Sabster dares sing a tune these days (It all started with Ingollum and Smeagolds coup!). I'm still mostly spoiler free (as free as I can, I tellee!) so pardon me immensely iffen I don't respond to your review just yet. Come next Tuesday though...anyways, like beansie said, just skip what you do't want to read at The Club and bring up anything you want to discuss.
-
Dec 13, 2004 7:46:37 AM CST
Round and round this post goes... where it stops, nobody knows..
by aliceinwonderlnd
Afternoon, all. I dropped by Club Angband to discover that I'd forgotten my name and password. This happens to me regularly, I'm ashamed to say. Hope everyone is enjoying their dividas... I'm currently in commentary land. I didn't realise how much I was interested I was in hearing the rationale behind things until I actually started to listen to it.
-
Dec 13, 2004 12:54:10 PM CST
(yelling for in-hose locating purposes) I'LL KEEP YOU COMPANY, A
by pallando blue
Sorry, I hate having to yell, even in here. Anyway. Strange prejudices and breakfast decisions are exactly right at home at the Club A. As for the intense philological discussions, well, I try to lower the tone as often as possible. You should find it quite familiar territory, really. But I feel it's only fair to warn you there's a limericker more talented and even less corrigible than I. (You hear that, irritable?) *** Excellent review, there! For your masochistic pleasure, one of the scenes gone into in depth in the extras (the extra leaked onto the Internet) is the multiple takes and actorly/directorly decisions regarding "Go home, Sam!" ... ... ...Now that was one heck of a shriek. Has Alice come out from under the divan yet? *** I remember renting that Fellowship PS2 game and laughing my head off in the way-off-the-story storyline and action bits, mainly because it was being touted as "based on the book! not the movie!" 'cause that was what they had the rights to. Er, what book would that be, exactly? But, a fine enough weekend rental, although all the stealth bits sucked butt. Never did play the movie-based actioners of T2T and ROTK. Mainly because they came out before the movies, and I was ducking spoilers (ha!). And then they just sorta dipped off my radar. I should probably get around to renting em also, I heard they're short enough, but they seem like run of the mill hackenslashers and I've done and got enough of those. Now this Third Age thing... As a recent converter to the vocal I Now Hate Final Fantasy Games camp this looked like a total stinker in my book, as everything pointed to not just a silly story concept but gameplay like Final Fantasy X, one the most excruciating movies I've ever had to manage inventory through. Argh. ....But you say it ends with slapping the silly shit out of Sauron's giant flaming red eyeball on top of Barad-dur... and now I HAVE to check it out. Sweet! Don't tell me, but I'm dying to know how -- IF! Gasp! -- you get down before the tower shatters! (But maybe that's for the sequel "The Lord of the Rings: The Fourth Age: The New Shadow: Based On 20 Pages of Manuscript and Notes From The History of Middle-earth Part XXII: The Peoples of Middle-earth"... You begin as a humble Gondorian stable-hand, but finishes with your humble band of men, Dwarves, Hobbits, Elves, a pet Dragon, an extra wizard and two gruff-but-lovable trolls slaughtering the entire Ghost Pirate Navy and climaxes with you battling single-handed the 7-story-tall Hieronymous-Bosch-knockoff-looking all-new Dark Lord of the Chokers of Power over three tactically-challenging stages (hope you saved some potions and watched your mana bar!) atop his cloud fortress above the Lost Island of Ulikmabrethsyr (some liberties have been necessarily taken, what with the incompete source material)!! KICKASS!!! [...For everyone's What's He Playing Now? diary entry, I will happily extol the rock-the-fuck-out virtues of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas until the very nature of this website changes completely. GTA:SA is quite definitely the rock-the-fuck-outingest videogame on the face of the history of the entire fucking planet.] *** So, back on topic, watched the FOTR: EE last night. You know, that's a fun little movie. I heard there's a sequel. Any good?
-
One more day...
-
Dec 13, 2004 1:13:02 PM CST
Oops, didn't see you there, PB. Or shoud I yell, OOPS, DIDN'T SE
by mortsleam
I've actually found it hard to get into GTA: San Andreas. That first level when you're riding a bike and have to avoid getting hit by a drive-by...it's just too rattling. And it makes me very glad I was raised in a suburb of Detroit, and not Detroit itself. But I gotsta love Samuel L. as Officer Tenpenny.
-
I am lost deep within Commentaryville at the moment (love the sound guy's outburst at Elrond, that was hilarious). Strange that the Yanks have been forced to wait for this (normally it's the other way round and the rest of the world gets to tap their toes, cross their arms forbiddingly across their chests, and sigh a lot for months on end). I'm now halfway through the production commentary and have the cast commentary still to come (I'm looking forward to that one, I must confess) before I bust out with the documentaries and galleries. I wish you guys would hurry up and watch this stuff so we could talk about it! Meantime, I'll take my review and post it at Club Angband, as directed.
