Submit Your
Comedy
List
The deadline for the Top Comedies of All Time list is coming up! Submit your ballot now, or read about it here

The MoFo Top 100 of the 2000s Countdown

→ in
Tools    





Have seen so far: 33 - The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King - A good movie to end the trilogy and loved the battle scenes in this one.
Have not seen so far: 65

My Ballots so far
#1 - The Departed (2006)
#9 - Spider Man 2 (2004)
#15 - The Dark Knight (2008)
#20 - Hot Fuzz (2007)
#21 - The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)
One Pointer - #25 - Anger Management (2003)
__________________
My 30 Favorite 80's Movies
https://www.movieforums.com/communit...ad.php?t=63396

My 30 Favorite 90's Movies
https://www.movieforums.com/communit...ad.php?t=63868



Return of the King was my #5.

It is my personal favorite of the three and the only one from the trilogy, which I haven't pulled down even a little bit in my rating and opinion of it.

I still love the trilogy as a whole and as one long journey and obviously I very much enjoy the first one and how that sets up the world and introduces us to everything. It's my second favorite. Two Towers is a difficult middle piece but it has some amazing sequences as well.

But somehow the conclusive finale of Return of the King and how everything that was set up comes together simply works amazing for me. And with such big epic films you often find yourself waiting for those moments or scenes that you really love - and the third film has many of my favorite sequences in the entire trilogy. The opening flashback that shows us more of Smeagol becoming Gollum, the sequence of Pippin lighting the beacon, the song Pippin sings to the King while his son rides to his death, the spider sequence, the "you bow to no one", I mean... I could go on and on.

Indeed, it's big and very long. It's also the most effects heavy. But I just can't help but see this as one of the greatest examples of a movie done on such scale. Again, the whole trilogy deserves that praise but when this list forces you to pick I'm on team Return of the King.



Not about ROTK but just about the LOTR trilogy in general:

One of the most significant anecdotes, for me, is how often I hear people say that they never watch fantasy, but for some reason they liked this. I've heard that from or about maybe a half-dozen people just offline.



Remember those three years when we got a new LOTR film every Christmas. That was great.
__________________
"Don't be so gloomy. After all it's not that awful. Like the fella says, in Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock."



I don’t like heavy fantasy. The only reason why I saw the other two is because my best friend wanted me to watch them with her. She’s also the reason why I have seen a couple of the Harry Potter movies. A different friend is to be blamed for me having seen two of the Twilight movies. I hated all of those movies and have no desire to finish any of those series.
Yeah, I've got a friend like this too. Which is why I've seen all the LotR films and 3 HP (though I've completely blanked one of them to the point I couldn't tell you which one it was) but she was also the reason I saw Sin City, so you take the rough with the smooth, I guess.

Ah, the King of the Edgers. Long before all but the darkest corners of the internet knew what it was this film was spreading the word... And **** me, it's dull. Actually, I don't know that because I remember all but nothing of it, apart from a couple of the 'endings', but I remember being bored and thinking it dull, so I'm going with that. I knew that @mark f will be shaking his head as he reads that even before I read his post, but that's OK. One, because he's used to me and two, because for all our differences, we'll always have Jaws.
__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.



The stuff about hating fantasy actually ties in perfectly to the cross-current discussion I'm having about what our tastes would look like without other people (and our preconceptions about them) around to influence them.

In theory there's nothing less plausible (or sillier, or dorkier, or whatever) about fantasy (IE: dwarves and elves and magic) than a lot of sci-fi films, or talking toys and animals, or what have you, but there's still this "I like all music except country and rap" thing about it that hurts it coming right out of the gate, for reasons that are confusing and difficult to unpack, but which I suspect are at least sometimes tied into latent ideas about what kinds of people like it.

Anyway, they're exceptional films because they use a remarkable setting to tell essentially human stories, like any good film does. The stuff surrounding that is, while sometimes pretty cool, mostly immaterial. The genre is not the person, it's just the clothes they're wearing.



Awwww look at the ickle fluffy-wuffy bunny
The genre is not the person, it's just the clothes they're wearing.
In that case my genre today is definitely 'respectable slob'
__________________
201620172018201920202021+
NomsPre-1930 Countdown


terrible, 0/5, not enough puppies.



Not about ROTK but just about the LOTR trilogy in general:

One of the most significant anecdotes, for me, is how often I hear people say that they never watch fantasy, but for some reason they liked this. I've heard that from or about maybe a half-dozen people just offline.
My room mate is one of these people. He has no interest in typical high fantasy elements, but finds the story and characters very compelling. He even watched the extended editions! Sometimes good films can transcend genre barriers.



We've gone on holiday by mistake
Preparing my points about why ROTK is the weakest of the trilogy like I do everytime it shows up on a countdown
__________________



Rotk made my list. Despite my interest in LOTR waning in the last few years I can’t deny what a stellar trilogy it is all around. I already knew I wanted a career in film when these movies came out but I’ve heard from countless folks slightly younger than me how influential the special features on the DVDs were to them in pursuing a career in filmmaking. To inspire a generation of filmmakers is something LOTR should be more recognized for as well.



