(no subject)
Dec. 20th, 2001 09:58 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
inahandbasketooooooooooooo man!
Um. You. the one with the eyes.
Step away from the computer and go see Lord of the Rings.
NOW!
Cause I know you're a dork/geek like the rest of us and have read the trilogy at least twice.
You'll love it.
Ahem.
Ok, so anyway, I'm alive. Have to take a test in the morning at 9:30, which sucks. But then the girl and I are meeting my sister and her boyfriend in the city for lunch at the best place in the world.
They have a beer list that's 10 pages long, largest in Philadelphia, and they're so damned tasty...
(I recommend the hoegartten (I can't spell in beliginish...))
And, um. yeah. ok. go to the theater and find the largest screen you can.
Ok, so I LOVED the movie.
Naturally they changed some parts to make it flow better in a visual medium, but all in all it's extremely true to the book. Between this, the recent Dune (sci-fi channel) and Harry Potter I think hollywood is finally catching on with how to rerender a book as a movie.
Cons:
There was no part that I hated, and only a few that I found noticibly annoying.
#1: I loved Tom Bombidill. I really hate that they took out that and the barrow-wights section, but I can live with it. That was my major issue.
#2: They made Boromir a little excessively evil, which is very in line with how he acts in the book, but I think that they exagerated it a little too much.
#3: Rivendell was beautiful, but not as I imagined it. Just a difference of opinion.
#4: elrond is the Agent from the Matrix. I really feel bad for this actor, because the Matrix just ruined him for any other roles. When you first meet him he says "Welcome to Rivendell.... Mister Baggins..." And for a second you're totally sure with all your heart and mind that he's about to say "Mr. Anderson..." It's painful, but oh well. He makes a decent elrond other than that.
#5: I'm very conflicted with their representation of Galadriel. you'll know what I'm talking about when you see it. Just kind of... overboard... or something.
Ok, that seemed like a lot of Cons, but for a 3 hour movie of a book that I know practically by heart that's exceedingly little negativity.
Pros:
Characters:
Gandalf, Legolas, Bilbo, Aragorn, fucking dead on. (they cut most of legolas's lines, pissed me off. he rocks.) These characters are amazingly cast and portrayed. Perfect I might say. some guy on slashdot summed up Legolas best when he said "where the hell did they find him? Go up in a tree and pick him out of it?" Gandalf is about exactly as I imagined him. Beard's a little short, but it makes life so much easier to not have a full body beard for the movie... Oh, and look closely at his staff, his pipe fits into the top of it. ;o) Bilbo is only in it a bit, but they got him very very well. And Aragorn (strider) is just great. I was afraid he'd be too pretty-boyish as he is the "man" in the movie, but he's down and dirty in just the right ways. It's great.
Visuals:
Filmed in New Zealand, it's just awe inspiring. Everything from the Shire to the Mines of Moria, to Mount Doom just make your jaw drop. Seamless special effects added onto the Landscape to make it really REALLY authentic.
Isengard (sarumon's tower) is just perfectly recreated, and the head of his staff is a miniature of the tower. Nice little touch.
The rest was pretty good, with the Elven woods (lothlorien I believe) being absolutely beautiful. The city in the trees is beautiful.
Special Effects:
only really noticed that they were computer graphics in 2 places: the elven city mentioned above was a little funny in it's lighting, but still really nice. And one flyby of some hilltop ruins looked a little two dimensional. But considering the amount of computer animation in this movie it's incredible that it's so unnoticible.
Plot changes:
Mostly unnoticible unless you really know the story. Gandalf should have escaped the tower by the time the hobbits got to weathertop, and his battle there with the flashing lights never happens. Fits the movie format better, and less to explain later, but still. Other little things like that. Frodo isn't invisible when he takes the boat and leaves, and he really should be, but again it makes things a little easier I guess. The way he slips the ring on by accident in the Inn at Brie is a little different, but again saves time.
And as this is a three hour movie already, it's good they cut it a lot. If they hadn't, they would've had to make it two movies and have 6 movies instead of 3. But damnit I wish they'd made it 6 hours long instead. It was SOOOOOOO good.
