PDA

View Full Version : The Return of the King movie regards


XERXES
08-13-2003, 07:27 AM
first of all nobody needs to say the books are better or blah or what, we know ;)

I just wanted to express my opinion aboot this upcoming movie.
*spoilers for those who have not read(the white spoiler box isnt there...weird)*





First of all of course since it never happened at the end of The Two Towers (because they went to Osgiliath for some...weird reason, and then that random Warg attack...). I am expecting the opening to be the encounter with Shelob.

Now what I am afraid of is this...Peter Jackson will make the Battle of the Pelennor Fields aproximately 75% of the movie. I believe he will do this (75% is only a slight exageration) because if you have read TTT you know that the Battle of Hornburg (Helms Deep...it aquired that name in the movie for some reason too) was about half of the running time of TTT yet it was only a few pages in the book. Considering the Battle of the Pelennor Fields is a LOT of pages in ROTK, I think that Jackson will make this battle on screen waaayy too long and not leave time for Aragorn and the Path of the Dead and for Sam and Frodo at the very end. I doubt we will even get a chance to see Pippin and Merry's individual "quests" from the books. =\

I just hope he doesnt butcher the way the story is told, it seems like the book itself could be directly put onto screen with little or no changes easily and itl still work well. This is arguably Jackson's versions of this epic story...but I dunno if I have the patience to watch one battle scene that is ridiculously long.

I understand how he made TTT, it seems like it was the best way to do it. The book is told in two seperate stories and the only way to "convert" that was to weave the two seperate stories together.

Anybody else have any comments??

Kstar__2
08-13-2003, 09:57 AM
well, i was a little dissapointed by the trailer (unofficial official one) and i have absolutely no idea how he wants to put ALL the battles in there:confused:

BawBag™
08-13-2003, 10:46 AM
You have to understand that not everything can be put into the films. Hence the reason for the extended DVD's being released. I thought that TTT wasn't as good as FOTR, but the main focus of the films is about the ring, and Frodos' journey.

I don't think Jackson will include the Paths of the Dead. It has little to do with the above. (Unless you have read the books).

The whole point in the adaptations is to tell the main story as entertainingly as possibly, and filter out as much of the things regarding to Tolkiens 'invented history' as possible.

Face it, this film will be the icing on the cake. Just sit back and relax. (With a good book - I recommend The Lord of the Rings)

:p

toms
08-13-2003, 12:01 PM
i think jackson has been doing an excellent job, but he has a terribly difficult task for the third film as there are a hell of a lot of important things for him to add in, not to mention the ones he didn't put at the end of TTT.

Its going to be hard for the film not to seem very similar to TTT with another big battle in it. Plus i don't know how he will deal with the march to the black gate. I suspect that these 2 final battles will be combined into one.

I didn't like TTT quite as much as FOTR, and i prefered the extended cut of FOTR to the theatrical. On the other hand, i hope he doesn't add a lot of pointless stuff to TTT extended cut just bacause he feels he has to.

ROTK on the other hand seems to me that it will DEFINATELY need the extended cut to fill in everything.

I would think that with the success of the last 2 he might have the luxury of making ROTK even longer, as it it the final film and he already has a big fan baase who are going to watch it whatever.

|GG|Carl
08-13-2003, 12:56 PM
Well, BigTeddyPaul told me that they would take away the funniest part of he book;
The part when the hobbits gets back to shire, and Saroman and Wormtounge has taken over it.
REALLY BAD!
But, Frodo sees this in galadriels mirror in FOTR, doesn't he? So, maybe this will be on the DVD...

legameboy
08-13-2003, 04:09 PM
Well, they will have the Paths of the Dead, the dead are a nice part of the Battle of Pellenor fields, AND I read this at http://www.theonering.net (they are mostly reliable). Also, according to an interview with Elijah Wood, this film is going to be like a war movie. Which makes me kind of sad, the books were much more more than just a war movie. Anyway, I'm certianly going to see it even if they don't include some important scenes (I'll just critisize them to death :p (joking)). I'll just wait to buy the Extended DVD after that. :D

XERXES
08-14-2003, 03:30 AM
war movie eh? Better get some asprin before I see it then =\

also, what is the deal with these said "extended versions" seriously, are they just another way for them to rob you of your money?