I think this sentiment is clearly inconsistent with the act of replying and expressing disappointment over and over.
Isn't life disappointing?

I think you'll find expressing a sentiment positively, as an aspiration, lands very differently than the exact same concept expressed as disappointment or disdain
Because people hate when others do not agree with them. And it's true for both herd mentality and individuals. That's how most people are conditioned to operate - in information bubbles that in no way challenge their views. Also, people usually mistake the tone with the content, often discarding value only because it's been brought to them in a coarse way.

I agree...and that's what we're seeing all over this thread. The list itself is almost secondary to the outpouring of personal testimonials that show up almost every day, when something someone loves shows up
For the most part, people are talking about why they like a film, not why it's personal to them. But as I've said, I'm not expecting them to bare themselves on a public forum.

I've touched on this before, but I think this is a false dichotomy. I think appealing to large numbers of people--breadth rather than depth, to put it simply--is a form of quality in and of itself.
Communism does that, ya know. I think you need to allow some exceptions in. :P But yeah, I have nothing against popular cinema, as long as it is good.

There's a weird blind spot here for some cinephiles, I think, where they agree quality is subjective, but still think of "quality" as only existing along that one axis.
Please, let's not get into the "taste is subjective" kinda discussion again.

which things to use to measure worth in the first place.
You can do this in several ways, and most people will inevitably use the worst way with films made by parachuters, as Jean-Marie Straub calls them.

One of them is boredom. If you absorb enough film, I think it's very difficult not to be become jaded, to the point where it's exciting (titillating, even) to see anything extreme or unusual even if it's not good. You kind of say as much when you talk about "bad" lists that are still interesting because they're weird.
That's ludicrous. You can do better than that.

Liking something just because it's different is basically liking something for what it's not, which is a reactionary posture towards art that, if not checked, drives us towards the extreme and away from even the most basic storytelling principles.
That's ludicrous. x2 But yeah, for your convenience and to confirm what you wrote: "Cinema is dead. No more films are possible.".

Aye, but the thought is more like: would we like the same things? It seems clear to me that we would not. Your average moviegoer would probably like more weird things, as you want them to...but you would probably like more mainstream things, as well.

We're all human. There's no way for us to listen to a song or watch a film, or hell, even see a film's marketing without immediately thinking of what kind of person it's "supposed" to appeal to, and if we don't think of ourselves as that kind of person, it will influence our reaction to it.
I'm quite sure we'd all like more mainstream things, with less known works having it even harder than now. Incidentally, to anyone whom this applies to, I love lots of mainstream things so implying I don't or that my approach is "elitist" is simply uninformed.



Return of the King got my LotR vote. It's just epic in every sense. One of the few super long movies I watched many times but the runtime didn't seem to bother me because what was happening didn't make it feel that way. Like Nolan's Batman movies we probably won't ever see them made like this ever again for better or for worse.



In theory there's nothing less plausible (or sillier, or dorkier, or whatever) about fantasy (IE: dwarves and elves and magic) than a lot of sci-fi films, or talking toys and animals, or what have you, but there's still this "I like all music except country and rap" thing about it that hurts it coming right out of the gate, for reasons that are confusing and difficult to unpack, but which I suspect are at least sometimes tied into latent ideas about what kinds of people like it.
I dislike most live-action Sci-Fi for the same reason I dislike live-action Fantasy and live-action Musicals: it puts too much strain on my ability to suspend disbelief. Animated movies get more of a pass from me on account of the fact that absolutely nothing on the screen is real.

As to preconceived notions as to who watches them: Given the extreme popularity of LOTR, Harry Potter, GOT (which even I watched all of), super hero stuff, etc. my perception is that practically everyone watches them. Also I already know I’m a dork. I attend the Renaissance Faire in costume. But I still hate the vast majority of live-action fantasy.



Awards




Now to the awards received by The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King...

  • Swept the Academy Awards with 11, including Best Picture and Director (Peter Jackson)
  • BAFTA Film Award for Best Film, Best Screenplay, Best Cinematography, and Best Visual Effects
  • SAG Award for Outstanding Performance by an Ensemble Cast
  • Saturn Award for Best Fantasy Film, Best Actor (Elijah Wood), Best Supporting Actor (Sean Astin), Best Director (Jackson), and 4 more.
  • AFI Award for Movie of the Year
  • Awards Circuit Community Award for Best Picture of the Decade and Best Directing of the Decade (Jackson)
  • Directors Guild of America Award for Outstanding Directorial Achievement (Jackson)
  • Empire Award for Best Film, Best British Actor (Andy Serkis), and Scene of the Year (ride of the Rohirrim)
  • Golden Globe Award for Best Director (Jackson), Best Score (Howard Shore), Best Song, and Best Picture
  • Grammy Award for Best Score and Best Song ("Into the West")
  • Jupiter Award for Best International Film and Best International Director (Jackson)
  • Golden Satellite Award for Best Overall DVD

__________________
Check out my podcast: The Movie Loot!



With this latest entry, Peter Jackson joins the list of directors that have multiple films in the countdown; both parts of his LOTR trilogy (The Two Towers at #15, and now The Return of the King at #8).