I've never been able to sit through a full two hour movie without wondering what time it was, but I was amazed when they wrapped it all up and it was 2 in the morning. I felt like it was just getting started.
Those of you who know me know that I'm not a movie freak. only movie I loved was the original starwars trilogy and I only saw the rerelease twice in the theater. this will be the first movie that I see at LEAST twice in the theaters. Probably 3 or 4 times.
Please, let's send hollywood a message that we LIKE well done epic movies with character development, plot, and beautiful sceenery and maybe we'll get more. Go see it this weekend and make it the highest grossing movie release ever. Please.
You won't be disapointed. I gaa-run-tee it.
Ok, off to study for morning test, only took 20 minutes to type this up. ;o)
Hope you appreciate it!
Um. You. the one with the eyes.
Step away from the computer and go see Lord of the Rings.
NOW!
Cause I know you're a dork/geek like the rest of us and have read the trilogy at least twice.
You'll love it.
Ahem.
Ok, so anyway, I'm alive. Have to take a test in the morning at 9:30, which sucks. But then the girl and I are meeting my sister and her boyfriend in the city for lunch at the best place in the world.
They have a beer list that's 10 pages long, largest in Philadelphia, and they're so damned tasty...
(I recommend the hoegartten (I can't spell in beliginish...))
And, um. yeah. ok. go to the theater and find the largest screen you can.
Ok, so I LOVED the movie.
Naturally they changed some parts to make it flow better in a visual medium, but all in all it's extremely true to the book. Between this, the recent Dune (sci-fi channel) and Harry Potter I think hollywood is finally catching on with how to rerender a book as a movie.
Cons:
There was no part that I hated, and only a few that I found noticibly annoying.
#1: I loved Tom Bombidill. I really hate that they took out that and the barrow-wights section, but I can live with it. That was my major issue.
#2: They made Boromir a little excessively evil, which is very in line with how he acts in the book, but I think that they exagerated it a little too much.
#3: Rivendell was beautiful, but not as I imagined it. Just a difference of opinion.
#4: elrond is the Agent from the Matrix. I really feel bad for this actor, because the Matrix just ruined him for any other roles. When you first meet him he says "Welcome to Rivendell.... Mister Baggins..." And for a second you're totally sure with all your heart and mind that he's about to say "Mr. Anderson..." It's painful, but oh well. He makes a decent elrond other than that.
#5: I'm very conflicted with their representation of Galadriel. you'll know what I'm talking about when you see it. Just kind of... overboard... or something.
Ok, that seemed like a lot of Cons, but for a 3 hour movie of a book that I know practically by heart that's exceedingly little negativity.
Pros:
Characters:
Gandalf, Legolas, Bilbo, Aragorn, fucking dead on. (they cut most of legolas's lines, pissed me off. he rocks.) These characters are amazingly cast and portrayed. Perfect I might say. some guy on slashdot summed up Legolas best when he said "where the hell did they find him? Go up in a tree and pick him out of it?" Gandalf is about exactly as I imagined him. Beard's a little short, but it makes life so much easier to not have a full body beard for the movie... Oh, and look closely at his staff, his pipe fits into the top of it. ;o) Bilbo is only in it a bit, but they got him very very well. And Aragorn (strider) is just great. I was afraid he'd be too pretty-boyish as he is the "man" in the movie, but he's down and dirty in just the right ways. It's great.
Visuals:
Filmed in New Zealand, it's just awe inspiring. Everything from the Shire to the Mines of Moria, to Mount Doom just make your jaw drop. Seamless special effects added onto the Landscape to make it really REALLY authentic.
Isengard (sarumon's tower) is just perfectly recreated, and the head of his staff is a miniature of the tower. Nice little touch.
The rest was pretty good, with the Elven woods (lothlorien I believe) being absolutely beautiful. The city in the trees is beautiful.
Special Effects:
only really noticed that they were computer graphics in 2 places: the elven city mentioned above was a little funny in it's lighting, but still really nice. And one flyby of some hilltop ruins looked a little two dimensional. But considering the amount of computer animation in this movie it's incredible that it's so unnoticible.
