The Fellowship Of The Ring

[spudracer]

Well, aside from the Entertainment Weekly cover being given to the late George Harrison, the review for LOTR:FOTR can be read in the December 14th issue. For all those wanting to know, it got an A!!

This can only mean one thing. The movie rocks a**. So while we wait a few more days until release of this epic, to say the least, movie, you can contribute your thoughts to this over in the Upcoming Movies/Sequels forum to what you are expecting. :D

[Yoda]

Yes, there's no doubt. Checkout the new story below...all the reviews are positive, basically, and only one is anything less than completely praise-ridden:

Reviews of "Lord of the Rings" Surfacing! (http://www.movieforums.com/news/index.html?id=25)

[Holden Pike]

Wow.

It is every bit worth the wait! You'll be seeing this three or four times each, believe me. Just amazingly well done.

No fan of the book can watch it without noticing what parts have been trimmed or slightly altered, but it never detracts from the pure enjoyment of seeing what IS there and done so very, very right. In a perfect world each book would be a four or five-hour spectacle, but these three-hour installments are going to be just plain awesome.

I'm now so glad these books were never attempted at any earlier juncture with live actors. Nothing could have ever sufficed until this technology came along, if for nothing else than the Hobbits alone. We've all seen Willow. Nothing against dwarves in real life, but despite their natural size they just aren't what a Hobbit is. Hobbits are quick and agile and incredibly expressive. There are physical limitations to real Little People that would prevent them from becoming Hobbits. The photographic trickery at work here that transforms Elijah Wood and Sean Astin and Ian Holm and the others into these singular creatures is quite seemless and wonderful. The opening scenes with Gandalf at Bag End absolutely sell the process.

The entire cast is perfect. Yes, even Liv Tyler. Most in particular Christopher Lee, Ian McKellen, Cate Blanchett, Hugo Weaving and Viggo Mortensen seem as if they were born to play these roles in these films at this specific time. Very serendipitous.

The whole productuion seems like serendipity. The locations, the sets, the FX, the music, the costumes - EVERYthing is so RIGHT, again and again. So many of the images were almost exactly as my mind's eye has pictured them over the years. What higher compliment can you give such a project?

I do believe perhaps Peter Jackson's sole purpose for walking our little blue globe is to make these movies here and now. And what a noble purpose it is!


The Fellowship of the Ring wasn't the least bit disappointing for me. I smiled and laughed and sat in wonder the entire three hours. Can't hardly wait to see it again tomorrow - or rather, later today!

Wow.

[Holden Pike]

Oh yeah, and geek alert: I only spotted two last night, but one guy was adorned in a full velvet cape & hood affair, and another guy in a tall, pointy wizard hat and oversized scarf. Very silly boys.

BTW, The Fellowship of the Ring was playing simultaneously at 12:01am on three screens at the cineplex where I was, and all three shows were sold-out!

[spudracer]

Look before you start a thread Holden. There's a thread already on this like half a page down. :)

[Yoda]

I've just merged the two threads. Ta-da.

[spudracer]

Oooooooooooooooh Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh

[Yoda]

Yes, a very cool feature. Anyway, I'm seeing this at 1PM today. I'll then write a review, post it on the site, and post a link here, most likely.

[sadesdrk]

Okay...I got in at 2:30 in the am this morning, but woke up, just so I can say, HELL YEAH!

This movie goes down as one of my all time favorites. It was a private screening for employees and their familys only. The theater owners were there, and had a big employee of their's, patrol the door, so that the little freaks outside couldn't come in.

I enjoyed this movie, with only 34 other people. You could hear a pin drop. It was heaven.

First: The trailers. Attack of the Clones, followed by Spiderman, followed by The Count of Monte Cristo, starring Guy Pierce, and the guy from Frequency and Angel Eyes. It looks like an exciting movie, and it would have to be to follow those two previews!:D

LOTR- I don't want to spoil a thing for you guys. You deserve to go in fresh, like I did. Just know, that it went far beyond my wildest imagination. I knew it would be great, but I had NO IDEA how great. You will all love it. Three hours went by so quick...my sister leans over to me, with tears in her eyes...and says," I would watch this movie forever." And so would I.:)
~sades

Little Helpful Tip: DO NOT take any small children to this movie. I don't know what it's rated, but a 13yr. old would still be afraid. There were parts when I was cringing and covering my eyes...the goblins are some of the scariest things I've seen in a long time...the Nine Riders, too.:eek:

[Holden Pike]

Where is everybody, out at the movies? ;D

Well me too. I'm walkin' out the door for my second screening now.

[Yoda]

Just got back. I'll post a link to my review once it's up. :)

[sadesdrk]

I don't need no stinkin' review! We all know it's fantastic...just gush about it on here with me!!!!!!!!!!!!!:furious:

[Yoda]

Here ya' go. It's rambly (sorry)...but it's the best I could do when talking about such an emotional film:

LOTR: Inspiring, Emotional, and Amazing (http://www.movieforums.com/reviews/index.html?id=43)

[sadesdrk]

I thought you did a good job. You didn't ramble more than any of us would. I wanted to do a review too, but I think there should only be more than one review when you have opposing opinions. Like, if Holden wrote one about Braveheart, or I wrote one. Or he wrote one about American Beauty, and I wrote one. Maybe Holden and I could be the Odd Couple of MoFo. :D

[Yoda]

:laugh: Well, I really don't mind having two positive reviews. Two reviews of anything is fine by me, so if someone else wants to write one, be my guest...I imagine it would even shape up into a little competition...such a film will probably be reviewed by the whole lot of you. :)

[spudracer]

WOW!!!!!!

I wish I could've seen it on a better screen, but I didn't have a screen time for the one I like going to, so I had to settle for the crapper. Which, had a B.O (that's Body Odor) count of at least 6. :laugh: When it was over, which came out of nowhere for me some guy was complaining about two guys talking throughout the whole thing. They were talking, but they were talking about the movie. I just ignored them even though they were right behind me. The sound, was wavy (it's an old old theater) so in some parts the music would come in, then drift away. Got annoying after a while.

Sadie is right though, no need to review something that deserves instant praise. I do have one small gripe. The damn theater only had two trailers before the movie. John Q and Goldmember. YOU BASTARDS!!!!!!!

[mecurdius]

i love this movie, but stil thought the books were better
anyone else think we should give star wars to peter jackson?
TWT- perfect choice 4.5 is a great rating
readm the books then go see this movie..... why cant next year be here yet!!!!!

[spudracer]

I might have to sit and read the books now. Peter Jackson did a very good job on this. I mean the sets, characters, EVERYTHING. So yeah, Star Wars would be great in the hands of Jackson. Slip Lucas a mickie(sp.) and have Jackson take over. :D

[RoadRunner]

I'll have to say that I thought it was good, but not great.

There were too many times when the camera lingered on a shot. I got tired of watching people stare at each other or gaze into the distance. If they had cut that out, the movie might have been 1/2 hour shorter.

[Yoda]

Originally posted by RoadRunner
I'll have to say that I thought it was good, but not great.

There were too many times when the camera lingered on a shot. I got tired of watching people stare at each other or gaze into the distance. If they had cut that out, the movie might have been 1/2 hour shorter.
Welcome back, RR. :) I dunno, I'd have to disagree somewhat. A few shots were longer than need be...but I didn't notice it often. I felt it spaced things out nicely, unlike Harry Potter, which, while very, very good, felt rushed.

[sadesdrk]

Originally posted by RoadRunner
I'll have to say that I thought it was good, but not great.

There were too many times when the camera lingered on a shot. I got tired of watching people stare at each other or gaze into the distance. If they had cut that out, the movie might have been 1/2 hour shorter. I'll pretend I didn't read that. Where's Wiley. E?

[spudracer]

:laugh:...come on Sadie...Gush Gush!!!

[sadesdrk]

Look at my top ten movies now...:laugh: I'm a smitten kitten.

[spudracer]

I beat you to it, but I don't like ordering mine, so that's why they stay in a "no order" order.

Back to subject,
For all that didn't see this yesterday - WHAT'S THE HOLD UP???

For those not wanting to sit through 3 hours smelling B.O. -
Take some lysol :D

[Yoda]

I'm not going to put it on my list just yet. I'm going to see it again this weekend, and then I'll make a decision...too impulsive, otherwise.

[spudracer]

I have to work in Vanilla Sky and The Majestic this weekend, so I don't have time to watch LOTR again. Maybe next week. :)

[jamesglewisf]

My wife is seeing it right now. Before it started, she sent me a text message that said: "It's like a Star Trek convention in here. You can't swing a dead cat without hitting a geek....And the geeks are chatty."

I sent her one back that said, "On all accounts, you should fit right in." She told me to "Bite my hiney."

Anyhow, we'll see what she thought of it.

[sadesdrk]

That was so funny! :laugh: Geeks are crawling out from under their rocks by the hundreds!

[spudracer]

I thought it was funny yesterday when I went and saw it, like I said in my eariler post, a couple of guys were talking throughout the whole movie about how that happened in the book, and wow they really did that good, and WOAH...look at that....

