R
Recoil101
Guest
- Thread starter
- #31
Liv Tyler doesnt ming.. but then everyone is entitled to thier opinions... and have you actually read the book????
Liv Tyler doesnt ming.. but then everyone is entitled to thier opinions... and have you actually read the book????
L
legendario
Guest
- Thread starter
- #32
My sentiments exactly....he always manages to bore the tits off of me.
B
bodhi
Guest
- Thread starter
- #33
Yes she does. She is about as attractive as the woman in the Electric 6 video. And yes, I have read the book (albeit about 7 years ago), and whilst the Ents did make a large appearance in the book, doesn't mean they should have spent so long in the film now does it. And the bit with Liv Tyler doesn't appear in the book at all (It's in Appendix A at the back of the thrid book. If Tolkein didn't think it was worth inclusion, I don't see why it should be in the film tbh).
M
Moving Target
Guest
- Thread starter
- #34
Damn Gollum and his schizophrenia (that really pissed me off)
T
Testin da Cable
Guest
- Thread starter
- #35
It didn't live up to my expectations at all. The "love interest" and anything else that has to do with Arwen is way overdone. The Ents taking Isengard to bits is crammed into 5 minutes, the battle at Helm's Deep is built up overly long [even though it rocks]. Faramir is a cunt. Muh. I did like Frodo being more and more taken by the ring, Gollum/Smeagol's split personality, Eomer and the wargs. Those huge wolves rocked. I'm a bitch, I know.
D
danger
Guest
- Thread starter
- #36
Yeah faramir's cuntishness was ghey.... In the book he didn't drag frodo + sam bag to Gondor did he? And he didn't go ghey and try to steal the ring either... IIRC frodo offered him the ring (as the dumbass prick did all the time) and Faramir didn't take it?! I don't remember 'cause I haven't read the books in ages .
Elija Wood or whatever his name is really pisses me off with his campness and general shit actingness. "No Sam, I feel so sorry for him." And besides he's friends with that Osbourne cunt....
On the other hand Ian McKellan is one of the greateast actors ever (thinks back to such dodgy films as the keep and Apt pupil but hey
)....
I won't compare TTT to FotR though... In my mind they're the same film.
Despite certain things that pissed me off though (as above including all the unecessary Arwen scenes... including the boring as fuck one with Elrond in and Legolas surfing on the shield <- seriously ghey) The film did kick major butt
Elija Wood or whatever his name is really pisses me off with his campness and general shit actingness. "No Sam, I feel so sorry for him." And besides he's friends with that Osbourne cunt....
On the other hand Ian McKellan is one of the greateast actors ever (thinks back to such dodgy films as the keep and Apt pupil but hey
)....I won't compare TTT to FotR though... In my mind they're the same film.
Despite certain things that pissed me off though (as above including all the unecessary Arwen scenes... including the boring as fuck one with Elrond in and Legolas surfing on the shield <- seriously ghey) The film did kick major butt
D
danger
Guest
- Thread starter
- #37
Sorry to be a real cunt... but this is the one thing I will always be cunty about....
GOLUMN / TYLER DURDEN and characters like that are NOT examples of schizophrenia..... the illness is dissociative identity disorder (formerly known as multiple personality disorder) and is EXTREMELY rare.... unlike schizophrenia which falls into three types "paranoid, catatonic and disorganised" although general symptons include paranoia, dilusions of grandure etc
Apologies to be a cunt as I said... I had a cousin who was Schizophrenic and I feel an urge to educate the masses who make the above assumption
</boring as fuck rant>
M
Moving Target
Guest
- Thread starter
- #38
You know what I mean...(it was still shit)
D
doh_boy
Guest
- Thread starter
- #39
About faramir that kinda annoyed me because iirc faramir is the younger clever one who was taught, a little, by gandalf and so was a top geezer. Also as I remember he refuses the ring saying something along the lines of it's evil and must be destroyed.
As for the ents they're my second favourite characters in the book(s) and would have like to see more of them (especially his home and drink/soup thingy he gives the hobbits). Also wasn't shadowfax a black horse? I distinctly remember thinking so, if not its kinda bizarre having a white horse called shadowfax.
It troubled me in the first film when I found out Liv tyler was starring as Arwen coz imho the arwen character has an incredibly small part(no jokes please) and isn't too important until maybe the end of the last book.