-
If so, I'm going for a Double Last. A temporary one, no doubt, but I'll take what I can get.
-
No one is last yet, because this tailend is still in operation.
-
But I decided to give it a try, anyway, seeing as how it might be the last "Lord of the Rings" talkback we'll ever have, and thus my Last chance at scoring a Last. Quite a prestigious Last, too, you'll have to admit. Last on the Last ever "Lord of the Rings" talkback... who wouldn't want to claim that honour for himself? Wouldn't you? Well, wouldn't you?
-
A piece of that Last. Consider yourselves forewarned and forearmed. *** Now, along with Alice's revelation that it was not Frodo at all but really some random Gondorian dude (RGD) who smote the Eye atop the tower, by paying close attention to the credits it turns out to have been a one-two punch that won it for the West. RGD may have poked the Eye out with his pigsticker and combo attacks, but one Mister Gary Horsfield was actually the Barad-dur Destruction Lead. Way to go, Gary! Sauron never saw ya comin! ...This concludes your daily useless random PB comment.
-
I'm nostalgiac for the good old days. Ya know, before the last movie came out and we all still actually had a reason to talk to each other. Where's a good troll when you need one. Or/Beal, you still skulking around? Magnificent Amberson's sucked. Touch of Evil was a hundred times better. So there pbbbbdt!
-
There's another interesting Mortism. Not quite up there with "thisablae", I think, but memorable all the same. **** In non-linguistic news, I'd like to inform all latecomers (Lastcomers?) that I intend to have this Last (damn it!) and that I'll slay whoever stands in my way, brutally if I have to. Thank you for your attention. Class dismissed.
-
Dec 16, 2004 12:26:44 PM CST
You might also want to let lastcomers know they have to actually
by mortsleam
Like you're not. Hee hee. And yes, "nostalgiac" is if fact a certified Mortism. It describes the phenomenon of being unable to precisely remember events in the past, so that you inflate them to mean more than they actually do. Like how I'm obviously mistaken in how fun a spirited game of Last can be. It's not fun at all. (;{=
-
Trust me, it will be once I start chopping off your fingers and feeding them to famished carnivorous millipedes. Which is what will happen if you keep on being such a headstrong, obstinate Last Thief. Or Fifth Thief, as the case may be. Go on, grant a girl her Fifth, eh? By way of EE Week present or something like that. You know girls like presents. :-)
-
Yaaaaay! ...Excuse me? Why... why are you glaring at me like that? Ha ha, what's the knife for, lady? *** You're right, mort. Someone needs to get pissed off around here. HEY! Bruce Campbell's overrated and zombie movies SUCK! "Nemesis" was the ONLY good Star Trek movie, Star Wars is for children (you buncha virgins!) and any deeper appreciation of The Matrix than explosions and kung fu means you have repressed homosexual urges! ... ... ... ...Anything?
-
Frist! Frist! Frist! OH, SWEET SWEET FRIST!
-
Not to mention obnoxious. Am I on Candid WebCam or something?
-
You may be an obnoxious Last Thief (and Fifth Thief, too!), but your Last few posts have been an absolute hoot. Between the Last post that went to the top and the Frist post that didn't, I had quite a laugh. Ha. That's what you get for trying to steal my Precious! My wrath will be terrible, my retribution swift.
-
If you can't be Last, be Fifth, is what I say. Yes, this will be my motto until my dying day.
-
Dec 17, 2004 8:36:15 AM CST
Oh well, at least I'm still first over at the Alan Lee tb.
by miami mofo
You can take my sword, my bow and my axe, but you'll never take that 'frist' away from me. [So I wonder, wonder, wonder where this will end up, as well as who wrote 'The Book of Love'?]
-
Yes, wierder than the cheese discussion.
-
Just trying my luck, you know...
-
LAST! LAST! LAST! LAST! **** Excited? Me? Nah. Not at all. Just jumping around the room for joy, that's all. :-)
-
...I have to come in here and rightfully claim that the LAST shall be FRIST!
-
"The once-frist shall be last," and it was good, or maybe just a little silly, but what the hey, he was bored.
-
There's only one person here who's woman enough to out-Last everyone else, and you ain't her. :-)
-
Well if it ain't me, who is she!? ...Wait. Rephrase. [ahem-hem. Okay.] As I was saying: LAST!
-
I'll give you a hint, though. She wears a black catsuit, owns an impressive whip and has driven many a Man, Wizard and Vala insane with both, to the point where they think they're up to challenges which are clearly beyond them. Such as being... Last.
-
Of course, with my luck, this will end up somewhere around 22nd.