When the movie was over, a guy that was real mad over that(I think), said it would've been better if those two a*sholes would have shut the f*ck up. :laugh: I got a kick out of that.

[sadesdrk]

Sounds like something I would do.
My sister's boyfriend brings a flashlight to the movies...that way, if he hears someone talking too loud, or being obnoxious in any way...he shines a beam right in their face. I like going to the movies with him.:D

[spudracer]

:laugh:

[jamesglewisf]

The latest message she sent was, "And now they r tooting."

:)

[jamesglewisf]

Well, I just talked to her. She said it was "goooooooood." I guess that means she liked it. :)

[sadesdrk]

When do you get to see it? Jamesgobledeegook?

[OG-]

Holy Nutz! James and RoadRunner are back!!:eek: YO! :D

Saw it today, and gotta say I loved it. Not as much as I loved Vanilla Sky, but it was a fantastic movie. Great character development, and almost everything about it was above average, no complaints from me. Very well done, bravo Peter Jackson, bravo!!

Oh and Chris, i thought the Ogre was cooler than the Balrog.

[Yoda]

It was a Cave Troll...and are you smoking somethin'? A troll cooler than a giant demon made of fire with a flaming whip? WTF? :D

[Timing]

Eh, it was alright. :)

[sadesdrk]

Og- almost everything about it was above average? M'okay.:rolleyes:

[spudracer]

With me not reading the books, I didn't know what to expect so this movie really looked good, but I didn't know if it could have looked better, or SHOULD have looked better. It looked really good though.

There's where I stand.

[sadesdrk]

...and I read them so long ago, that it totally did it's job of bringing everything back to life, even if I did forget some of the details. I heard that one guy in our town, demanded his money back after an hour, because he said it was nothing like the books he's read 100 times! If you're that crazed over a series of books, than make your own damn movie.:p

[spudracer]

People like that deserve to be drug out into the street and shot out of stupidity. I mean, come on!!! Has ANY movie ever lived up to the book entirely??? NO!!

[Yoda]

I wouldn't say it has to "live up" to the book. It only has to live up to its own hype. PJ made it fairly clear: it's a good movie first, faithful to the spirit of the books second, and faithful to specifics third. In some ways, the movie was better than the book. In other ways, it wasn't as good. I don't feel comfortable calling one better than the other. They're apples and oranges.

[Timing]

I haven't read any of the books so it was all new to me. The scenery was totally amazing. My favorite character was the elf bow and arrow dude. When he was standing on that hill just shooting arrows one after another, that's was cool. Kinda like a video game or somethin.

[spudracer]

Yeah, Timing, he was pretty cool. Wish I could lob arrows like that.

[Timing]

Hey, what was the deal with the moth, or butterfly whatever and that big bird. I didn't get that part at all.

[Yoda]

The guy's name is Legolas, Timing. And the moth thing involved Gandalf talking to it...he sent a message to the King of the Eagles. He has a name and everything. The book explains it in greater detail, naturally, but in the movie, you're just supposed to realize that he sent a message to the Great Eagle through that moth.

[sadesdrk]

I remembered the Eagle thing from the Hobbit. Seemed like everytime Gandalf left the little Hobbits, they would always get into trouble, Bilbo would forever be yelling out for Gandalf, and by some miracle, Gandalf would show up on some giant eagle.
Also, I remember the sword that glowed blue, Sting. Bilbo used it when fighting the Gobblins and also the giant spiders in the caves...

[OG-]

Yea, above average. Somethings were amazing, some were average. Unlike what MANY people are saying, it wasn't the most amazing movie ever.

[sadesdrk]

Really? A Lot of people are saying it was the most amazing movie...EVER? Wow. Don't know about, ever...but I sure as hell won't say that I wasn't impressed as hell by it. Certianaly was better than Phantom Menance...or any other sci-fi/fantasy flick, I've seen in a LONG time.

[Timing]

Ok, so what was that thing that the lady in the woods gave the Hobbit dude? That white shining thingy. And what was that thing that the elf chick gave to Aragon?

[Yoda]

Galadriel gave Frodo a phial. I think it's the phial of Elendil, or something like that. Like she said: it will bring you light in a place of darkness, basically. As for Arwen: she gave Aragorn a necklace of hers. I think it somehow symbolizes her decision to give up her immortality to be with him.

[Timing]

So you basically don't know either huh? ;)

[Yoda]

Don't know what?

[Timing]

What!?

[Yoda]

Quit messing around. :) What is it you think I "don't know either."

[Timing]

You don't know what the things were.

[Yoda]

Ummm, yes I do. The first, the phial...well, I know what it does (basically), and I know how it comes into play later...but I'm not going to spoil one of the next two movies for you. As for the necklace: I'm 99% sure of it being symbolic...though you only asked what it was, and not what it meant.

[Timing]

Errr... k. I had the whole light in the darkness and the necklace thing down already. I guess I'll just wait a year. hehe :p

[sadesdrk]

Anyhoo...:rolleyes:

[SultanBigPants]

Y'all ready for this?

Aight! Felloshi[p of the Ring was an aesthetically awesome movie that was fortunate to be working with such great material. There are a number of things that I thought were bad about this film. However, I think they all root to poor preparation by the director. At least I hope so. And I do not blame anyone, because filming three long movies at once is proabably an impossible task.

First, the action sucked. I want directors to begin to understand that it is not completely necessary to pace action scenes quite so fast. There is a fine line between quick cuts and a jumbled up mess. LOTR was mostly the latter. One could argue that they were trying to portray chaos and that's why its was so crappy. Please. With that many action scenes in a movie, its simply retarded to make every single one suck. One time, I liked the action: When the Ranger dude was fighting the wraiths on the watch tower. It was still early in the movie, so I wasn't sick of that style entirely yet, and it truly was absolute chaos, with Froto putting the ring on and all that jazz. Perhaps the footage taken of these scenes was just insufficient and so they had top edit it this way.

Second, the viewer got at least fifteen solid minutes of a close-up of a ring in Wood's hand. Dear Christ did I get sick of that shot! The bonus footage on the DVD is gonna be interesting... Perhaps they didn't shoot enough different angles, or were afraid to use the same shots all the time during the dialogue. Actually, that wouldn't make sense becasue that's what they ended up doing.

It appeared that the slow-mo was not shot slow. It looked to me to be quite choppy. can you say: afterthought? Poor planning? That's TV movie stlyes. Come on.

As far as the story and plot, step back. The material they were working with here is unmatched. The one thing I didn't liek was taht damn orc at the end with the bow. The predator guy with Tinactin all over his face. He was such a freakin wuss, but they played him up all beastly.

In retrospect, had this movie had good action (the shot of the elf capping foos that held all long kicked rear) it would have been extremely awesome. Unfortunately, it didn't.

[Yoda]

Wuss? What on earth makes Lurtz a wuss? He's a giant frickin' Orc General who can take a sword to the stomach and keep going. I don't see the action as a mess at all. How anyone can consider the action before and within Moria anything than completely kick-a** blows my mind. The Balrog: crap, can I praise this thing any more? The action was mildly hectic, but not overly so. I knew what was going on 90% of the time...which is more than enough.

The close ups of the ring, I think, were good, too. The ring IS a character in this movie...as far as I'm concerned, it's the same as a closeup of Frodo's face. The shot of the ring from the snowy ground before Boromir picks it up is particularly nice looking...though nothing compares to the BRILLIANT shot of the ring at The Council of Elrond, with a view of people bickering in its reflection.

[sadesdrk]

I'd have to go with T on this one Sultan.

The first battle scenes were amazing. When the dark lord was literally throwing down forty or so men at a time...and when that guy hacked the ring off of his finger and there was that explosion...lemmie just say, I thought the action sequences were fine. I had no problems with 'em.

The evil general guy was so scary. My sister and I were cringing in out seats when he was yelling in that low gutteral voice," Find the Halflings! Find the Halflings!" He was hideous looking. Not to mention he was created from Goop, that alone proves his ickiness.

I think the creators did the very best they could with the movie. They mostly started as fans of the books, and those that were not, soon came to be. I read that they did everything they could to be true to the books...they couldn't possible fit it ALL in.

[Yoda]

Side-note: my stepmom loved the part where Aragorn turns from Frodo to see something like a dozen orcs right in front of him. He raises his sword in front of him, and has time for basically one breath. He knows what he has to do. I dug that part, too...it fit perfectly.

[OG-]

I thought the evil general guy looked like a dork. He looked like Darkman off of the sci-fi channel!

[Timing]

Yeah, there was some stuff about the movie that didn't jive with me. Especially what I already asked about. The elf chick just kinda shows up, we don't know who she is, what she's about or whatever. Then she says she needs to take Frodo to her father for help, well, who the heck is her father? They never explained that but I'd assume it was Agent Smith. Then there's the whole elf girl/Aragon scene and up to that point we have no idea that they even know each other. It seems the movie was trying to include as much as possible without giving it the necessary time to explain it all.

[spudracer]

And if they did explain everything you would be looking at a 5 hour movie.