Gollum was cool but I always thought the gollum sound was a sort of loud swallow almost akin to a frog/toad which was kind of what he was supposed to look like anyway.
When gandalf/McKellen winked as they went into the golden hall I just thought cool!
As for the ents they're my second favourite characters in the book(s) and would have like to see more of them (especially his home and drink/soup thingy he gives the hobbits). Also wasn't shadowfax a black horse? I distinctly remember thinking so, if not its kinda bizarre having a white horse called shadowfax.
It troubled me in the first film when I found out Liv tyler was starring as Arwen coz imho the arwen character has an incredibly small part(no jokes please) and isn't too important until maybe the end of the last book.
Gollum was cool but I always thought the gollum sound was a sort of loud swallow almost akin to a frog/toad which was kind of what he was supposed to look like anyway.
When gandalf/McKellen winked as they went into the golden hall I just thought cool!
B
bodhi
Guest
- Thread starter
- #40
Originally posted by ^Danger
Despite certain things that pissed me off though (as above including all the unecessary Arwen scenes... including the boring as fuck one with Elrond in and Legolas surfing on the shield <- seriously ghey) The film did kick major butt
During the scene with Elrond and Arwen was anyone else thinking "One of these lives has a future. The other does not.". Or was that just me?
Oh and before TTT they had trailers for 8 Mile and Matrix 2 and 3. Both kicked serious ass.
L
legendario
Guest
- Thread starter
- #41
I never got any of those. Bastards
Are they still releasing 2 and 3 withing a few months of each other?
/edit
forget it ... just checked, Reloaded is out on the 23rd of may and
Revolutions is out november.
M
Mr. 47
Guest
- Thread starter
- #42
seen it twice already...
the golum / smegol model was differnt to the one used in the first film... but is was a damn good model, hair and all sorts. and the split presonality was very well done (although you lot don't seem to apreciate peter jacksons genius.) and said arwen moments got annoying.
at wtf was all that warg crap about, interesting yes, but not really in the book, and aragorn shouldn't have made with the falling off the cliff
they could also spend more time on the ents attacking isenguard/othonac
and the tower of othanac was far too ornate, in the books it was smooth...
the golum / smegol model was differnt to the one used in the first film... but is was a damn good model, hair and all sorts. and the split presonality was very well done (although you lot don't seem to apreciate peter jacksons genius.) and said arwen moments got annoying.
at wtf was all that warg crap about, interesting yes, but not really in the book, and aragorn shouldn't have made with the falling off the cliff
they could also spend more time on the ents attacking isenguard/othonac
and the tower of othanac was far too ornate, in the books it was smooth...
D
doh_boy
Guest
- Thread starter
- #43
Oh aye, the ent's say(in the book) that 'many ents broke their nails on the smooth face on orthanc' they couldn't find any handholds or anything. It is said that higher up it gets ornate but far enough away for no creature to be able to take advantage.
O
old.?
Guest
- Thread starter
- #44
Another great film. I really can't wait to see the third installment. After that I'll read the books as they seem more serious.
R
Recoil101
Guest
- Thread starter
- #45
Saw it for the third time tonight ... I love it
D
danger
Guest
- Thread starter
- #46
LOL yeah during the first one when Elrond first turns up I whispered to my mate "Tell me Mr Anderson... how do you plan to make a phone call... if you can't use your mouth?" .... Then some beefy guy gave me a dodgy glare so I was like YEAH WHATEVER
.... ok noo I shut my yap Blasphemy! heh no seriously though read all the books.. INCLUDING ALL 5 APPENDACIES(sp?)
While the films do rule the books just own it on so many levels...
How many of you guys have seen the extended edition of tFoTR? What did you think of the extra scenes?
There was one scene that really should of made the final cut... The one at the council meeting where Gandalf utters the tongue of Mordor and everything goes black... I don't know why they cut that... It was soo cool! I can see why they cut all the stuff from the beginning though.. too much baggage. The extra battle scenes at the end were kick ass though
E
ECA
Guest
- Thread starter
- #47
LOTR was shit.
I may explain this in further detail at some other juncture in time.
I may explain this in further detail at some other juncture in time.
D
danger
Guest
- Thread starter
- #48
I feel I should respond with something harsh but... hey I'm knackered... It owns you fool.... also I'm glad you took the time to present your argument clearly!
