VCDQuality Forums - LOTR2 = Good Film or Dog Poop??

Show all 28 posts from this thread on one page

VCDQuality Forums (http://www.vcdhq.com/forum/index.php)
- Movie, movies and more movies! (http://www.vcdhq.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?forumid=14)
-- LOTR2 = Good Film or Dog Poop?? (http://www.vcdhq.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=14195)

Posted by buttheaduk on 01-26-2003 07:59 PM:

LOTR2 = Dog shite

Seriously dude did you like this film?

Posted by kap0n3 on 01-26-2003 08:03 PM:

ummm yes !

__________________
"As far back as I can remember, I've always wanted to be a gangster." -- Henry Hill, Brooklyn, N.Y. 1955.

Posted by bobbystill on 01-26-2003 08:04 PM:

yep liked it

Posted by bertieg on 01-26-2003 08:11 PM:

Thought it was good too.

Posted by kap0n3 on 01-26-2003 08:12 PM:

hehe i got a feeling this thread is going down a one way street

__________________
"As far back as I can remember, I've always wanted to be a gangster." -- Henry Hill, Brooklyn, N.Y. 1955.

Posted by buttheaduk on 01-26-2003 08:15 PM:

OMG, I got bored to death while watching this film! Cant believe so many weirdos here like it

Posted by bobbystill on 01-26-2003 08:23 PM:

you should probably start cleaning your assult rifel
cause its probably gonna win an oscar or 2

Posted by Dwaggy on 01-26-2003 09:21 PM:

I love the movies

I love the books

I wear rubber pants

my middle name is susan

i have a weird zit thingy on my right index finger.

i like ice cream

you like ice cream

your existance is meaningless without ice cream

you want it

you love it

ps. this thread is shit, one line? No reasons to why you didnt like it? Write a review of the movie and define the reasons why you do not like this movie, and why you feel the need to express yourself about it, or shut up.

and now. for something completely different.

__________________

i have sigs off

Posted by tumtum on 01-26-2003 09:32 PM:

I tought the dog was cute.

Posted by PhAnToMs on 01-26-2003 09:38 PM:

i was bored shitless watching the fellowship both times i watched it i almost fell asleep the movie was awsome but boring

i was at the top of my seat the whole two towers it was 100x better than the fellowship

__________________
Jesus fucking christ my sig was huge so Dwaggy replaced it with this message

Posted by dc_man on 01-27-2003 12:34 AM:

Agreed I wasn't bored with FOTR just I enjoyed the two towers so much more. It is now my favorite movie. Im mad it never won at the Golden Globes.

Fucking bullshit. It owns Gangs of New York and The Hours

Posted by walldude on 01-27-2003 06:35 AM:

Yep I thought it was good too. Liked FOTR, but this was much better. Is it fantasy movies in general you don't like or just this one? I can't imagine a fan of the fantasy genre not liking this film. It was just too cool.

Posted by jedi420 on 01-27-2003 07:35 AM:

yeah man gangs of new york was seriously one of the lamest movies i ever seen. but anyways, i dont know why he had to start a post asking if anyone liked TTT. ofcourse some will like it, and others wont. btw i thought it was insane and well worth the money i spent to watch it 4x in the theater.

Posted by dc_man on 01-27-2003 02:09 PM:

4x that's like my friend me however watched it once in theatre, then I got my precious DVDScreener and I've watched it 4 more times since then.

Posted by SINZAR on 01-27-2003 03:48 PM:

i thought it was over rated, i still liked it but didnt think it was "the greatest movie ever" like i've heard some people declare, i dont think its even one of the best 5 movies of the year. i did however enjoy gangs of new york more then the two towers, without that big ass battle at the end two towers woulda been boring.

Posted by The CandyMan on 01-27-2003 04:15 PM:

I think in order to really enjoy the Lord of The Rings Trilogy, you should read the books, and maybe even The Hobbit as well, though that just gives you the back story for FOTR, TTT, and ROTK. I've read all 3 books about 4 times in the past 20 years, and re-read them all just before LOTR came out in 2001. From this, I think I was able to enjoy the movies more, because what was left out I could fill in, and what was not explained well I knew anyway.

The movies are very, very good, and definitely belong in at least the top 10 best movies of 2001 and 2002.

__________________

Posted by walldude on 01-28-2003 03:45 AM:

After seeing FOTR and TTT I read The Hobbit but don't want to read the rest until after I see Return of The King, I have no idea whats going to happen, who's gonna die, and I don't want to spoil it for myself.

Posted by Ocyurus on 01-28-2003 04:39 AM:

quote:
Originally posted by walldude
After seeing FOTR and TTT I read The Hobbit but don't want to read the rest until after I see Return of The King, I have no idea whats going to happen, who's gonna die, and I don't want to spoil it for myself.