[Timing]

Well, they coulda made 6 movies then or just cut some of the stuff out and focus on less. Another thing is that the movie didn't have an ending really. Like in Star Wars, every movie ends with some definitive battle. Everyone in the theater all kinda whispered, that's it!? hehe It was kinda funny.

[spudracer]

Ha, I had the same feelings towards the end. It was just there. Not even a storyline like, "...So Frodo and Sam continue the travel to destroy the ring...blah blah blah...you get the point..." Something like that would have made me feel a little better about the ending. To someone who has not read the books, the movie really leaves those people out. Especially at the ending.

[Anne]

Believe me, the movie ended with a much stronger sense of conclusion than the book did.

In the book, Boromir is shot at the end of FOTR but doesn't die until the beginning of The Two Towers. And it's not like it's a long, drawn-out proces either. He's shot, Frodo and Sam leave, and then the book ends.

[spudracer]

Anne, in the future you can use the [spoilers=Your Movie] [*/spoilers] Of course, remove the * and it works like a charm. :D

[Yoda]

Argh, you fools! :)

Yeah, there was some stuff about the movie that didn't jive with me. Especially what I already asked about. The elf chick just kinda shows up, we don't know who she is, what she's about or whatever. Then she says she needs to take Frodo to her father for help, well, who the heck is her father? They never explained that but I'd assume it was Agent Smith.
Uh, yeah. She says he can heal it, and then Gandalf introduces us to Elrond as the one who healed him. I see no lack of explanation. We even get a quick shot of him reciting something as Frodo is "drifting." I also can't help but notice that you have no interest in any of the character's names. Even with all that description, you think it was a problem? Well, you assumed correctly anyway, so I guess the movie did its job: it didn't toil needlessly on details, adding to the already immense running time.

Then there's the whole elf girl/Aragon scene and up to that point we have no idea that they even know each other. It seems the movie was trying to include as much as possible without giving it the necessary time to explain it all.
Explain what? They are in love. That's all they chose to show you now. Is Aragorn supposed to say "Oh, hello Arwen, Elf Princess who I am in love with but is immortal and therefore will have to make a choice later on. How've you been, baby?" Of course not.

Well, they coulda made 6 movies then or just cut some of the stuff out and focus on less. Another thing is that the movie didn't have an ending really. Like in Star Wars, every movie ends with some definitive battle. Everyone in the theater all kinda whispered, that's it!? hehe It was kinda funny.
The battles with the orcs and Lurtz weren't at all definitive? Pshaw. And no, I'm sorry to be so VERY blunt, but 6 movies is a horrible, horrible idea. The movie is open-ended, and for good reason...I have yet to come across anyone who doesn't know that it's the first of three.

Something like that would have made me feel a little better about the ending. To someone who has not read the books, the movie really leaves those people out. Especially at the ending.
I don't know that that would be a good idea...at least not that specific thing, because it makes it sound as if that is indeed the VERY end. It's semi open-ended, but not in a cliffhanger sort of way. It doesn't leave all loose ends up, nor does it tie ALL of them up. It ties up all present, urgent issues, and leaves the rest open.

Anne: yes, correct...though I think they were wise to move that "event" to the end of the movie. It fits in nicely there.

BTW: Just saw this again. As good as ever. I'm now 100% convinced that Lurtz is one bada** mutha, and that the Balrog is beyond all levels of cool comprehendable by mankind. I'm also highly impressed with Liv Tyler's performance...the Elvish language is beautiful, and it flows out of her so naturally. Her voice also sounds remarkably serious and precise...a startling difference from the ditzy/goofy way she tends to sound during interviews.

[spudracer]

Maybe a Back to the Future-esque type ending. You know, a "To Be Continued" kinda thing. :laugh:

[Yoda]

Originally posted by spudracer
Maybe a Back to the Future-esque type ending. You know, a "To Be Continued" kinda thing. :laugh:
Actually it's "To Be Concluded..." on that movie. :D

Originally posted by OG-
I thought the evil general guy looked like a dork. He looked like Darkman off of the sci-fi channel!
Fool. :D Lurtz owns you...

Dude's arm gets sliced off, he's stabbed in the stomach, and he pulls it in closer to show off! You kiddin' me? He ain't supposed to look pretty.

[B&W]

Maybe a Back to the Future-esque type ending. You know, a "To Be Continued" kinda thing

Come on people, we all know that it is "to be continued"

[spudracer]

How many people that are seeing this, do you think, have read the books? I mean I realized it was the end of the first "chapter" so to speak, a lot of people might not realize this. I could be totally wrong though.

[Yoda]

Oh, surely a significant portion have not read the books...but they don't need to to know that it's just one of three. Like I said, I haven't talked to anyone, online or offline, or any significant age (kids don't count), who thought that this movie was meant to stand 100% by itself. It is meant as a good standalone film (which it is!), but the knowledge that it's part of a whole is practically universal.

[spudracer]

Chris, first BTTF movie ends with a To Be Continued. Second one ends with To Be Concluded. :D

[Timing]

Pulease, the average viewer couldn't tell you half the names of the characters in this movie. The three central characters of the film are Frodo, Gandalf, and Aragon and that's who most viewers are likely to identify I imagine. And no, you don't know a thing about elf chick. She shows up out of the blue without anything to explain her. How about this genius idea, Aragon could have referred to her as princess arwen instead of acting like she's the good samaritan walking around in the dark. In fact until her last scene in the movie you don't even know that they even know each other. Again comparing to Star Wars, you know who characters are right away and their relationships to other characters because it's explained.

Also, you're speaking from the point of view of knowing all of this in advance so you think "everyone" knows and can follow all of the subtleties that aren't explained and poorly linked. The battle at the end resolved nothing and concluded nothing. In fact these orcs just show up to fight and disappear all of a sudden. Where the heck did they go? Huh!? Trying to incorporate way too much material is a recipe for confusion. They should have cut it down more or made more.

[Yoda]

Pulease, the average viewer couldn't tell you half the names of the characters in this movie. The three central characters of the film are Frodo, Gandalf, and Aragon and that's who most viewers are likely to identify I imagine.
I have no doubt most people could, if they gave a crap, remember names like Bilbo, Legolas, Elrond, Boromir, and Gimli. If they don't, then they just didn't bother to even try.

And no, you don't know a thing about elf chick. She shows up out of the blue without anything to explain her. How about this genius idea, Aragon could have referred to her as princess arwen instead of acting like she's the good samaritan walking around in the dark. In fact until her last scene in the movie you don't even know that they even know each other. Again comparing to Star Wars, you know who characters are right away and their relationships to other characters because it's explained.
Did we watch the same movie? Go see it again and take a look at their dialogue in Elvish between Aragorn and Arwen...it's BEYOND obvious that they konw each other. If your girlfriend was a Princess, BTW, would you call her "Princess Gloria," or just "Gloria"? I'm sure I know the answer already. I'm sorry, but this gripe of yours makes no sense...there's nothing at all confusing about how she is introduced.

Also, you're speaking from the point of view of knowing all of this in advance so you think "everyone" knows and can follow all of the subtleties that aren't explained and poorly linked.
I've seen this movie with an 8 year old girl who hasn't read the book, and she followed it easily. You're not stupid, Timing...either you weren't paying attention, or (much more likely), you're simply determined to find fault with this movie, for reasons as of yet undetermined. Follow all the subtitles? What, you mean read them?

The battle at the end resolved nothing and concluded nothing. In fact these orcs just show up to fight and disappear all of a sudden. Where the heck did they go? Huh!? Trying to incorporate way too much material is a recipe for confusion. They should have cut it down more or made more.
If you're going to harp on me about having already read the story of the first movie, then you also have to give me credit on knowing better than you as to what would be better: 3 movies, or 6. There is no doubt whatsoever that 6 movies would be TERRIBLE.

The battle at the end led us to several things:

Boromir died, Lurtz died, Frodo and Sam went on alone, Merry and Pippin were taken away, and Legolas, Aragorn and Gimli all decided to try to save them. How is that nothing? Plenty was left open, but I believe I've already adequately explained that. It's just the first movie. Didn't "Back to the Future" end open-ended? Did you complain about that when you saw it? Oh, and the orcs were, some of them, killed, and the rest, chasing Merry and Pippin. This wasn't confusing to anyone else I know.

[thmilin]

ok ok. so it had flaws. they are laid out below in spoilage form.


- battle scene at the end by the shore - camera was jumpy and cuts were rough and yes, sometimes i couldn't tell who was getting hurt by who and who was where.

- why did the dwarf think his cousins would still be alive and throw him a party when he hadn't talked to them in ages and apparently their bodies had been gathering dust and rotting for DECADES?!

