RotK...Official "I've seen it" thread...

Remove all ads!

Well...I've seen it now too! Wow! What a ride!!! I can't wait to see the extended edition, because you can tell the little details that were taken out.

Overall, I thought it was a great movie! The whole Shelob sequence is incredible!!! The Ride of the Rohirrim and the battle of Pellenor Fields was spectacular - and so was Minas Tirith!!

The ending seemed a little rushed, but there was so much to get in, I can live with it. Overall, a great movie!!! But for all you purists out there, IT'S NOT THE BOOKS! But go, buy some popcorn, and enjoy the ride!!!

 

I saw it and thought it was a good to very good flick but it wasn't great. I really, really thought the ending dragged on. I talked to the folks I went with who never had read the book and this was the general consensus. They also didn't think it was as good as the second film (I suspect the end hurt it in a lot of folks' eyes.)

The directing was good but not great. Same thing with the acting. The story was of course very good (I don't care that much about how he changed it from the book).

All in all very good. Not as good as Master and Commander though in my opinion and I don't think it deserves an award for Best Picture and I don't think Peter Jackson deserves a Best Director award.

 

Lotsa spoilers:

Man, I saw it last night, and it was a good movie. I just can't say great because so many of the scenes were rushed. The ride-through of Isengard should have been cut out altogether instead of just using it as an excuse to find the palantir (which served no purpose except to divide Merry and Pippin). After the big build-up for Shelob's lair, I was disappointed by how easily Sam laid the smack down. In fact, Sam becoming some sort of uber fighter who takes three orcs solo wasn't believable. If he could do that, why didn't he take them out when they first picked Frodo up?

The battle scenes were truly great. Legolas doing his Mary Lou Retton routine didn't bother me. And I didn't mind so much Faramir's battle consisting of only a charge and his horse dragging him back to Minas Tirith. In fact, the battle scenes are enough of a reason to buy the DVD.

The ending, however, was all goofed up. I was disappointed that the conflict in the Shire wasn't included. Not because I wanted to see another battle scene but because putting things right at home -- and seeing the difference in Frodo and the hobbits after their journey -- was a great way to end the story.

Jackson could've done away with one or more of the fades to black, but the story ends as pretty much all stories should: With a vaguely British guy sitting in his home.

 

Awesome... Just... Awesome...

/me trundles off to write a review

 

@BTA

Yeah, you're right, one of this reviewer's charms is that he gets things mixed up on purpose, but is very funny. He is also, unfortunately, profane, so I can't link to the entire review with enduring the wrath of one of our humourless Admins or Moderator

Here's another snippet

Ya gotta love the Independent internet reviewer

 

OK, now that I've seen all three I will comment on the trilogy.

The things that make me like this trilogy the most are the music and the scenery. They are simply off the hook.

But story, pacing, and characters are given the bad end of the deal. I'm not asking that the movies be 100% faithful to the books, but the movies bite off more than they can chew and handle in even 3+ hours time each. There are too many characters, too many storylines, too many locations that they all have to be rushed through and not treated with the amount of time and respect that they demand. The story is too epic to be glossed over. It becomes a jumbled mess of flashbacks, dreams, and visions of the future. Gandalf has to sit on a balcony spouting exposition like some kind of bad commentator telling us all about what Frodo and Sam are facing and what Sauron's up to when Gandalf's not even there. The pacing of these movies does not do the epicness of them justice.

I said this after seeing Fellowship, and I'll say it again, it would have been far better if the trilogy of books had been extended to more than just three really long movies. Forget trying to fit three epic books into three epic movies, it didn't work as well as it could have been. I know from a producer and studio standpoint this sounds like suicide, but all they had to do was do sign on to cover Fellowship in two movies(leaner individually, but better quality put together) and get a fanbase from that. Once the studios saw the good reception, they'd be willing to sign on for four more films, to cover Two Towers and Return of the King. But no, everyone doubts fans would want to see the 6th LOTR film a few years down the road. They need to stop doubting the fans. I'll forgo speedy releases to the box office for better quality anyday.

That said, what the **** was up with the beginning of RotK. I thought I was seeing a spoof at first with those two hobbits fishing, and that one makes a really funny face underwater. What the crap. What a way to begin a movie as epic as RotK. I understand it was to explain how Gollum found the ring, but did it have to be so corny? I am not against corniness here and there, but it didn't seem to fit with the rest of the movie.

And the ending, the actual throwing the Ring into Mount Doom, seemed so anti-climatic. I mean this was the whole point of the movies, so much fanfare, so much hype, all trumped up, and all it was Frodo and Gollum dancing a jig on a cliff. I wished there was at least some redemption from Gollum, and was sad at his fate. But Frodo, man how I wished he had toppled over that edge.

Well, my favorite part of all three movies is the beginning half of Fellowship. It's the least rushed, spends the most time getting to know characters, and just makes the most sense (with a few exceptions). The last half of Fellowship I hate, feeling it is way too rushed and badly done. Two Towers and RotK fall in between my favorite and least favorite parts of Fellowship, although I think I liked Two Towers slightly better overall than RotK.