-
Please note that I came eerily close to predicting the truth on my last attempt to score a First. I jokingly said I'd propably end up 22nd; in the event, I was 23rd. Vaguely scary if you ask me.
-
OK, so now I'm 23rd en 24th. This post will probably join the other two rather than shoot straight to the top of the talkback, but I'm going to give it one more try. My Last, for the time being.
-
Dec 21, 2004 1:27:19 PM CST
Poor Rudolph, the others wouldn't let him play in any of the rei
by miami mofo
Last!!!!!!!!!
-
You know who you are. And now I do, too. And you are going to pay, you sick little punk.
-
You know who you are. And now I do, too. And you are going to pay, you sick little punk.
-
So, it looks like some jackass little motherfucker has decided to fuck with Angband. CALLING ALL TECH GEEKS WITH DIRTY TRICKS. Moaters, I'm looking at you. TRILOGY TRILOGY TRILOGY. Time to come offa walkabout, there's work to be done. ...So mort, you know how to track and give payback, that kinda stuff, too? Nice. Go to it. Wish I had any skillz in that arena. ...Of course, until we hear otherwise, shouldn't rule out the possibility that this is some work of raw bean's in preparation for his Xmas surprise. I doubt it, but I want to hear from our faithful web-man himself that he's under assault, not just changing the oil.
-
I may not be at the bottom of the order, but I do believe I am currently... LAST! PWN3D! *** So, I got to the PJ/Walsh/Beanstalker commentary, and loved it all over again. I cannot WAIT for the 25th anniversary DVDs, with Lost Scenes such as Sam going to the post office, and taking his dog to the vet. Sweeeeeet.
-
Must... remember... to check back... in January... and... defend... my LAST... *gasp* (Well, now I might as well go ahead and quote MST3K directly) ...Can't.... THINK.... too.... STUPID...
-
As fas as I can tell, I'm still at the bottom of the talkback, making me a very clear and unmistakeable Last. But all the same I wish you (and anyone else reading this) a Happy Christmas and a Wonderful New Year. May the Last fight continue well into 2005!
-
I wasn't expecting that. Nope. Not at all. But it sure feels niiiiiice.
-
I am going to watch the director/writers commentary on LotR:RotK-EE, of which, this is the LAST one that they'll do. Whatcha say? LAST!
-
While you enjoy the commentaries, I'll keep myself occupied relishing the feeling that comes with being... Last. :-)
-
This, boys and girls, is what a true LAST looks like! Last I tellee! LAST!!
-
post of the year for me. H.N.Y.!!!!!!!!! :~)
-
... but I've got the First one of the new year! And to top it all off I'm Last again. Rejoice, ye impure in heart! A splendid new year has got off to a wonderful start...
-
Congratulations on your Last! May no idiot come along and wreck it!
-
While hosings remain true...
-
Do-o-o-o-oes... Last count only at the bottom? Do my later time-stamps somehow stain the Dutch-ess' glory? Personally I don't mind making up rules to suit my ego. And therefore, declare LAST, in Time if not Space.
-
I like the look of my name at the bottom of this one, though. Yep, it sure feels great being Last!
-
For once again, I am! Plus, you'll NEVER be able to take away my last LAST of last year.
-
Jan 24, 2005 10:28:58 AM CST
I have no intention of disputing your "Last of 2004" Last, Miami
by elaine
I do, however, insist on claiming this particular Last, in this particular talkback on this particular day in January 2005. It must be mine, and so it shall!
-
Whoops, too late. Sorry.
-
But now I'll have back my Last, if you don't mind. You know, by way of a birthday present, or something like that. :-)
-
But certainly not the LAST one. :~)
-
It wasn't the Last report. I'm sure this won't be the Last post on this talkback either, but a girl can hope, can't she?
-
The LAST round was quite awhile ago, so when we gonna see the results? Also, when we gonna get the next round of questions? Finally, how ya like the new AICN? I have chosen this tb for my frist post in the new format. Somehow I get the feeling that it won't be my LAST!
-
that you wankers have no LASTing power.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 383 total posts 380 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 111 total posts 111 posts
- WTF HOLLYWOOD: SOLARBABIES -- 75 total posts 73 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 71 total posts 68 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 77 total posts 55 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 54 total posts 48 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 165 total posts 41 posts
- Herc’s Seen Tonight’s Return Of THE WALKING DEAD!! Discuss Also DOWNTON ABBEY, FEAR FACTOR, PAN AM, ONCE, SIMPSONS, DYNAMITE, LUCK, SHAMELESS, BAIT CAR, THE GRAMMYS And More!! Sunday Is Sweeps Day 11!! -- 41 total posts 41 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 500 total posts 35 posts
- Avid Comic Reader Hercules Does Battle With Tedium During Kevin Smith’s COMIC BOOK MEN! -- 28 total posts 28 posts