- yes, many close-ups of the ring - flaw - too long on the closeups sometimes

-yes, many closeups of frodo's wide-eyed worried face - flaw - too long, too frequent. we get it. he's a small guy with a big problem and not much of a chance. the story alone makes up for that and we don't need so many close ups to emphasize it.

the ending - i haven't read the books but even i knew with all the setup that Frodo wasn't going to get to the place yet. this was exposition. now he goes in and fights the real fight.

i'm confused as to what the Heir (forgot his name) and the elf and the dwarf are gonna go do when they run off all happy with a plan after Frodo leaves for the other shore.... can someone elighten me? they said something about protecting "Marysomething or other" ... Mariandor? who what? went by too fast, the name sounded familiar but i didn't catch/get it.




the good stuff:

cate blanchett. this woman ... this woman is great. and i mean it in the fullest sense of the word. i mean it like Grand. Like, Huge. GREAT. she is the next judy dench. spectacular actress. incredible voice. her voice at the beginning alone can capture ... every emotion possible. just her voice. i felt every word. she won me with Elizabeth. I'm forever hers for that.

i knew the Heir and the elfchick were in love from the moment she showed up. come on people, read the actors. lingering eyes. whispers. he speaks her language ... rare. the fact that the two of them know she rides faster/better/lighter - that is not a piece of common knowledge and not one easily given up by a man, let alone a fighter/ranger. she knows him well and doesn't get him angry because of that assertion AND gets agreement. so um, yeah, i knew them two was close.

OVERALL ...

great. loved it. go see it if you haven't (ha, like you haven't!). i'll see it again, i'm sure. it filled my chest with ... happiness. joy. felt good just to watch it. felt real. marvelous. beautiful.

they were wonderful with the sense of humanity and reality to the races. i cannot tell you what it means to me to see this played out ... other fantasy films, they all focus on something or fall short and this ... i grew up with fantasy books, i grew up with elves and dwarves and orcs and magic and nothing has ever felt so much like home, so perfectly captured. the SPIRIT was captured here, and so what if the special effects weren't as "spectacular" - they didn't need it. they told the story. they were fantastic at it. all the special effects in phantom menace weren't enough - i felt distanced and emotionally unmoved by everything. milldy piqued in the human story but the human story wasn't properly developed or shown by wonderful acting. unlike here, where the acting is ... marvelous. oh so marvelous.

HERE - here i felt the passion of races that are as real to readers as the rest of human life is, and for once it really felt ... real. not a tv show. not an 8 hr TBS series. but a film with the budget, the talent, and the story to pull me in and keep me THERE ... truly feeling and believing.

because of that, i actually jumped when monsters were after our heroes, when most often i snicker or roll my eyes or look askance waiting for the cheesy fighting to be over. here ... i felt it. i recognized these races because the creators actually captured it ... i have always been in love with elves and what i saw on the screen were ELVES - their culture, their language, their talent, their very features. their beauty. down to the fair skin, pointy ears, long hair, delicate finery/artwork, light feet, quick bow, magic, serene mystery, determined judiciousness, aloofness, and sharp glance. the dwarves' reddish hair, brogue, bad moods, loyalty, quick axe, braids, armor. oh my god they had MITHRIL armor in the movie! to see it recognized like that ... this world that i know and love ... that i know all the other geeks know and love ... to see these details RECOGNIZED, rendered! and correctly! the language, the camaraderie between the hobbits ...

and that says it all, when i say that it felt like coming home. this is one of the greatest movies of all time, for me. just because it managed to capture something so rare and hard to capture - the silly car commercial about "Drive = Love" and capturing magic in the build of the car they played in the previews, it was stupid but the idea is spot on for the film - it captured magic for me.

like your peeps said, sades - i could have watched this film forever. what that really means is - i saw the world i love and wanted to be IN it. and for 3 hours i actually was.

it made me think afterward that what we NEED is a world like that, but we'd ruin it. a world of other creatures, other beings, rather than just humans. we need elves and hobbits and magicians and dwarves. that time is a world of beauty that in some weird way, reading about it, in the modern world, though i've never known it - i miss.

[Yoda]

Answers to some of your queries:

1) Yes, Gimli's talk of Moria was odd, and poorly done...though not horribly so. Thankfully they chose something mostly insignificant to mess up a bit...though it wasn't a TOTAL messup. Let's not forget that, in Middle-Earth, you can't call your cousin Balin on the cell-phone to ask how things are in Moria. :D In the book, though, it seems that Gimli and his people have not heard from Moria, but, as a result, pretty much know that something is up.

B) As we mentioned in IMs, the dudes are Merry and Pippin.

3) Sorry guys, I'll respectfully disagree: I though, perhaps, there was a LITTLE too much focus on his troubled expressions, and the ring...but not much. More his face than the ring...the ring deserved 99% of the camera time it got.

D) Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli are going to go try to rescue Merry and Pippin. As I'm sure you've no doubt guessed, however, a lot more will happen to them as a result of doing that.

[sadesdrk]

Originally posted by Timing
How about this genius idea, Aragon could have referred to her as princess arwen instead of acting like she's the good samaritan walking around in the dark. In fact until her last scene in the movie you don't even know that they even know each other. Actually you do. When they see each other for the first time, he touches her hand when she's about to leave, tenderly, and says," Be careful." they also discussed who was the faster rider, which would imply that they knew each other.

[spudracer]

I'm going to stop trying to break this movie down. I'll wait til all three movies are released to make my decisions.

[Timing]

Subtleties = nuances
Subtitles = written translation of dialogue

I'll go see the movie again soon and check out all the stuff again.

[The Silver Bullet]

I deliberatly didn't read any of this thread.

It was ana amazing film, epic, intimate, brilliant. It is what film and cinema and yes, dare I say it, movies are all about. It took your wholley to another time, another place and let you walk among the halls of Rivendell, the woodlands of Lothlorien, and the mines of Moria. It was brilliant.

Next step, the two towers -- which means much more of Christopher Lee and even better, our first really good look at my favorite character from the book [note I see book, not book] -- GOLLUM.

This film was great, and basically, it can only get better.

[Yoda]

Here's a question for some of ya'll: how did your opinion of the film change upon multiple viewings? I know Holden's seen it several times. I don't know who else has had the privelage to see it more than once, though.

I've seen it three times, and my opinions did shift a little each time, as is to be expected. The sequence in Moria is better than I gave it credit for the first time around (even though I thought it was amazing the first time around), and the score is amazing. I didn't notice the score TOO much the first time around...too much to look at, and it fit so well with the movie in general. The second and third times I took greater note of the music in the background.

I also found it amazing that I was more chocked up during my third viewing than during my first or second. I also became more aware of Frodo's facial expressions (which worked wonders), and some of the things in the background. Anyone catch the director's cameo in Bree, or the Hobbits camping out amongst some familiar ol' trolls with Strider? :D (personally, I missed PJ the first time around...but I think I read about it afterwards, and subsequently saw it clearly the next two times. I didn't notice the trolls the first time, either. Nice touch.)

[spudracer]

I've been wanting to catch this again, but have been too busy to catch it again. When I do, I'll let you know. :)

[Holden Pike]

I noticed Jackson's cameo the first time I saw The Fellowship of the Ring, or at least I thought surely that had to be him. On my second viewing, when I knew exactly where to look, it cleared any doubts I had - it is definitely him.

[The Silver Bullet]

Where is that?
Sorry if it's back further. So I skim.

[Holden Pike]

Just after the four Hobbits enter Bree, before they find the Prancing Pony, Jackson can be seen as a drunk on the street in the rain. He's on the right-hand side of the frame. He spins toward the camera and belches. It's a quick cut, but if you know what to look for, you'll see him.

[Sunfrogolin]

I just saw this movie and I don't think I liked it all that much. Of course I didn't think There's Something about Mary was all that funny either and everybody loved that too. So maybe it's me. ;p

What was this movie about? It's like hi, I have hairy feet let's run! Where was the charaterization? I saw some but not a whole lot, I just saw run and fight run and fight. Why did they let Gandolf die? They could have helped him up. That sucked. If the ring is so important why are there only nine people trying to destroy it? There should be armies. What else can the ring do besides turn people invisible and extend their lives? What's up with Sam and Frodo being gay? Was that nessasary?

I agree with Spud, I didn't like the ending. I think it might be better to buy all three movies as a set and watch them all together over a period of days. This movie seemed like one long introduction to me. It'll probably be a cult favorite and live on in movie history when it's all done tho.


Btw, I've never read the books or seen the cartoons or muppets.

[The Silver Bullet]

Firstly, in regards to "letting" Gandalf die -- they didn't. He told them to run and let him take care of the Balrog. So they did, next thing they know he's on the edge and a sh!tload of Orcs are firing arrows at them.

Secondly, Gandalf doesn't even die. He comes back as Gandalf the White.

Regarding the characterisation, I didn't notice any problems with it. What you need to realise is the both wizards, elves, dwarves, hobbits and men are not that much different except in spirituality and culture. Basically, all of them are just PEOPLE. In the books, [I know, I know, you haven't read them] you forget that the hobbits look the way they do, height wise, or that the elve and the dwarve are meant to look totally different. They are all people with special traits, and those traits were well brought to the screen.

I am not even going to go into this but, Frodo and Sam were NOT gay.

[Sullivan]

What's up with Sam and Frodo being gay? Was that nessasary?

What's up with being homophobic? Is that nessasary?

