Recommend (or don't) a movie thread v2

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by djsFlames

Your taste is awful then.

Jacksons trilogy is a feat of modern filmmaking.

Get stomped by an ent bro.

God I hated Jacksons films, completely missed the whole effing point of the books, like completely, not by a little bit but not even in the same postal code

[peter12]

I watched The Hobbit trilogy the other weekend and I kind of liked it.

There is something of the Reddit incel frothiness when people get all up in arms about the Jackson films.

Like read another book.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by peter12

I watched The Hobbit trilogy the other weekend and I kind of liked it.

There is something of the Reddit incel frothiness when people get all up in arms about the Jackson films.

Like read another book.

I wish I could be so easily entertained.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Wormius

I wish I could be so easily entertained.

It is true. I’m like a child in front of the television. No taste.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

God I hated Jacksons films, completely missed the whole effing point of the books, like completely, not by a little bit but not even in the same postal code

Peter Jackson understands Tolkien better than you do.

[FireGilbert]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

That frickin stupid river scene soiled my entire impression of the franchise.

I was over the franchise during the cave scene in part 1. From the book I expected an intense chase through claustrophobic caverns but instead got this weird hollowed out mountain hosting a Rube Goldberg CGI action set piece.

[Wormius]

Jackson has managed to garner quite a devoted collection of LOTR fanboys despite Fellowship of the Ring being the only one that was actually very good and the rest were “let’s see who we can impress with aerial shots of orc / elf / dwarf / human armies.”

[Coach]

The Two Towers is magnificent.

ROTK drags and just isn’t as good as the others, but dammit if Helms Deep isn’t fantastic.

[Fuzz]

I recently watched the extended editions of LOTR, but did them in one hour chunks, like a show. It was much better that way.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Peter Jackson understands Tolkien better than you do.

Really, then how come the whole point of the books was how the fate of the world really turned not on hero's and wizards but on the simple love of an ordinary hobbit and his plain common sense, the single most important character in the books is Sam, not Gandalf or Aragon or even Frodo.

The movies though were about hero's and sword fights, missed the book by an effing mile

[direwolf]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Really, then how come the whole point of the books was how the fate of the world really turned not on hero's and wizards but on the simple love of an ordinary hobbit and his plain common sense, the single most important character in the books is Sam, not Gandalf or Aragon or even Frodo.

The movies though were about hero's and sword fights, missed the book by an effing mile

Did you actually watch them? Sure, there are big battles and sword fights, etc.. but the true heroes of the movies are the Hobbits, and Sam is clearly the most important character. Especially in ROTK. Not sure how you missed that.

[Sr. Mints]

Once upon a time in Hollywood had the most satisfying movie ending I've seen in ages

[Coach]

Originally Posted by direwolf

Did you actually watch them? Sure, there are big battles and sword fights, etc.. but the true heroes of the movies are the Hobbits, and Sam is clearly the most important character. Especially in ROTK. Not sure how you missed that.

Agreed. The one step I wish they took was to have Sam overtake Frodo and throw the ring into Mt Doom himself. Like you needed to have a future friend to really dispose of the evil.

Either, those films truly are a fear of filmmaking and if you haven’t seen the appendices of the extended version you are missing the best film school that exists. Just hours and hours of how to make a movie
And make it feel real.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Coach

Agreed. The one step I wish they took was to have Sam overtake Frodo and throw the ring into Mt Doom himself. Like you needed to have a future friend to really dispose of the evil.

Either, those films truly are a fear of filmmaking and if you haven’t seen the appendices of the extended version you are missing the best film school that exists. Just hours and hours of how to make a movie
And make it feel real.

Except that the point of the novels was that the (at the time) almost pointless act of mercy by Bilbo towards Gollum would have enormous and unpredictable repercussions.

The biggest theme of the books is mercy and compassion vs power and calculation which is why they are gigantic Christian allegories.

[afc wimbledon]

There are two figures in the books that the ring has no power over, Tom Bombadil and Sam, both give up the ring willingly, neither are touched by its power, Bombadil is thought by some to be analogous to God, unsullied by desire and yet still powerful beyond almost any other, the first one who saw the begining of middle earth, Sam is driven by his love for Frodo, it is the driving narrative of all three books, without Sam Merry and Pippen wouldn't have know about the quest (in the books Merry and Pippen are Frodo's equal, young men not idiots), through all three books Sam is the constant source of Frodo's strength, who at every turn enables the quest to continue

[Cali Panthers Fan]

I will say that the only small disappointment I had in Jackson's adaptation of LOTR was the lack of Tom Bombadil, but understanding pacing in filmmaking, it. made sense to cut it.

[Fuzz]

I wish Jackson had made a separate hour long Tom segment, just so people would stop bitching about it's absence.

[Wormius]

I thought Bombadil chapters were entertaining but upon further reflection…

[blankall]

The major problem with the hobbit for me was stretching it out into three movies. They filled the gaps with painfully long cgi shots. Realistically you had 2.5 hours ish of material there. We got 3 plus hours of filler. When they do that it also dilutes the character development. I'm sure it would be possible to edit all three films down into one half decent one.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I wish Jackson had made a separate hour long Tom segment, just so people would stop bitching about it's absence.

I was actually fine with not having Tom Bombadil in the movie, it made sense from a narrative point of view as it was an easy self contained segment to remove without affecting the plot, I missed the battle of Bywater more, it is in some way the whole point of the books, the coming of age of the companions, how evil far away will destroy everything if left unchecked, but again is an easy segment to remove and Jackson was clearly not in the least bit worried about the books