Having finally seen the film, I was wondering what everyone else (who saw it opening night or earlier) thought of it. What parts did you like most? What parts didn't work so well for you? Dying to see the second movie? Did you read the book?
Let's try to keep the spoilers to a minimum, though, for the sake of the poor saps who haven't seen it yet and haven't read the book.
As for my opinion, I'm a little awed and kind of at a loss. Very impressed by the visuals; every place they went looked absolutely real. The action scenes were amazingly tense, and the sense of peril from the Ring and especially the Eye of Sauron were ever-present. Acting was dead-on perfect, all around. The story diverged in numerous ways from the book, sometimes cutting something out or moving a conversation to another scene, but it worked.
One of the things that impressed me most was the way the Ring was a character unto itself. It would change its size, or whisper. Most of the time when the Ring would whisper, you could hear the words that are etched on its band--in the tongue of Mordor. (Keep an ear open for "ash nazg", a phrase repeated often in that couplet of the Black Speech.) Sometimes it would speak a character's name to lure them, as it does with Aragorn near the end of the film. Seeing it on the table at the Council of Rivendell, it's clear how this thing is a peril even to lay eyes on. And when the weight of it makes Frodo lean out over the mirror of Galadriel, it truly seems as if the Ring itself is straining to touch the Eye in the surface of the mirror. Amazing.
The views we're afforded of Gollum are wonderful too; he'll be interesting to see in full in the next film. The balrog was stunning, especially in the way his weapons were made of fire.
More thoughts, anyone? Let's hear 'em.
Lummox JR
ID:274352
 Dec 20 2001, 7:07 am
|
|
Air Mapster wrote:
...The one thing I hate about seeing a movie in the theater is the distractions of other people around me. Doesn't matter if they're morons talking and taking calls on their cell phones (has happened a few times), screaming babies that shouldn't be in any movie rated above G, or obsessive fanboys who ooh and ahh and giggle with giddy delight over every little detail. Not implying anything about anyone who's already seen it by now. ;-) I just like to be immersed in the movie and forget I'm sitting in a theater. That usually happens best in a relatively empty theater, typically in the middle of the week. There was a row of fanboys two rows ahead of us, who spoke in their best Renfest accents and even wore low-budget costumes; one carried a plastic spear. They were on the loud side before the film. Someone else in the theater had a crying baby, but they must have removed it before the film began. (What the heck were they thinking? I don't care what movie you go see; it's inappropriate to bring a baby into a theater at all, let alone for a 3-hour film.) After the movie started, everyone got very, very quiet. There were only three distractions: The man in front of me had a wicked strong cologne, and the woman next to me had a strong perfume, though neither was very noticeable unless they moved. That, and the theater was about 80 degrees, and I was wearing a sweater. Lummox JR | |
Lummox JR wrote:
Someone else in the theater had a crying baby, but they must have removed it before the film began. (What the heck were they thinking? I don't care what movie you go see; it's inappropriate to bring a baby into a theater at all, let alone for a 3-hour film.) My worst story of this was a Joe Jackson concert...I am a huge fan of Joe Jackson (especially his more recent fusion of classical and rock), and he doesn't give many concerts these days. When we heard he had a concert in LA (we're in SF) and we didn't know if he would reach our area, we drove hundreds of miles and booked a hotel to see him. And a woman with a newborn -- a few weeks old -- sits next to us. I was absolutely furious... She was a hippie-type and had this theory that in the womb babies hear lots of strange noises, so noise wouldn't be a problem... Oy. There are only 2 things that a baby is naturally scared of out of the womb: Falling and LOUD NOISE! I was forced to be the bad guy, and made rude comments until she decided to go and stand in the back of the hall. Worse you can imagine in her stories about the event she talks about the evil yuppie guy who was all upset even though her baby was a perfect angel. Anyway, our solution to the movie thing is to go to late night Sunday showings...these tend to have the smallest number of problems. And Mapster, you gotta see more movies! Mullholland Drive, for one. | |
My girlfriend and I keep odd work schedules, so when we want to see a movie, we can usually catch a matinee showing on a school day. The theaters are almost always completely empty. The downside to this is that it doesn't leave anyone to annoy but the projectionist, and you have to talk awfully loud to drown out the movie for him.