And I'm straight, BTW, in case anyone was wondering. :D

[Sunfrogolin]

Me? I'm not homophobic. You mean JR Tolkien. Or did you not notice how everyone in the movie is gay except for the humans? Hobbits, gay. Burly dwarf guy, gay. Bilbo, gay. Gandalf who's always hanging out with hobbits, gay. Elves, bisexual. That's what I'm saying, we get it, to be gay is to be an unaturall strange creature. Did we really need to see Sam and Frodo hugging to figure out this movies true message? Subtle is better sometimes. :D

[Sullivan]

Heh, heh. Funny, man. You had me going there for a second.

[Yoda]

I was gonna say...I thought you were serious. I start fuming when people think they're gay. Can't these fools see PAST their own time and place? This was written around 50 years ago. There's no sexuality in the books, really. None. There's no hidden anything; it's meant like a historical record of sorts...which is one of the reasons so many people find the books to be boring.

And dude, it's Gandalf, not Gandolf. Argh.

Silver is right. Gandalf lives, my friend.

They didn't let him fall. He was right on the edge, for all we know the Balrog was hanging on the other end of the whip, they're already quite a ways away, the bridge is unstable, and orcs are running over to fire at them! and yes, "it sucked" is correct. That's the idea: you're supposed to feel their UTTER devestation as Gandalf, their friend and their main reason for hoping this will work, falls in a most horrifying and depressing way.

Furthermore, there is NO way they ought to send armies there. For one, you heard Elrond: their army cannot stand up to the armies of Mordor and Isengard. Y'know what would happen if they went marching in there? They'd get the crap kicked out of them. Choosing nine to go mirrors th choice to let the hobbits go: stealth. People won't notice 9 characters sneaking around the back entrance, just as Sauron isn't as likely to notice two tiny hobbits creeping into Mordor.

As far as The One Ring's powers: invisibility and youthfulness are part of it, but it depends on how far you go with it. It doesn't have a specific power, ala "Flight" or "super-strength." It depends on what you use it for...but above all, it is meant to corrupt those who wear it, save for Sauron. You heard Aragorn at The Council of Elrond: "it answers to Sauron...it has no other master."

Run and fight, run and fight? Man, were you watching this movie? It was emotional as hell. I've teared up to some degree all three times I've seen it. It was not just action with running inbetween. And please, someone else give me an "amen" on how fortunate and timely that "the time that is given to us" exchange was between Gandalf and Frodo in Moria? Amazing timing...and dumb luck, really. It was so applicable to today.

[The Silver Bullet]

I watched the most brilliant documentary that combined information on the film and on Tolkien's life, and I can only hope it will be on the DVD.

It started by going through, like you know "the making of" stuff, and while this was enjoyable for a a part [very enjoyable in fact, they found "Hobbiton" a year before shooting and started planting vegetables and gardens so it looked 100 years old when they got there!] it then progressed into the more interesting stuff -- the universal themes that Tolkien was using and the insperation for Quenya from Finland and the mythology he felt the Britain had been robbed of. It also compared Hobbiton to his home town of Manchester and the destruction of it to the industrial revolution to Sauron taking over Middle Earth. It also went into depth that some of the writing's he wrote in the trenches of WWI became pre-requsite writings of hobbiton and Middle Earth. Despite the fact that he once wrote "Once in a hole a hill there lived a Hobbit" on the back of a blank test paper, is irrelevant and this doco argues that despite Tolkien saying it wasn't [because he so badly didn't want it to be linked to modern times -- he wanted it to be this mythology] that Middle Earth began a long time before, when he was a teenager and during WWI. He also refused to admit that WWII compelled him to write even further into it, good vs. evil, and once again that was because he so badly wanted to write a mythology for Britain.

Having Elijah Wood was a waste of time, he's "insights" were pointless, but Ian McKellen, Cate Blanchett, Peter Jackson and especially Christopher Lee gave fantastic insight. It ultimatly showed how the story and theme became so much to them. Christopher Lee ended by comparing the story to any stage of history -- but especially the one we are living in right now. He said:

"Today, I believe, that there are more conflicts and indeed wars than anywhere else in the world....and where is the ring-bearer?"

[Sullivan]

And please, someone else give me an "amen" on how fortunate and timely that "the time that is given to us" exchange was between Gandalf and Frodo in Moria?

AMEN!

Really, that insight of Gandalf's is applicable to any time, any place, in history or in our personal lives. It's just especially poignant now.

[The Silver Bullet]

As I said: Everything is universal. Good Vs. Evil. Small people doing big things. Everything is those books is always applicable. That's the point.

[Sunfrogolin]

Sure it was, the movie starts with an introduction of the ring and the basic plot of the movie. Then it's just run and fight, run and fight. They were still running and fighting when it ended. What else happened? It was a movie about nothing. Something will happend in later parts but this one was just a long introduction. As a stand alone movie it lacks something. It can't stand alone, it needs it's other parts. I did think it was good tho. The parts that made me emotional were the Hobbits being scared. Whaaa! To be a little fellow in a world of big humans and scary monsters! :( Bilbo regretting passing the ring on to Frodo. Waaaa!

When Gandalf died. When they were trapped in the mines. I thought they were gonna get lost and die in there. It felt like they were screwed and it made me depressed. When they were talking about how crazy it was to try and destroy the ring by taking it back to where it was created. I felt like they were gonna die. No freaking way will they be able to do it.

It was goofy that they let Frodo and his friends take it. They should have gathered the best warriors from around the country to form the Fellowship. Frodo could still take it cuz he's incorruptible. I wouldn't trust that motley crew with the most important task in history. That was like throwing the ring away.


As for the gay thing.
This movie was chok-a-blok full of gay references. The Hobbits all liked Gandalf and his big staff. The wizard fight. Where they battle it out with their staffs. That's a parody of straight testosterone rich men. Merry & Pippins, an obvious refference to Mary Poppins. Mary being a gay term, and they were clearly gay anyway. Gandalf being trapped atop a big phallic symbol tower and how does he escape? By talking to a butterfly. Like I said before, every unnatural creature was gay or bisexy except humans. That elf girl who was about in the woods was only there to show that humans like girls. And how do we know elves have matching elf parts anyway? The fellowship of the ring. Imagine a ring of men standing in a circle. I think you can figure out what that means. Being chased around by orcs. Orc coming from the word dork. Dork being slang for penis. The way Frodo is saved by his frilly underwear. Pays to dress up doesn't it? :D

[The Silver Bullet]

Who the hell are you, Freud?!

Man, I really do believe you're looking to hard into something. It's just like the whole Gay reference thing in Fight Club. Shall we start discussing the beastiality issues in the Jurassic Park series, shall we? I'm sure there's plenty is you over analyse it....

[Yoda]

I honestly have no clue as to whether or not Frogman is joking about the gay thing. If he is, I apologize in advance for being so blind to it. :) If he's not, I must say, dude, you're beyond off base! In the books they mention it clearly: they're all straight. They all go gonzo over Galadriel, for one. They're completely captivated by her beauty. Orc doesn't come from the word dork, either. Hey, get this: your first name is Frank. Frank is another word for a hot dog. Need I take the analogy further, or is it clear that you are indeed gay? :D

Dude, they DID have some of the best warriors of Middle-Earth in The Fellowship. Who do you think Legolas, Gimli and Boromir were? Some of the best of their respective races. You talk in one paragraph about how it seems like they'd never make it out alive...and then you talk about how they ought to have the best there. Didn't you see Gimli, Boromir, Gandalf and Legolas whooping it up on Moria, escaping impossible situations?

Wait for the rest of the story before you pass judgement on the hobbits. Didn't you hear Gandalf? "After 100 years, they can still surprise you." The whole point here is that hobbits don't value adventure and glory...but that doesn't mean they're helpless. Their stature and homebody-ish nature is misleading. Also, don't forget Elrond: he said Frodo has shown amazing resilience. They're starting to see the value of the hobbits.

They need people who, aside from being skilled, will do WHATEVER it takes to help Frodo achieve his goal...even if that includes risking their own lives. They need loyalty as much as skill, and the hobbits are loyal to Frodo. As you see, in the case of Boromir, a lack of loyalty and trustworthiness, which the hobbits have a surplus on, could've caused a disaster.

You say the movie is boring run-and-fight, but you say you got depressed and worried that they were going to die in Moria. Sounds like the movie did it's job with that sequence! :)
Nothing happened? I don't understand. There was a huge amount of dialogue. Surely more talking than running and fighting.

[spudracer]

If you can't appreciate it for what it is...simply don't comment on what you THINK it is. That'll save us all some time.

[Yoda]

Originally posted by spudracer
If you can't appreciate it for what it is...simply don't comment on what you THINK it is. That'll save us all some time.
C'mon now...I'll have to disagree with that. I welcome Frogman's opinion. I just think he's nuts-o. :laugh:

[The Silver Bullet]

I think if someone didn't enjoy it, the least they should do is appreciate it. So people can comment on why they didn't like it, but only if they respect it as a film.

But as Spud said, if you can't respect it or appreciate it, don't comment on it. It's very close-minded, that.

I'm not sure Frog was saying he disliked it, or that he didn't appreciate it.

Just that the characters were gay. And they of course, were not.

[Snakes47]

I loved this film....although it was a little hard to watch in the front row of an imax theater... ;)

I plan on going again to see it, a little further back this time though.