The Cheat
08-14-2003, 03:38 AM
the extended editions are made to compliment the theatrical versions, they make the movie more like the book while the theatrical versions are made to keep the movie at a steady pace which is why most of the scenes from the extended editions are removed from the theatrical version

XERXES
08-14-2003, 03:41 AM
so basically its another DVD you gotta buy that has a ridiculous cost yet its nearly the same as my FORT regular dvd?

edit: Why didnt Jackson just put the deleted scenes on the regular DVD in like a Deleted Scenes menu like 50 million other DVDs. But guess not he hadda make an entirely different one that way his profit from DVDs would double.

The Cheat
08-14-2003, 03:48 AM
none of the extras from the regular dvd appear on the extended one they are all new features with a new version of the movie

XERXES
08-14-2003, 03:54 AM
yes but...I've noticed the extras on the regular DVD all draw from the same interviews. I wouldnt be surprised if the newer extras used the same interviews as well.

The Cheat
08-14-2003, 04:29 AM
well i know that the extended edition has a lot more behind the scenes stuff like animatronics that were used in planning the movie and stuff like that

Khier
08-14-2003, 05:55 AM
I could be wrong, but isn't the extended version of FOTR like 40 minutes of deleted stuff? I think it's because considering that it's already 3 hours long, audiences wouldn't want to be sitting for nearly another hour in a theater.

XERXES
08-14-2003, 07:47 AM
Originally posted by Khier Serakk
I could be wrong, but isn't the extended version of FOTR like 40 minutes of deleted stuff? I think it's because considering that it's already 3 hours long, audiences wouldn't want to be sitting for nearly another hour in a theater. I think that with each new movie that is big, they purposely make it longer than the last. Just think, we are complaining about these 3 hours epics now...in 5-ish years we will be complaining about 5 hour epics in the theaters, lol. It is all a conspiracy to rob us of our time! :eek:

Seriously look at Finding Nemo, its a long movie as well. My gf made me take her to see it (and yes I liked it, despite my excuses to not go) and the kids in there started getting really antsy towards the end. How could disney expect kids to sit still that long. I think its all pointing towards the conspiracy, getting the kids used to sitting for ridiculously long movies at a young age.

So it seems like ROTK will be a "Saving Private Ryan in medieval style" cool, but that means I gotta buy more asprin >_<




btw the conspiracy stuff was a silly joke, but what if its true!!:eek:

The Cheat
08-14-2003, 12:25 PM
well the extended edition of the two towers will be 222 minutes which is 3 hours 42 minutes (thats long)

goes and loses time watching fotr

toms
08-14-2003, 12:31 PM
The extended version of FOTR had an extension to almost EVERY SCENE in the film, plus a number of new scenes that were highly important in to book. Apart possibly from the Aragon singing bit i would say that every new scene they added was one of the scenes i came out of the cinema wishing they hadn't cut.

It is all re-edited together, with an entirely new score. So it would never have worked as deleted scenes. Hell, the entire opening introduction to the shire is totally different with a voice over by Bilbo rather than Gandalf in his cart.

Oddly, although it is longer, i found it seemed shorter... must be the new pacing, or the fact there is more stuff packed in.

Also, it is split over 2 dvds, and then you have 2 dvds of extras. And they are all decent extras, unlike the promotional crap they included as extras in the 1st release.


My only worry is that i can't think of many important points that were missed out of TTT, so im not sure what he is going to add to the extended cut. (Except more ents :cool: )
I just hope he doesn't feel OBLIGED to add stuff that isn't needed, just to please a studio who want to sell lots of extended cuts.

Just because te extended cut of FOTR was way better than the theatrical, doesn't mean the extended cut of TTT has to be.
THe directors cut of T2 was excellent, but the directors cut of aliens sucked and totally ruined the pacing of the film.