| |
Deadron wrote:
And Mapster, you gotta see more movies! Mullholland Drive, for one. That's why I said in the theater. It's too damn expensive these days. A few tickets, maybe some drinks and before you know it, you're paying $30. We used to go a couple times a month but it was really adding up. We joined Netflix in September and have already made up more than the cost of the DVD player. Highly recommended. So now, I'll only go to the theater if it's free (recently got a pair of free passes from a coworker) or something like FOTR, which I'd really like to see in all its glory. Mulholland Drive is going on the queue as soon as it's available on DVD. | |
Air Mapster wrote:
That's why I said in the theater. Ah good, glad you are at least being exposed to the world of movies! I occasionally see the "all movies these days are crap" screeds, which is totally BS, and I wanted to make sure you weren't falling for that! I know many people who love Netflix...we don't use it right now because we have a great independent video store that's walkable from us...but if/when we move, I wouldn't be surprised if we started using it. Let's see, what other good movies... Oh here's an old one I push on everyone I can: The Night of the Hunter http://www.netflix.com/MovieDisplay?movieid=804679&trkid=73 This is one of the great movies of all time. Just incredible stuff. | |
Oh here's an old one I push on everyone I can: Hmm... it sounds great! And I see that Robert Mitchum was also in Scrooged, which is one of my own favorites. | |
Deadron wrote:
Let's see, what other good movies... Oh of course, my other favorite movie this year after Mullholland Drive: Memento http://www.netflix.com/ MovieDisplay?movieid=60020435&trkid=73 | |
|
#9 Dec 21 2001, 5:10 pm
|
|
Well, my thoughts on the movie are somewhat mixed. First, let me begin by saying that I am an unabashed Tolkien lover and proudly own not onlt the LoTR and the Hobbit, but also the Silmarillion, the Unfinished Tales, and the Book of Lost Tales (vols 1 & 2). JRR Tolkien is the father of modern fantasy and I believe there are few writers in the genre who even come close to his caliber. That being said, I turn to the movie.
Overall, the movie was stunning. From gorgeous visuals to a superb soundtrack, the ambience was perfectly loyal to the worlf of Middle Earth. The hobbits were quite endearing without being sappy thanks to some well written scripting and the rest of the actors had no problem carrying there occassionally verbose roles. Likewise the script stayed sufficiently loyal to the story, apparently trimming only extraneous songs and narrative that would be entertaining only to LoTR diehards (like myself:-). Interestingly, a significant section was trimmed from the movie. Fortunately, it was the section concerning Tom Bombadil, whom I never cared for. Unfortunately, it also means that we don't get to see Old Man Willow or the Barrow Wights. The down side of the movie is that in trimming, I think something of the *nature* of the book is lost. The Lord of the Rings is an epic- a tale of journeys. The songs, the laborously detailed descriptions of the terrain, the references to long ago events all build a sense of mystery and at the same time give life to the mission of the characters. The book is an amalgamation of arrivals, leavings, and returns. The movie on the the other hand focuses much more on action. In the book, for example, there are no bloody descriptions of battle, even if they occur. The movie, however, in Gladiator-like fashion dives in with bloodshed and violence. Meanwhile, the innoncent but brave hobbits are relegated from prime protagonists to a much more secondary role. Instead of the story of hobbits and those who aid them, we get a story of men, elves, and wizards and the hobbits who aid them. I think Tolkien would not have liked this shift in focus, nor would he enjoy the focus on violence. But ours is a different era and what is good for a book can be anathema for a movie. I wonder if a 3 hour epic is commercially viable, but we shall see. Any reservations I have about discrepencies between the movie and the book are overpowered by the fact that the product is very entertaining, if a bit long. Besides, I always loved the Moria encounters in the book and I absolutely adored the portrayal of the Balrog in the movie. -James | |
|
#10 Dec 21 2001, 8:58 pm
|
|
I saw it Wednesday with my mother, and I loved it.
I loved the acting, and especially loved the effects that the evil had on people (Bilbo was best). My favourite part of all was the magic combat... but I won't elucidate for fear of ruining it. There were only two things I didn't like. The first, Arwin... she seemed filled with too much rhetoric, and looked like an afterthought (I haven't read the book, mind you... it's been one of my long-standing New Year's Resolutions after someone in my family lost the copy). The second, the three girls in the row behind me. I suppose they had a crush on Stryder's actor or something, because every time he fought they giggled. (Of course, I turned around and gave them a silent glare. At least they were smart enough to realise one thing -- when a six-foot-even 17-year-old guy glares at you, you shut up. ;-) ) Personally, however, I think this movie was just made as a drug... I mean, they designed it to sucker you in and keep you hooked. They're likely to milk this movie for all the money they can possibly get. After all, they could have released all three movies in the trilogy one month after one another (since all three have already been filmed, according to the hearsay floating around), but instead they're keeping people waiting to build suspense and anxiety. Small wonder that I am more than looking forward to the next in the series. =) | |
|
#11 Jan 12 2002, 4:00 am
|
|
I finally saw the movie last night, and loved it, of course. I don't remember much from the books, but what I remembered the most -- how weighty (metaphorically) and tempting the ring was, and Frodo and Sam's bond -- was treated well here, I thought. They cast the movie well. The only thing that bugged me was Sean Astin's magical morphing accent, hehe.