Steve

[spudracer]

Snakes, where ya been? Glad to have ya back!!

Front row at an IMAX would be a little hard to follow. Plus, you would have to pay a visit to the chiropracter after an experience like that. Otherwise you would be staring at the sky for a few hours out of the day.

I caught a bit on Headline News this morning about LOTR and seeing a clip of it only made me want to see it again. Plus, I discovered two eggs on the Rush Hour 2 DVD so I can watch the trailer all the time if I want to. :D

[Sunfrogolin]

What? I can say I don't like a film if I want to. That's what these boards are for, for discussions. That makes less sense than my gay theory. I don't even know what this means. (See quote)
I think if someone didn't enjoy it, the least they should do is appreciate it. So people can comment on why they didn't like it, but only if they respect it as a film.
I don't understand the words that came out of your mouth in that quote.

And I did like it. I didn't say it was boring. I said it wasn't about anything. Like Sienfeld. :)
It's like the first chapter of a story, which somebody on this board said it was supposed to be. In fact I think Twt said Tolkien didn't want to break it into three pieces to begin with. I'm saying that if people go to see this movie they should be aware that it's the first part of a triology. You won't get an ending where everything is closed up and packaged. The story's still ongoing as far as I'm concerned.

I love this spoiler feature. :)
Anyway, did they destroy the ring? Did they rescue Mary & Pippins? Did they get killed by Orcs or did Xena save them? We don't know. The movie didn't have a neat and tidy ending. You've read the books, I haven't. I still think they're all going to die.

Yes, I did get into the movie. Poor little Frodo, I feel for him most. I think they should have a better fellowship but maybe that's how I'm supposed to feel. Maybe Tolkien intended it that way. As far as manipulating my emotions, it did work. Good movie, no closure.

As for my name. It's my dad's name too so it must be my grandfather you're wondering about. :D Hahaha! Would you go to a bar called The Prancing Pony? If that's doesn't sound like a gay bar I don't know what does. :D

[Guy]

Originally posted by Sunfrogolin
What? I can say I don't like a film if I want to. That's what these boards are for, for discussions. That makes less sense than my gay theory. I don't even know what this means. (See quote)

I don't understand the words that came out of your mouth in that quote.

And I did like it. I didn't say it was boring. I said it wasn't about anything. Like Sienfeld. :)
It's like the first chapter of a story, which somebody on this board said it was supposed to be. In fact I think Twt said Tolkien didn't want to break it into three pieces to begin with. I'm saying that if people go to see this movie they should be aware that it's the first part of a triology. You won't get an ending where everything is closed up and packaged. The story's still ongoing as far as I'm concerned.

I love this spoiler feature. :)
Anyway, did they destroy the ring? Did they rescue Mary & Pippins? Did they get killed by Orcs or did Xena save them? We don't know. The movie didn't have a neat and tidy ending. You've read the books, I haven't. I still think they're all going to die.

Yes, I did get into the movie. Poor little Frodo, I feel for him most. I think they should have a better fellowship but maybe that's how I'm supposed to feel. Maybe Tolkien intended it that way. As far as manipulating my emotions, it did work. Good movie, no closure.

As for my name. It's my dad's name too so it must be my grandfather you're wondering about. :D Hahaha! Would you go to a bar called The Prancing Pony? If that's doesn't sound like a gay bar I don't know what does. :D

i was wondering this as well.. why not put about 5 more strong soldiers to go with the fellowship to have more protection.

[spudracer]

A better fellowship???

Well if you will take this in mind when you say something like that. You have to remember that nobody except for Frodo was strong enough to push the ring away. Frodo simply didn't want the thing which kept him from becoming under its control. Any group of 9 people would have done just the same. Especially someone that likes war. They would be drawn to the ring and be submissive to its powers.

So the fellowship present is just fine and dandy. :D
Maybe that's not what you meant, but that's how I took it. It's true that this movie really makes no sense, it won't really, except for those who have read all three books and know what's going to happen. For those of us who haven't read the books, we're lost right now. It's sorta like Episode IV, V, VI of the Star Wars series. I was always lost as a kid when I watched them. I never knew what to make of Episode IV when I saw it the first time, now that Episode I, II, and III are being released, more light will be shed on that series.

So if a movie MUST have a sequel, you can't put your opinions to work just from seeing that one movie. At least wait til all three are out to base your decision.

Personally, the first one was great, and it will get better with time. :)

[Yoda]

Sun: no, we don't know what's happening yet. Since when is that bad? Did you like "Back to the Future"? It didn't have a neat and tidy ending. And I'll disagree with Spud here: lots of people who haven't read the books have understood and enjoyed the movie.

And no, a "better" fellowship, sorry to be so blunt, makes no sense. There isn't much of a way to make it better. Maybe in a small way or two, but nothing glaring that they "should" have noticed, if you know what I mean. The gay theory, I've said, and will say again, is 100% ridiculous. Sorry man. It really is.

Guy: more protection? And more guys clanking around. As you saw, even among a small group of people, they still had some trust issues. They had to be quiet in Moria...the more people you have, the harder that becomes.

[Sunfrogolin]

Well gee, it's not like no one knows they have the ring. All the bad guys know it. They're all after it. They could use more swordsmen, more archers, more axemen, more wizards, a couple of giants (if they exist) some bad A monster types. It's easy to make a better fellowship. And this is an important thing. If Sauron gets the ring it's game over for the whole planet.

That wizard guy has The Eye of Sorrow so it's not like he doesn't know where they're going. I would set up ambushes all along the way. And now that it's just Sam & Frodo all they need to do is run into one more evil thing and they're both dead. You said the fellowship was there to protect Frodo and the other guys left to rescue Merry & Pippin. Who cares about Merry & Pippin? Their destiny is to become barbecue beef. The fellowship should go after Frodo.

If it's Frodo's destiny to destroy the ring he doesn't even need a fellowship. They could all just sit home and eat corn on the cob, Frodo's gonna destroy the ring anyway, it's his destiny. How do you know it's not Frodo's destiny to die and return the ring to Sauron?

The gay stuff is there if you look for it. It's like all that stuff you said about Aliens. Just cuz the book was written 50 years ago doesn't mean anything. There were gays 50 years ago.

[spudracer]

TWT, I think I found it a tiny bit difficult to understand, but I understand it more after talking about it. :)

Sun, why must you look for the hidden messages you think are in a movie? Can't appreciate it for the movie it is?

[Yoda]

Well gee, it's not like no one knows they have the ring. All the bad guys know it. They're all after it. They could use more swordsmen, more archers, more axemen, more wizards, a couple of giants (if they exist) some bad A monster types. It's easy to make a better fellowship. And this is an important thing. If Sauron gets the ring it's game over for the whole planet.
It's more like "almost no one knows where they are." Let me spell it out for ya: if all the bad guys went head-to-head with all the good guys, the bad guys would win easily. That's why Saruman's corruption is such a big deal: he's bred an entire army and turned Isengard over to Sauron's side. There's no way to drastically improve The Fellowship...none at all. The Fellowship is not perfect, but it's as reasonably good as they were gong to get.

That wizard guy has The Eye of Sorrow so it's not like he doesn't know where they're going. I would set up ambushes all along the way. And now that it's just Sam & Frodo all they need to do is run into one more evil thing and they're both dead. You said the fellowship was there to protect Frodo and the other guys left to rescue Merry & Pippin. Who cares about Merry & Pippin? Their destiny is to become barbecue beef. The fellowship should go after Frodo.
First off, it's the Eye of Sauron. :) Secondly, that's just Sauron...Saruman doesn't have it; he was just speaking with Sauron through the seeing stone; the Palantir. Sauron can somewhat see Frodo when he wears The One Ring...but he cannot see all.

One more evil thing and they're both dead? Boy, you've made the mistake the bad guys have been making: you're underestimating the hobbits. What makes you think they're so helpless?

The Fellowship knows they'll only hinder Frodo. Boromir proved it: these warriors cannot be trusted. Frodo and Sam have been the most consistent, the most loyal, the most trustworthy, and the most quiet as well. Now they're going to try and sneak in the back door of Mordor, if they can.

If it's Frodo's destiny to destroy the ring he doesn't even need a fellowship. They could all just sit home and eat corn on the cob, Frodo's gonna destroy the ring anyway, it's his destiny. How do you know it's not Frodo's destiny to die and return the ring to Sauron?
Who said anything about anyone's destiny?

The gay stuff is there if you look for it. It's like all that stuff you said about Aliens. Just cuz the book was written 50 years ago doesn't mean anything. There were gays 50 years ago.
Listen man...I like ya' a lot, but you sure are pushing my buttons. :) Many Tolkien scholars (yes, scholars...some people devote large portions of their life to his work) have analyzed this situation, and no one who knows anything about the story thinks that they're gay. We even have a collection of Tolkien's personal letters to deal with. The gay stuff isn't there. Sorry. I don't know what you mean about aliens, either.

Didn't you say you hadn't read the books? If so, how exactly can you make this judgement, when all you've seen is the book in movie form, with lots of dialogue and many scenes cut out? FYI: in the beginning of the movie, Samwise wants to dance with Rosie Cotton. Remember that?