El Sitherino
08-14-2003, 01:50 PM
I like watching the entire extended versions of LoTR. I don't see why people complain about the time. If the movie is entertaining you won't even realize how much time has gone by. That's how I feel when I watch LoTR.

legameboy
08-14-2003, 05:32 PM
^Excactly!^

I love the Extended DVDs, they have so much stuff (I haven't seen all of it yet) it'll keep you busy ;).

ZBomber
08-14-2003, 05:49 PM
Saw the first LOTR. Hated it. :)

I never saw the Second one. I mgiht rent the DVD or soemthing, sometime. Same with the next one. ;)

The Cheat
08-14-2003, 11:02 PM
wow that is the first time i have heard somebody say something bad about fotr, i thought it was great but everybody has their own opinion, i personally cant wait for return of the king to come out

ZBomber
08-14-2003, 11:12 PM
Originally posted by The Cheat
wow that is the first time i have heard somebody say something bad about fotr, i thought it was great but everybody has their own opinion, i personally cant wait for return of the king to come out

Yeh.. I just found it boring... *shrugs*

The Cheat
08-14-2003, 11:28 PM
well everybody has their own opinion, i couldnt get enough of lotr when i saw the first, i was dying to see the last two

XERXES
08-15-2003, 04:49 AM
Jackson better not add the Shelob scene in as an "extra cut" for TTT. It needs to be in the regular storyline so that we know why Sam is having to drag Frodo to Mt. Doom.

ckcsaber
08-15-2003, 05:42 AM
Originally posted by XERXES
Jackson better not add the Shelob scene in as an "extra cut" for TTT. It needs to be in the regular storyline so that we know why Sam is having to drag Frodo to Mt. Doom.

If PJ did that, I would not even bother seeing the movie. Instead I would create a life-size Peter Jackson doll and stab the hell out of it.

toms
08-15-2003, 12:16 PM
its odd to remember now, but when i first saw FOTR i didn't really like it.
Luckily a week or so later i was stuck in a hotel on my own on a business trip with nothing to do and everything else looked aweful so i watched it again. LOVED IT. Im not sure what changed, but it is now one of my favorite films of all time. Maybe it just takes a while to grow on you.

My housemate found it boring too. I can see why some people might not like it, it is fairly slowly paced... and in these days of non stop action films anything with even a moderate pace can seem slow (eg: The Hulk, or try watching any OLD action film. After 10 minutes you will be wondering where all the explosions are... :D

Ironically, i expect most of the people who found FOTR boring would have liked TTT, as it was much faster in pacing, with a fair bit more action. Almost more like a war movie. But of course my housemate refused to see it as she hadn't liked the 1st one.

Me, i actually prefer the slower pace of the 1st one, as it gives more of an epic, unique feel to it. But that is just me.

The Cheat
08-15-2003, 01:07 PM
yeah the 2nd definitly had more action in it then the first one which was cool, not totally needed, so if you thought the first was boring you may want to consider seeing to second as it has much faster pacing and more action then the first does

Mike Windu
08-16-2003, 11:04 PM
omg ttt sucked imo compared to fotr, they messed up helms deep so badly, cutting to the ents and frodo and back and forth like that... i woulda preferred it if they waited at least till the end of the first day to cut to frodo, then back to helms deep, then to the ents, and then finish off helms deep

but what would REALLY tick me off, is this

at the end of the movie it says: to be concluded

haha that would suck so bad :P shame on u who dunno wtat i'm talking bout :D

Kurgan
08-17-2003, 01:32 AM
Personally I think some theaters are just gutless.

I mean, it USED to be that a 3 hour or longer film got a short "intermission" somewhere along the line, to allow patrons to go the bathroom and stretch their sore butts and (most importantly for the theater) buy more popcorn and snacks.

And if they leave early? Who cares! They've already paid for the tickets and initial snacks! And the ushers can always ask to see their tickets if they try to sneak in part way.

But now, no... the longest films are 3 hours and no longer, and you get a sore bottom and bladder. ; p

Is getting people in to see the next movie 10 minutes earlier REALLY that important?

The other deal is that film festivals can go on much longer than 3 hours, and they get breaks.