R
Recoil101
Guest
- Thread starter
- #49
Although its 30ish mins extra it actually seems to make the movie "flow" better than the original....
Cant wait for the extended TTT
T
Testin da Cable
Guest
- Thread starter
- #50
exactly
T
theriven
Guest
- Thread starter
- #51
Havent seen the second film yet, and have no intention of watching it till i can dl it from somewhere.
The first film DOES NOT follow the book at all,if anything its based on the book, (im still waiting for the definative film version) with chapter names slung in as lines in ther film its "a shortcut to mushrooms" being a prime example).
Its not only the camp cunt, tom bombadil, who happens to be one of the most powerfull men alive and is basicly of the same sort of thing as gandalf, his wife goldbury who is a water spirit, again a maia that was left out, what happend to farmer maggot? the house at crickhollow?the whole scene at the prancing pony was fucked up, WTF was arwen doing just after weathertop as it took iirc a few weeks to reach elrond and even then she wasnt in the book untill later, saruman didnt make the urik-hai as they were made during the second age by sauron, all saruman done was corruped the strains of man by breeding with orcs then sent them as spies against the shire/bree why is sams donky called bill? explain that without adding bill ferny, hes got a job in the third book where he basicly owns the shire as "sharky's" man,sams gift? what gift?.
Galadrial's mirror? cant remember that bit, well, the felling of the shire anyway, balin in moria?.
The whole fecking film was wrong.
Ok admitedly the book would take too long to film in its entirety, but mayby thats why it was 2 books in each book,(ya might have to read to work that one out) but if anyone wants to do a film of one of the best selling books of the 20th centuary why not do it right?
Please feel free to pick holes.
The first film DOES NOT follow the book at all,if anything its based on the book, (im still waiting for the definative film version) with chapter names slung in as lines in ther film its "a shortcut to mushrooms" being a prime example).
Its not only the camp cunt, tom bombadil, who happens to be one of the most powerfull men alive and is basicly of the same sort of thing as gandalf, his wife goldbury who is a water spirit, again a maia that was left out, what happend to farmer maggot? the house at crickhollow?the whole scene at the prancing pony was fucked up, WTF was arwen doing just after weathertop as it took iirc a few weeks to reach elrond and even then she wasnt in the book untill later, saruman didnt make the urik-hai as they were made during the second age by sauron, all saruman done was corruped the strains of man by breeding with orcs then sent them as spies against the shire/bree why is sams donky called bill? explain that without adding bill ferny, hes got a job in the third book where he basicly owns the shire as "sharky's" man,sams gift? what gift?.
Galadrial's mirror? cant remember that bit, well, the felling of the shire anyway, balin in moria?.
The whole fecking film was wrong.
Ok admitedly the book would take too long to film in its entirety, but mayby thats why it was 2 books in each book,(ya might have to read to work that one out) but if anyone wants to do a film of one of the best selling books of the 20th centuary why not do it right?
Please feel free to pick holes.
D
danger
Guest
- Thread starter
- #52
Err the 6 books to which you refere were split by the publishers... Tolkien orriginally wrote the whole thing in one....
Anyway TBH the bombadil section while cool was not entirely essential to the overall plot and FFS the film was 3 hours long as it was people are unlikely to be comfortable sitting for 4-5 hours watching a film... While I'm a big fan of the books, if you live in the real world you realise certain scenes will have to be taken out/slightly changed....
OK I agree with you on the Arwen bit... where she takes frodo back to the shire when it was a Dude Elf in the book that was gay... and when they decided frodo should be the one to solve the riddle at the gate of Moria instead of pippin or merry whichever of the two it was....
The only infuriating bit was, as you said, when Saruman claimed to have invented the Urukai...
Still I thought the films 0wned anyway... there have been many worse adaptations of great books...
Anyway TBH the bombadil section while cool was not entirely essential to the overall plot and FFS the film was 3 hours long as it was people are unlikely to be comfortable sitting for 4-5 hours watching a film... While I'm a big fan of the books, if you live in the real world you realise certain scenes will have to be taken out/slightly changed....
OK I agree with you on the Arwen bit... where she takes frodo back to the shire when it was a Dude Elf in the book that was gay... and when they decided frodo should be the one to solve the riddle at the gate of Moria instead of pippin or merry whichever of the two it was....