Also, there are some spoilers about the ULTIMATE ending to the entire story in the block below...don't read them if you don't want to know, mmmkay?

Samwise lives through everything and marries Rosie...having THIRTEEN flippin' children. Gay? Pshaw.

[spudracer]

Well said.

[Sunfrogolin]

Sheese, boy, talk about being in denial.

Originally posted by TWTCommish
It's more like "almost no one knows where they are."
When they were in the snow and that guy sent the avalanche he didn't know where they were? Just a lucky guess on his part then.

There's no way to drastically improve The Fellowship...none at all.

Better weapons, more people, add some monsters, protective magic spells etc.. Didn't you read that paragraph?

One more evil thing and they're both dead? Boy, you've made the mistake the bad guys have been making: you're underestimating the hobbits. What makes you think they're so helpless?

The fact that they're so small, they don't know how to fight well, whenever someone hits them they fly 20 in the air and hit a tree. Stuff like that. :)

Who said anything about anyone's destiny?
That future king guy. He said it wasn't his destiny to help Frodo anymore and he ran off to waste his time and endanger the mission saving Merry & Pippin.

Listen man...I like ya' a lot, but you sure are pushing my buttons. :) Many Tolkien scholars (yes, scholars...some people devote large portions of their life to his work) have analyzed this situation, and no one who knows anything about the story thinks that they're gay. We even have a collection of Tolkien's personal letters to deal with. The gay stuff isn't there. Sorry. I don't know what you mean about aliens, either.

Aliens, 'member when you said all that sex stuff about the spaceship being like a womb and stuff? As for the scholars, it only took me 5 minutes to see the gay connections. Maybe you should invite them to read my post. The fact that Gandalf is pretty powerless without his staff, that doesn't have a hidden meaning? I could go on and on. :)

[Yoda]

When they were in the snow and that guy sent the avalanche he didn't know where they were? Just a lucky guess on his part then.
Weren't ya' watching? The birds saw them, and delivered the message to him. They're only 9 people: if they're not spotted, he won't know which way they're going. The whole place is big enough that they could be any one of 100 places. Can't hide an army, though.

Better weapons, more people, add some monsters, protective magic spells etc.. Didn't you read that paragraph?
Yeah, I read it. I'll take these ones one by one: monsters? What kind of monsters? Protective magic spells? Wha? Better weapons? What do you have in mind? They all had weapons they were highly skilled with; why do you think they were so good at fighting off orcs? They were some of the best warriors around. More people? I've already addressed that.

The fact that they're so small, they don't know how to fight well, whenever someone hits them they fly 20 in the air and hit a tree. Stuff like that.
I don't think that happened. :) They're not weaklings. There's a constant theme throughout the movie: don't judge a book by its cover. The hobbits, if they were truly pathetic, would've never made it to Rivendell.

That future king guy. He said it wasn't his destiny to help Frodo anymore and he ran off to waste his time and endanger the mission saving Merry & Pippin.
I don't remember him using the word destiny. Even if you assume that he did, or that that was what he meant, it doesn't mean that it's Frodo's destiny to suceed, it means that, one way or another, it's up to him. They are supposed to obey Frodo; remember when Gandalf let him decide whether or not to go through the mines? It's Frodo's choice. They've put their faith in him...so when he wants to go off on his own, Aragorn lets him.

Aliens, 'member when you said all that sex stuff about the spaceship being like a womb and stuff? As for the scholars, it only took me 5 minutes to see the gay connections. Maybe you should invite them to read my post. The fact that Gandalf is pretty powerless without his staff, that doesn't have a hidden meaning? I could go on and on.
So, Sam's interest in Rosie Cotton is what -- made up, so people will think he's straight? Or is Sam bisexual? :rolleyes: The thing about "Aliens" is that it has things to back it up: like the fact that there's plenty of material to show that one of the people who had a significant hand in creating the creature was obsessed with contraceptives. The fact that many scholars have poured over this all and don't see any viable evidence, and that you see it in 5 minutes, is evidence against your point, man, not for it. :)

Hidden meaning? Well, how do you measure power? Gandalf hardly uses his staff in the movie. His power is, mostly, his knowledge. Did you read the spoilers I posted, BTW? They explain part of it, too. Besides: is the creator of Cricket/Baseball gay because he made the bat the primary weapon in terms of scoring? How about a martial artist who uses the bo?

[spudracer]

If you're looking for the gay messages in a movie, you're obviously watching the movie for the wrong reasons.

I watched the teaser and trailer for LOTR on my Rush Hour 2 DVD, and even watching that, it explains pretty much everything. :)

[Sunfrogolin]

Yeah, I read it. I'll take these ones one by one: monsters? What kind of monsters? Protective magic spells? Wha? Better weapons? What do you have in mind? They all had weapons they were highly skilled with; why do you think they were so good at fighting off orcs? They were some of the best warriors around. More people? I've already addressed that.

Everyone who's played video games knows there's all kinds of magic elven weapons. In this movie there's Mithril, swords that glow when Orcs are near, swords that turn people into wraiths. Here's what they need, 10 swordsmen with swords that shoot fireballs or ice or that are made of diamond. You name it. 5 axe men with axes that return to the throwers hand or that can cause earthquakes when they hit them against the ground. 10 archers with paralyzing arrows that turn people to stone, or arrows that explode. All kinds of cool arrows. 3 wizards cuz wizards are hard to find. One could be a girl in a skimpy robe. 3 big A monsters. Like good Balrogs. Frodo. That's 32 people. That's not so big. I think you're thinking of an army of 500 men.
Also magic spells for stealth, invisibility, flying horses etc..

So, Sam's interest in Rosie Cotton is what -- made up, so people will think he's straight? Or is Sam bisexual?

I don't know anything about Rosie O'Cotton and I'm not going to devote my life to studing JR Tolkien just to prove my point. Just let me say Gandalf, rearrange the letters forms Fagland. True or not? :D

no, I didn't read both your spoilers only the top one cuz you already spoiled the next movie by telling me something about Gandalf. :mad:

[Yoda]

I'm giving up on the gay thing; you're just playing around now. :)

As for all those spells: man, you trippin'? The bad guys are more powerful than the good guys. And yeah, wizards are hard to find: there aren't many powerful ones. Gandalf is one of the wiser ones out there. Furthermore, they don't have many people to trust. Remember Elrond? "Our list of allies grows thin." Tolkien can't be expected to adhere to the stands of video games and such. His world is his own.

[sadesdrk]

I come back and check on the thread of my new favorite movie, and what do I discover? We're discussing Gandalf and 'Fagland'! That's just perfect.
Hmmm...maybe I can come up with something using the letters in,"sunfrogolin".....

[Sunfrogolin]

Hi Sades :)
Please read Page 7, post 10 I think. That's where all the gay stuff starts. If you don't come to the same conclusions as me by the time you read back to this post I'll be really surprised.

PS. Baseball is not gay.

[sadesdrk]

Okay...I just went through all the pages I missed out on, and I'm going to have to say that you are really reaching for those gay conotations, friend. I'm not buying any of it. Not because I don't like the idea, but because your examples are weak.

My mom told me a mistake she saw in the movie. I'm going to look for it the next time I see LOTR. It's in the scene where Frodo and Sam are leaving home, and Sam talks about taking one more step will be the furthest he's ever been from home, apparently, a car drives by in the foreground.*shrugs shoulders* I don't know if that's true or not...it'll be fun to look for it though, huh?

[Yoda]

Really? I never noticed it. I heard, instead, though, that the scarecrow (or Sam, not sure which) jumps from place to place as the shots go back and forth there. I also heard that the biggest mistake in the movie involves those giant statues: apparently in one shot they're both holding up their left hands, or something, but in another, one has his right up. Oops! :eek: That's a big one.

[sadesdrk]

I was such an awestruck mess, I didn't notice anything. I'm sure that in the scheme of things...it doesn't matter or distract from the film.

[Sullivan]

IN REPLY TO SUNFROGLAND:

Dude. Seek proffessional help. Go, now, run. Before it's too late.

[The Silver Bullet]

I've heard of the car in the background.

By the way, Fellowship of the Ring won best film at whatever awards were just last night. At least my last night.

On something. Yesterday.

[Holden Pike]

It was the first annual AFI Awards, held Saturday night in Los Angeles. The Fellowshhip of the Ring was named Best Picture of the Year, winning over nine other nominees.

The other major awards (with only four nominees per category) went to Robert Altman as director of Gosford Park, Denzel Washington as actor for Training Day, Sissy Spacek as actress for In the Bedroom, Gene Hackman for supporting actor in The Royal Tenenbaums, and Jennifer Connelley as best supporting actress for A Beautiful Mind. The other awards went to Christopher Nolan for writing Memento, Roger Deakins for lensing The Man Who Wasn't There, Jim Bilcock for editing Moulin Rouge, Craig Armstrong for scoring Moulin Rouge, and the crews of The Fellowship of the Ring for both production design & digital effects.