Favorite characters are Aragorn, Elrond, and Treebeard. Although RotK made me appreciate Faramir and Theoden more.

Again, I cannot express how much I love the music and the scenery. And the epic battles were great. But I cannot express how much I am upset with the handling of the story, the pacing, and character development, etc. I think more time onscreen could have worked these issues out.

All in all, LotR makes my third favorite movie series. Star Wars (prequels and sequels) and Indiana Jones are still my first and second favorites.

 

Finally saw it, so now I don't have to vex over the content and Hacken Slash and Death Rabbit's commentary. It was very good overall, and the battle scenes were exceptional. If I were to have a complaint, it would simply be that so much was cut out, there would be things that don't make sense if you didn't read the books. For example, the whole ending with the Gray Havens, if you didn't read the book, you wouldn't have a clue as to WHY they were going to the Gray Havens, or that Elrond, Galadriel and Gandalf all had rings of power (even though Gandalf wasn't an elf.) Another example is that they introduce the Palantir, but don't really do anything with it. It's been a while since I read the books, but I was under the impression that Denethor (sp?) was driven insane by the use of the Palantir. He certainly does go insane, but there really never is an explanation as to why. Finally - and I could be dead wrong with this but I don't think so - Elrond shows up to give Aragorn the sword that was reforged. Wasn't this (in the books) supposed to have been given to him in the Fellowship? That's a small point really, but some of the things don't make sense if you've never read the books. However, from what I hear, the director's cut is 65 minutes longer than the released movie, so I imagine a whole lot of what was missed will be included there.

 

Big B.

I do agree on most of the points you make, especially the rushing of certain areas. I could certainly have liked a few extra Eomer moments for example.

As for your idea of 6 films, i am not sure it could work. Think about the layout of the books.
There are of course six books, but in true Tolkein style, the endings of most of them are lacking in style somewhat. Could you really imagine people getting excited about a 2 hour movie of Frodo travelling through the shire and onto rivendell, only to almost die at the end. There is really no way the films could of worked in this format, and no, i don't beleive there would be that many fans who would be prepared to wait.

But everything else you say i think i agree with.

Still amazing films though.

 

Why not, it sounds a heck of a lot like what they did in the second Matrix film? Err, actually come to think of it that is a pretty good answer to why not.

 

They don't mess up Eowyn, do they?

BTW, I like that they made Arwen a real character and have put some conflict into that relationship. Tolkein himself wanted more in-depth female characters and male/female relationships, but he found that he had problems writing women in any way that satisfied him. He was way ahead of his time in his opinion of women, which is obvious when you look at Galadriel and Eowyn.

 

Nah, Eowyn's fine...But the ending shows her with "you know who" but gives no explanation as to why or how they'd met in the movie. The Houses of Healing scene in the book is completely missing.

 

The Houses of Healing was filmed, but cut to keep the movie at 3-1/2 hours. It, along with the fate of Saruman will be included on the EE dvd. This scene will explain how "you know who" gets together with "you know who"

There are rumours that the EE dvd will be almost 4-1/2 hours long!

 

Wow! I am pretty much blown away! Jackson has done a marvelous job of interpreting Tolkiens work, heck, he even improved it quite a bit and now I am tihnkging the ending. Jackson's ending is lightyears better than Tolkien's. However as many has said the film do suffer from everything they had to remove but I honestly cant say how they could have put it all into a movie which was going up in the cinemas.

I thought the scene in Mt. Doom was a bit prolonged, it didnt fit with my image from the book and I think it would ahve been more dramatic if Gollum would just had jumped Frodo, bitten of the ring and then plunged to his death.
The movie had virtually no breathers, it was full throttle throughout it all, it would have been nice with some small pauses in between all the cataclysmic events.

 

I thought that the movie was okay, if you ignore the fact that you read the books.

I know you shouldn't compare, so if you just go for how good the movie was, I think it was great.

My favorite scene was after Legolas takes out the big Oiliphaunt with all of the guys on it and lands right in front of Gimili. Gimili's line was hillarious.

 

so, if i haven't watch the movie, can i post here?

guess i just did.

i am waiting for a collector's edition LoTR dvds set and watch them all in once, one day, non stop.

 

I emjoyed the film. I thought the ending went on a bit long, Gollum really annoyed me, and by the end felt like screaming at Frodo to get on the damn boat, but other than that it was good. The Merry/Pippin scenes in the city (I can never remember which is which - they both look the same to me) were the parts I enjoyed most.

 

LOTR is the best movie I've ever seen (I think of all of them as one movie)

It blows Braveheart out of the water

 

I saw RotK yesterday, and it was an awesome movie. No more, no less. Well, maybe a little more. For the lenght of it, it could have been much better. Better then the first two, and as my friend put it, "It raped The Matrix", but it still could have been better.