Plot changes:
Mostly unnoticible unless you really know the story. Gandalf should have escaped the tower by the time the hobbits got to weathertop, and his battle there with the flashing lights never happens. Fits the movie format better, and less to explain later, but still. Other little things like that. Frodo isn't invisible when he takes the boat and leaves, and he really should be, but again it makes things a little easier I guess. The way he slips the ring on by accident in the Inn at Brie is a little different, but again saves time.
And as this is a three hour movie already, it's good they cut it a lot. If they hadn't, they would've had to make it two movies and have 6 movies instead of 3. But damnit I wish they'd made it 6 hours long instead. It was SOOOOOOO good.
I've never been able to sit through a full two hour movie without wondering what time it was, but I was amazed when they wrapped it all up and it was 2 in the morning. I felt like it was just getting started.
Those of you who know me know that I'm not a movie freak. only movie I loved was the original starwars trilogy and I only saw the rerelease twice in the theater. this will be the first movie that I see at LEAST twice in the theaters. Probably 3 or 4 times.
Please, let's send hollywood a message that we LIKE well done epic movies with character development, plot, and beautiful sceenery and maybe we'll get more. Go see it this weekend and make it the highest grossing movie release ever. Please.
You won't be disapointed. I gaa-run-tee it.
Ok, off to study for morning test, only took 20 minutes to type this up. ;o)
Hope you appreciate it!
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2001-12-20 07:36 pm (UTC)And keep an eye on the size of the Hobbits, I think there were some SFX/editing slipups there or something, they seem to change sizes between scenes. I have my theories on why (in a technical sense) but I'll keep em to myself.
Cheers!
no subject
Date: 2001-12-20 07:44 pm (UTC)i'm looking quite forward to the movies though.. the books all just seem about 3 times longer than they need to be. :)
no subject
Date: 2001-12-20 07:47 pm (UTC)(that's ok, I never made it through the return of the king (the 3rd one) until last year. Like you said, seemed unnecessarily long.)
you'll love the movie anyway, and it may just inspire you to finally read the books.
As good as the movie is, the books are still better.
Cheers!
no subject
Date: 2001-12-20 08:32 pm (UTC)i can sorta equate this to the star wars stuff.. i had never made it through a star wars movie without falling asleep (and i surely logged at least 7 or 8 attempts) until episode 1 came out.. and i actually sorta liked it. i could have done without jar-jar and some of the action sequences, but there were parts that i really liked.
i think the relation comes mostly to the way things are built up.. the books always seemed to be building up to something that never came.. so i'd give up waiting for it.. the older star wars movies seemed to do the same, but i only have about 30 minutes to get hooked on a movie or else i either change it or fall asleep :)..
:)
Date: 2001-12-21 10:51 pm (UTC)I will be ranting about it shortly in my journal, if I don't fall asleep first, but I just wanted to say- Hugo Weaving (Agent Elrond) deserves better. He's a really good actor, with enormous range. It's too bad his "breakthrough" role in the states was such a creepy one- check him out in Priscilla Queen of the Desert.
Also, the other animation thing I hated was very brief-
when Legolas leaps onto the head of the cave-troll, and it thrashes around- for a split second he stays perpendicular to the head of the troll as if it were upright, and it looks like something out of a 3D war game.
but.
ooh.
goosebumps, and tears, and a big smile.
movies NEVER do that to me.
no subject
As a dork(tm) who's read the book a bunch of times, I'm happy with how things turned out.
Biggest Pro: Legolas. That guy's awesome and they probably did pick that actor out of a tree.
Biggest Con(s): Not enough Legolas and not enough Arwen. Those elven girls just do it for me ;)
Hooray for elves! Love em!
Now I can't wait for the rest of the trilogy :)
What about Sam!
Date: 2001-12-28 10:51 pm (UTC)I was completely impressed by the movie in every sense. Though maybe the Balrog wasn't scary enough. Oh well.
And just so you know where I'm coming from, I read the Hobbit 3 times, Felowship twice, Two Towers one and a half times, and Return once.