The other nine nominated films chosen for the Best Picture category were A Beautiful Mind, Black Hawk Down, In the Bedroom, The Man Who Wasn't There, Memento, Monster's Ball, Moulin Rouge, Mullholland Drive, and Shrek.

The Awards and nominations were voted upon by about a hundred folks drawn from different comittees, made up of film critics, filmmakers, film historians, and AFI trustees. They also gave awards for television. Time will tell if their choices predict or influence what The Academy does. The Screen Actor's Guild Awards, which just became a public televised event about seven years ago, has been a pretty accurate gauge of how the Oscars will turn out in the acting categories. Of course since their Guild membership makes up a good percentage of the Academy voters, that only makes sense.

[The Silver Bullet]

Continue this AFI and awards talk in the Oscars thread Holden. I'd like to see how you think it's going to pan out now that this has been and you've yourself seen some of the other films.

The Globes are usually the biggest gauge though.

[Monkeypunch]

Okay, I am one of the only voices of dissent here, but Lord of the Rings just didn't stick with me. At all. I kind of liked it when I saw it, but now it's like I know I won't be back for the sequels. The first one was too...British. Not in a good, Monty Python and the Holy Grail or Trainspotting kind of way, but in a really dry, emotionless way. They ran and fought various things, nobody really became a standout actor, I never really cared too much about what happens, I suppose you have to be a Tolkien fan to get it. I wouldn't doubt that this will be the Star Wars of it's generation, but I'm not of it's generation, so it didn't really impress me.

[Yoda]

How are you not of it's generation? Everyone alive for it is of it's generation. :) Anyway, you may not like it and all, but there's no way it's just for Tolkien fans. It's getting praise from many people who did not read the books. It wouldn't be grossing so much if it didn't appeal to the masses.

[L .B . Jeffries]

Well What can I say I watch LOTR Fellowship of the rings yesterday and it is now my favorite Peter Jackson Film. I voted for Bad Taste but I hadn't seen this movie yet now I have and it's his BEST.

Okay first off I haven't read the book so I thought that you have to read it to really understand it but after a lot of people posts on this site saying that it doesn't matter if you've read the book or not I decided to go and boy you guys were right.

I sat there in the theatre the movie starts up and i'm like this is good than there's this massive sweeping shot of a battle scene people and creature falling over cliffs being cut to pieces. than there's arrows flying all over the place the swords come out ***** my jaw grops from that point on and that's like a minute into the film I'm in love with this film.

The CGI blended perfectly with the Cinemtography and with the storytelling of the movie. I thought the cast did a great job. I think it should be a contender to win for best picture. Peter Jackson has done a tremendous job with this picture he really made some great choices on how he wanted the film to look the pace the acting the way the story unfolds.

I also was suprised with some of the actors cause I didn't know they were in the film in the first place Christopher Lee was great and I think casted pefect and fit like a glove to his role.

My favorite character is Viggo Mortensen Aragorn/Strider he kick some serious butt in this movie. but there was so many great character's it hard to just pick one from such a great cast.

I have a Question I want to ask when are the other parts to the story coming out? does anyone know.

[Yoda]

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers - December of 2002
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King - December of 2003.

Long wait, eh? :)

[spudracer]

And don't forget, if you have Rush Hour 2 on DVD, you can watch that glorious trailer in Widescreen over and over and over and over. :)

[henry hill]

Why didn't Gwaihir, greatest of all the eagles of the North, just pick the Ring up from BagEnd and drop it in Mount Doom, maybe take Frodo with him. The 9 where in the Shire unable to catch him. Movie over in 30mins, not 9hours. Don't suppose that makes for such superb entertainment though?

[Yoda]

Sorry, I moved this to another thread. I hope you don't mind. :)

I think the thing here is that a big hacking eagle would get noticed. It would still take the eagle at LEAST several days to fly all the way to Mordor: you don't think he'd get shot down big time? The entire point of The Fellowship is that they need a small group of people to avoid detection, because they can't win in any battle or conflict that is blatant or obvious.

[Sullivan]

Originally posted by goodf3lla
Why didn't Gwaihir, greatest of all the eagles of the North, just pick the Ring up from BagEnd and drop it in Mount Doom, maybe take Frodo with him. The 9 where in the Shire unable to catch him. Movie over in 30mins, not 9hours. Don't suppose that makes for such superb entertainment though?

I believe this is because (as told in the books, and as shown in FOTR) the Cracks of Doom are actually *inside* the mountain. Gwaihir is great for flying, but not so good a choice if he has to land, "walk" down some passages, and toss the thing over the edge. It's not like there's an open caldera you can drop the thing in from 30,000 feet or something.

Out of curiosity, why do people feel the need to say "Why didn't...." or "Why don't....." or "A better way...." or "They SHOULD have...." I mean, come on. The story is the story: nobody's gonna jump in and revise it, on the fly, because of your whims. So what's the point in trying to suggest a better way?

Want to see something other than what Tolkien wrote? Write your own book.

[Yoda]

Rough quote:

"Don't you know, child, that no one is ever told what would have happened?" - Aslan, The Chronicles of Narnia

[Sullivan]

Yes. YES. Precisely.

Good one, T. :)

[spudracer]

Originally posted by Sullivan
Out of curiosity, why do people feel the need to say "Why didn't...." or "Why don't....." or "A better way...." or "They SHOULD have...." I mean, come on. The story is the story: nobody's gonna jump in and revise it, on the fly, because of your whims. So what's the point in trying to suggest a better way?

Do those that criticize, or critique LOTR: FOTR, deconstruct other movies based on books as well simply because they find them hard to understand? Just wondering...

[henry hill]

I deconstruct everything, whether I like it or not. I can't help it :(

[Guy]

no offense to any of you, but after reading most of this thread I found some of the replies kind of pushy.

IMO The Two Towers and Return of the King are far superior to Fellowship, so we are all in for a big ride over the next two years!

I thought a good idea would be to get a group of maybe 1000 eagles, put Frodo on top of one with the ring, and about 20 hobbits on others and have all one thousand fly to Mount Doom. Obviously many will be killed but what are the chances that the one with Frodo on top would. Gandalf could use a protection spell on Frodo's eagle, and voila!

Also, what was the deal with mithral. If I was in charge of the fellowship I'd give everyone in the group some mithral armor, helmets and shields. I guess it's too rare though :furious:

[Guy]

or another idea that would work..

send 200 eagles flying at mount doom from every direction.

send 5 fellowships out, with only one that has frodo and aragon in it.

and send an army to attack mordir.

the nazgul would be drawn to frodo and the real fellowship but aragon will beat them off easily (like he did at the night camp). after that, as they near mordir, a human / elf army attacks, and by then the 200 eagles arrive. Legolas, Frodo and Aragon get on an eagle and charge mount doom while the human / elf army is attacking. If the nazgul try to take out the eagle, Legolas and Aragorn will be on the eagle protecting Frodo.

the evil army couldn't focus on getting Frodo because they're busy defending themselves.

Tell me that's not a good plan! ;)

[The Silver Bullet]

'Tis an alright plan, but they'd be going to the wrong place.

The cracks of doom or in Mordor.

;)

[Yoda]

Originally posted by Guy
Tell me that's not a good plan! ;)
Okay: that's not a good plan. :D

The film misrepresented Aragorn's strength considerably. In the books, he'd, even when teamed with, say, Legolas or Glorfindel, wouldn't have much hope of fighting off 4 or 5 Nazgul. The film had them looking cool at first, but they became total wusses on Weathertop...no way in hizzell Aragorn could take them all out.

BTW: I don't think an Eagle can carry more than one person.

Part of the plan is a good idea...and it shows up in the books. In the third book, one of the reasons Frodo makes it to Mount Doom is because, in Mordor's front gate, so to speak, there's a big comotion. The WHOLE point is to be quiet about things, though. It can't look like some big plan in any way...and two hobbits sneaking into the back of Mordor while every other good guy in the whole flippin' world (I exaggerate, of course) is on the other side of Mordor (roughly...you know what I mean) attacking goes along with that perfectly.

[Sullivan]

Originally posted by spudracer


Do those that criticize, or critique LOTR: FOTR, deconstruct other movies based on books as well simply because they find them hard to understand? Just wondering...

I have no problem with people who "deconstruct" a movie or book because they don't understand it: that's just analytical thinking. What I dislike is revisionist thinking, of which there seems to be quite a bit about, in this thread.

[spudracer]

Those, and I'm included, are simpy the ones who never got the book and are trying to understand it now. :)

[Guy]

Originally posted by Sullivan
What I dislike is revisionist thinking, of which there seems to be quite a bit about, in this thread.

I don't understand why you make such a big deal out of it. Personally I think it's fun to think of different strategies in different situations. I'm not putting down the actual story, just thinking of different ways it could be done (even if they wouldn't work :o).

[Sullivan]

Where's the big deal? All I'm doin' here is making a few comments and answering a few questions. I don't see that as a big deal.

You're free to speculate all you like. But there's a clear difference (in my mind at least) between descriptive and prospcriptive speculation. Saying "They could have done this...." doesn't bother me, but saying "They SHOULD have done this..." does, for some reason.