With this latest entry, Peter Jackson joins the list of directors that have multiple films in the countdown; both parts of his LOTR trilogy (The Two Towers at #15, and now The Return of the King at #8).
Yeah it's a shame he won't get another one



Isn't life disappointing?
Disappointment is the result of two distinct things: reality, and our expectations. We control one of those things.

Because people hate when others do not agree with them. And it's true for both herd mentality and individuals. That's how most people are conditioned to operate - in information bubbles that in no way challenge their views. Also, people usually mistake the tone with the content, often discarding value only because it's been brought to them in a coarse way.
Right, but all of this applies in both directions: you express your disdain because you "hate when others do not agree with [you]." Yes, even "outsiders" are in bubbles, they're just inverted.

None of this is germane to the point, though, which is ultimately about what your goal is. Is it to help people expand their horizons, or is it to express superiority and/or anger towards them? If it's the latter, then by all means, continue to express disdain towards popular films. But if it's actually the former, you can express the same idea as a positive, via advocacy for other things. If you don't, you can see how it would naturally lead someone to wonder whether the expression of disdain is, in fact, the actual goal.

For the most part, people are talking about why they like a film, not why it's personal to them.
I don't think this is actually accurate, and to the degree it is I think it'll require that "personal" be quite narrow, to the point where I'd have to question its value as a measure. But I can't really disagree without knowing a lot more about what you mean here.

I have nothing against popular cinema, as long as it is good.
Well, yeah, but the whole point is that I think "good" is being measured along an insufficient number of metrics. I think there's an unexamined assumption here that quality is based on the depth with which a work of art can touch someone, and not the number of people it can touch. There's a lot of "it's popular BUT it's not..." which implies that popularity is completely unrelated to value, and I don't think that's actually true. That's what I mean when I say quality is only being measured on one axis.

That's ludicrous. You can do better than that.
And I'm sure you can do better than just saying something is ludicrous without explaining yourself, but here we are.

But yeah, I don't think it's a coincidence that people who absorb a lot of any kind of art tend to value novelty and experimentation more. There's some degree to which that's good, but it's not magic. It's not suddenly immune to all the same kinds of human failings as any other posture. Of course people become jaded and bored when they experience a lot of something. How could they not? How could they really think that their preference for extreme things over time is just their real/pure taste (as if there even is such a thing!), and not the result of that experience?

I'm quite sure we'd all like more mainstream things, with less known works having it even harder than now. Incidentally, to anyone whom this applies to, I love lots of mainstream things so implying I don't or that my approach is "elitist" is simply uninformed.
"Some of my best friends are Marvel movies!"



I dislike most live-action Sci-Fi for the same reason I dislike live-action Fantasy and live-action Musicals: it puts too much strain on my ability to suspend disbelief. Animated movies get more of a pass from me on account of the fact that absolutely nothing on the screen is real.
I'm not really sure how to address that last bit (which is obviously key, since a rat controlling a dude through his hair is way crazier than elves existing). I guess I can see why that might be true as a sort of first blush reaction, but it also suggests the evaluation is happening on a level totally disconnected from the story itself. Hell, a lot of the overtly fantasy stuff is CGI, anyway, which isn't meaningfully different from animation. I doubt we can draw a line here that encapsulates live action fantasy without including lots of other things that don't prompt the same reaction.

I think pretty much everybody (myself included), at least occasionally, has a gut level reaction to something and can't always craft a series of rules or principles that really explain it, since there's almost always exceptions to those rules. Really knowing why we react the way do to things is pretty hard, but I also think it's a crucial part of developing a deeper appreciation for any art form.

As to preconceived notions as to who watches them: Given the extreme popularity of LOTR, Harry Potter, GOT (which even I watched all of), super hero stuff, etc. my perception is that practically everyone watches them. Also I already know I’m a dork. I attend the Renaissance Faire in costume. But I still hate the vast majority of live-action fantasy.
Fair, though it's definitely been my experience that a) most people have something dorky they like but b) they still find other people's dorky things to be particularly dorky. I've seen Star Wars fans make fun of Harry Potter fans in ways that really lack any self-awareness, and vice-versa. Being a big ol' nerd for something doesn't have any social detriment any more.



You ready? You look ready
Gotta say it's been particularly painful to see my No.1 go at No.53 and The Dark Knight, a film that would not make the consideration list for me, go No.10.
I feel so alone.
None of my top 5 even gonna make this list at all. It’s cold out here



Hell, a lot of the overtly fantasy stuff is CGI, anyway, which isn't meaningfully different from animation. I doubt we can draw a line here that encapsulates live action fantasy without including lots of other things that don't prompt the same reaction.
Yeah but the CGI in fantasy movies is attempting to look real. In animation, nothing on the screen is real and I’m not expected to believe otherwise.

Peter Jackson wants me to believe that this hideous and obnoxious thing is real and is really interacting with humans (or hobbits or whatever):