If intermissions were brought back, I think audiences would put up with longer movies, and not just hardcore fans.


I knew of course that the extended cut of FOTR was coming out, so I purposely held off buying any other version of it or seeing it anywhere until it came out, and then bought it. I'm glad I did, it was definately an improvement.

It's true, they released seperate full frame and widescreen DVD's then a few months later the Extended Cuts. They charged double price for the "collector's edition" that was just the extended cut with a previously released National Geographic disc (which was mostly fluff and only 1 hour long) and some quirkly "bookends."

I guess you could say they needed the money to finish the SFX for the extended scenes, so selling the theatrical versions allowed them the extra cash to do this...

Thus I think if you're going to get Two Towers, get the Extended Cut that comes out in November, unless you just HAVE to have a little Golem statue to put on your mantle. ; )

MagBag
08-17-2003, 04:10 PM
I believe that the Paths of the Dead will be in the movie. On a side note, Peter Jackson is going to direct the new King-Kong movie. Not sure if that has begun yet or what but...there you go. I thought the movies were wonderful but that is just me.

BawBag™
08-17-2003, 04:53 PM
Originally posted by Kurgan
Personally I think some theaters are just gutless.
I mean, it USED to be that a 3 hour or longer film got a short "intermission" somewhere along the line, to allow patrons to go the bathroom and stretch their sore butts and (most importantly for the theater) buy more popcorn and snacks.
Agree. Although, the theatre in my town show movies between January and March, and when they screened TTT there was an intermission. Plus they had a bar, nothing like a couple of beers during a flick. :D

El Sitherino
08-17-2003, 05:30 PM
Originally posted by BawBag™
Agree. Although, the theatre in my town show movies between January and March, and when they screened TTT there was an intermission. Plus they had a bar, nothing like a couple of beers during a flick. :D see they need to bring back beer and intermissions to theatres.:cool:

XERXES
08-17-2003, 08:32 PM
Originally posted by Kurgan
Personally I think some theaters are just gutless.

I mean, it USED to be that a 3 hour or longer film got a short "intermission" somewhere along the line, to allow patrons to go the bathroom and stretch their sore butts and (most importantly for the theater) buy more popcorn and snacks.

I told you!! Its a conspiracy!!:p

Kylilin
08-17-2003, 10:10 PM
I remember going to see Dances with Wolves in the theater, that had an intermission. That was also over ten years ago.

Pertaing to LotR, I heard that the scouring of the shire chapter would not be included in the movie, which is ok, its a cool chapter, but its really not that big a deal, excluding the death of Saruman.

I've seen the extended version of FotR, its cool, a few of the extra scenes don't really pertain to the movie that they are in, but they fit in very well with the rest of the movies.

The Cheat
08-17-2003, 11:49 PM
gods and generals had an intermission and im glad that was long and boring

toms
08-18-2003, 12:47 PM
i think it is a case of the number of showings they can pack in each day. I can't remember the details, but earlier in the year there were 2 films out, but one was 2/12 hars and the other was 90 minutes... so of course they made far more money on the 90 minute ones as they could show it nearly twice as many times per day. it sucked though. probably had eddie murphy in it :rolleyes:

I never really liked breaks (last film i saw with one was Heat), but then i don't need to go to the bathroom every 5 minutes (unless i have been on the beer:D )

Im assuming they are going to put a fair bit more Ents into the extended cut, plus hopefully the Hurons and the forest marching to Helm's Deep. Im waiting until november for my DVD. :)

The Cheat
08-18-2003, 12:54 PM
yeah im going to be getting the extended edition because it has more movie, it has a dts and commentary track, and it has more cool features

|GG|Carl
08-19-2003, 05:16 PM
Originally posted by The Cheat
yeah im going to be getting the extended edition because it has more movie, it has a dts and commentary track, and it has more cool features
YOU FORGOT TO MENTION THE GOLLUM STATUE!

I'm gonna get the extended edition too...

I liked the FOTR extended edition, but I never bought it, I saw it at a friend of mine. It was good, but it was a bit long!