Ian McKellan was so awesome as an inscrutable but very caring Gandalf I felt affection for as well. Sean Bean really brought out the conflict in Boromir. I experienced a new sadness when he died because he was the most intriguing character up to that point for me, heh. For the first bit I thought they were going to treat Merry and Pippin only as comic relief, just like those &%$*# brownies in Willow. But by the end of the movie I was very fond of them. The three hours passed in no time at all. It was just fantastic to see Middle-Earth brought to life, and to be reminded of the original, classic depictions of these fantasy races. And seeing what Frodo saw when he put on the ring was totally awesome, wow. Parts I didn't like... hmm... some of the cinematography (if that's what it's called) and a few of the effects. The effects for evil stuff was great, but some of the ones used with the good guys (well, gals, mostly) seemed a little hokey. And when Aragorn was fighting the big bad uruk-hai, the camera kept switching from view to view in a way that was neither cool nor particularly easy on the eyes. And when Sam was drowning the fade to the wider view just didn't seem to fit. A few things like that kinda took me out of my immersion. Niggling enough that I'd note and remember them! <<So my question to anyone who's seen it: how was the crowd?>> The theater was about half-full, and quiet. That was nice, though I might have liked a gung-ho, packed and cheering crowd more. I've only been to one movie on opening night... some friends dragged me to Star Trek X... I didn't know people clapped at movies! The rest of the audience's being so into it got me into it even more. Z | |
I cant wait for the other 2 parts to this awsome film :)
| |
Zilal wrote:
For the first bit I thought they were going to treat Merry and Pippin only as comic relief, just like those &%$*# brownies in Willow. But by the end of the movie I was very fond of them. I don't particularly like any of the non-Frodo/Bilbo hobbits yet...but I'm suspending judgment, because their real action and character development comes later in the story. A lot of the movie is like that for me...I'd have to see it again to really know what I think, but I'll probably wait for the DVD, which will have 40 extra minutes of material and will come out shortly before The Two Towers. I don't expect to have a full opinion until the series is complete... The theater was about half-full, and quiet. That was nice, though I might have liked a gung-ho, packed and cheering crowd more. People cheered at the end when the nasty guy was dispatched, and I think there were reactions to Boromir dying. Overall it was a reasonably active crowd when I saw it. You may have been seeing it with a bunch of people seeing it a second time, which tends to reduce the reaction (as does not having a full theater). | |
I've only been to one movie on opening night... some friends dragged me to Star Trek X... Don't you mean IX? Not that I'm an obsessed fan of Star Trek... the only reason I know that the last one was IX is because all the sci-fi trade papers I read as an obsessed fan of Buffy refer to the one they're working on now as Star Trek X. | |
Its an exellent movie, i enjoyed most of it (ive seen it twice so far). The first time the theator was about half full, though thats probably becuase i skipped school to go see it with my dad two days after it opened. The second time was a week and a half after opening, a sunday, and it was packed, someone started crying when the bad thing happened(trying to to spill it) and there were to phags behind me that would not shut the **** up.
I only have two things i didnt like. One (I dont even know why i noticed this) the railings in Rivindell were only only about 1 and a half feet tall, because hobbits are only 3 and a half feet tall, and they came to their wasts, why would an elven city have hobbit sized things? Second is the actor for Ellrond. I just cant take that lead agent from the matrox serious as an Elf, partly becuase he almost talked exactly the same way as he did in the matrix, and partly becuase he was in a gay austrailian porno. Thats pretty much all i have to say about it. Oh and im going to see it again tommorow. I love this movie. (EDIT: Oh and i think they are called fighting muru-kai, though im not sure that just what i remember from book, i think i spelled it wrong though.) | |
I only have two things i didnt like. One (I dont even know why i noticed this) the railings in Rivindell were only only about 1 and a half feet tall, because hobbits are only 3 and a half feet tall, and they came to their wasts, why would an elven city have hobbit sized things? Because they're human-sized actors made to look smaller with curved camera lenses, disproportionate camera angles, and computer editing. =) | |
I know that, i just am surprized they left that in there thats all.
| |
Lesbian Assassin wrote:
Don't you mean IX? Not that I'm an obsessed fan of Star Trek... the only reason I know that the last one was IX is because all the sci-fi trade papers I read as an obsessed fan of Buffy refer to the one they're working on now as Star Trek X. I meant X, but I was wrong. It was VIII. I thought it was X when I saw it too. Z | |
Jotdaniel wrote:
(EDIT: Oh and i think they are called fighting muru-kai, though im not sure that just what i remember from book, i think i spelled it wrong though.) Uruk-Hai. It's even in the title of Book III, Chapter 3. Not an M in sight. Lummox JR | |
So my question to anyone who's seen it: how was the crowd? Packed? Loud and cheering at the good parts? Annoying? Quiet and unobtrusive? Did you notice the people around you at any time during the film?