The only infuriating bit was, as you said, when Saruman claimed to have invented the Urukai...
Still I thought the films 0wned anyway... there have been many worse adaptations of great books...
D
danger
Guest
- Thread starter
- #53
Yeah I think you're right.... Like certain scenes from the unextended versions seem slightly silly after watching the extended version heh
T
theriven
Guest
- Thread starter
- #54
Originally posted by ^Danger
While I'm a big fan of the books, if you live in the real world you realise certain scenes will have to be taken out/slightly changed....
OK I agree with you on the Arwen bit... where she takes frodo back to the shire when it was a Dude Elf in the book that was gay... and when they decided frodo should be the one to solve the riddle at the gate of Moria instead of pippin or merry whichever of the two it was....
I personally thought they were very well done I got annoyed at the Urukai bit as well... OK in fact TBH everything you mentioned semi annoyed me as well... but it didn't change the fact that I loved the films
While I'm a big fan of the books, if you live in the real world you realise certain scenes will have to be taken out/slightly changed....
I agree, but the whole book was changed.
when it was a Dude Elf in the book..
Lol that elf dude was an elf lord, one of the most powerfull elf's there were. according to cristopher tolkien he was prolly named after an elf of the light who died helping beren gain the silmarill from morgoths crown.
and when they decided frodo should be the one to solve the riddle at the gate of Moria instead of pippin or merry whichever of the two it was....
Merry
I did like the film but as i said i still would love a definative version.
There is no reason why the whole thing could not be writen as a film (ok mayby length). Taken as a film alone it was ok, but coulda been better.
Btw the publishers never split the book, tolkien did it himself as he was constantly working on the history of middle earth (started in the earliest form in 1913 and finished uncompleted in 1974 or somink like that, when he carked it).
His son cristopher then went on to write at least 12 books based on those writings and also published the sillmarilion, sorry but the last 1 i read was during the 1980'S i could be wrong but ffs its a long time ago now.
Like i said , for a film based on the books it was good, but it doesn't live up to the hype.
On a side note, who the fuck sticks sean bean as borimer?
D
danger
Guest
- Thread starter
- #55
Damn some cunt in the general forums mentioned what I said before and I believed him
That's a very rash and untrue statement to be honest... I think they did a pretty good job of preserving enough of the book to keep it true to it while changing enough to make the film exciting and interesting enough to keep an audience of not just tolkien fanatics but also people who haven't read any of the books before!
I bought a copy of the Silmarillion the other day... shame it was left unfinished... How (dis)organised is it?
And damn you replied to my previous post before I finished editing it
T
theriven
Guest
- Thread starter
- #56
He actualy done a fecking good job of compounding over 50 years of writings into a small book.
but its like if you can imagen star wars as a 15 min film .
Some bloke goes into space, meets a nasty bloke,learns how to swing a sword thats all glowing, meets a short green bastard,learns how to swing his glow stick better,finds out nasty bloke is also daddy, then saves the universe.
its not quite the same
If you can get your hands on all cristophers writing then its very much worth it.
spellings shite but heh
but its like if you can imagen star wars as a 15 min film .
Some bloke goes into space, meets a nasty bloke,learns how to swing a sword thats all glowing, meets a short green bastard,learns how to swing his glow stick better,finds out nasty bloke is also daddy, then saves the universe.
its not quite the same
If you can get your hands on all cristophers writing then its very much worth it.
spellings shite but heh
S
Sar
Guest
- Thread starter
- #57
The publishers were the ones to split the book up into 3.
T
theriven
Guest
- Thread starter
- #58
No tolkien split the book, and it was published in two years. I think 1954/55
He always meant the books to be in 6 parts but the publishers realised then in groups of 2. They were writen as a prologue to the hobbit but turned more into a prequel for the sillmarilion.
I think if you look that up ill be correct.
He always meant the books to be in 6 parts but the publishers realised then in groups of 2. They were writen as a prologue to the hobbit but turned more into a prequel for the sillmarilion.
I think if you look that up ill be correct.
B
bodhi
Guest
- Thread starter
- #59
theriven talking shit eh? no change there then.
T
theriven
Guest
- Thread starter
- #60
look it up cunt boy.
prove me wrong or shut the fuck up