I heard that quite a bit from a few people, but what I ask you is why? Why would reading the Lord of the Rings spoil the story for you? Watching to movie without reading them spoiled it more considering the movie just barely includes the basic plot telling you all the important details without letting you in on all the amazing things that happen in between.

But if you do read the books before The Return of the King movie comes out I would highly suggest starting at The Fellowship of the Ring but if you won't then you at least have to start at The Two Towers because they cut out about half of the book (The Battle of the Hornburg (Helm's Deep) was only chapter 7 in a 21 chapter book...)

Posted by jedi420 on 01-28-2003 10:29 AM:

man the books are awesome. return of the king is the best in my opinion.

sinzar i respect your opinion that u liked gangs of new york, but dude, there was NO action, except the first 5 mins. the last action scene would've been awesome, but instead they shot some cannons and the butcher was acting stealhy in the smoke like a ninja..got shanked........the end. wtf why was cameron diaz in the movie? she had no role, all she did was fuck everyone in the 5 points. just like that chick in the 8 mile, all she did was fuck ppl.

anyways for me gangs of new york started off reall well, but got worse as it went on.

Posted by 404notfound on 01-28-2003 11:15 AM:

I dont swing either way on this. I neither think it a great film or a crap film. I find it average. There are better films out there which deserve more recognition.

404

__________________

Posted by Ocyurus on 01-28-2003 05:00 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by 404notfound
There are better films out there which deserve more recognition.

what the Fellowship?

P.S. we need that emoticon on here, until then I will just have to link to it....

Posted by 404notfound on 01-28-2003 05:12 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Ocyurus
what the Fellowship?

What? Are you crazy? No...not the sodding fellowship.

OTHER films. I dunno.. Amelie for example.

404

p.s . Do you mean this emoticon?

__________________

Posted by walldude on 01-28-2003 09:12 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Ocyurus

I heard that quite a bit from a few people, but what I ask you is why? Why would reading the Lord of the Rings spoil the story for you? Watching to movie without reading them spoiled it more considering the movie just barely includes the basic plot telling you all the important details without letting you in on all the amazing things that happen in between.

But if you do read the books before The Return of the King movie comes out I would highly suggest starting at The Fellowship of the Ring but if you won't then you at least have to start at The Two Towers because they cut out about half of the book (The Battle of the Hornburg (Helm's Deep) was only chapter 7 in a 21 chapter book...)

Once I read the books I know everything, who lives, who dies, what happens, I would rather be suprised at the movies, then read the books, then watch the extended versions of the movies on DVD and I'll have all the blanks filled in. Maybe it's just a matter of personal taste.

I do understand what you are saying though, nothing drives me more crazy than people pissing on Star Wars for not having "character development" If you read the books you'll have more character development then you care to deal with. Alot of people are just too fucking lazy to read. At least here we're discussing "when" to read and not "books suck d00d"

And while I agree neither FOTR or TTT is the "greatest" film ever (That would be The Godfather) they are both in my top 10..

Posted by ArchdemoN on 01-29-2003 05:48 PM:

movie was incredible.

i loved it.

Posted by Ocyurus on 01-29-2003 06:28 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by walldude
Once I read the books I know everything, who lives, who dies, what happens, I would rather be suprised at the movies, then read the books, then watch the extended versions of the movies on DVD and I'll have all the blanks filled in. Maybe it's just a matter of personal taste.

I do understand what you are saying though, nothing drives me more crazy than people pissing on Star Wars for not having "character development" If you read the books you'll have more character development then you care to deal with. Alot of people are just too fucking lazy to read. At least here we're discussing "when" to read and not "books suck d00d"

And while I agree neither FOTR or TTT is the "greatest" film ever (That would be The Godfather) they are both in my top 10..

I do understand your view-point (sorta) but my personal opinion would rule that since they took the story from the books and they are simply trying to make a film copy of it wouldn't reading the book be more of a surprise when someone dies or something unexpected happens? A lot of stuff was changed in The Two Towers and personally I would rule that Tolkien's version was MUCH better.

If you watch the movies first then the entire basic plot will already be revealed to you and it will spoil the book's extraordinary detail. I liked knowing the story long before seeing the movie and seeing how Peter Jackson saw the people/places in the story, many were very different to what I originally imagined, and many were exactly the same.

The main problem I have with knowing the story beforehand is my desire to inform all the un-enlightened folk how it ends.

Posted by Pra3t0 on 01-29-2003 07:29 PM:

I didn't like it as much as FOTR.

Here's my list of TTT nitpicks:

1. Merry & Pippin are stuck in the tree for 95% of the movie. Each time a scene returned to them and they were still in the tree I felt it just got to be ridiculous.

2. As soon as Treebeard opened his eyes and started walking around the movie started having a "Neverending Story" feel to it. Like a kids movie. I didn't like that. If the trees could walk and had a mouth to talk out of that was enough for me. The eyes, ears, and nose were unecessary and made the movie feel like a kid's variety show.

3. The way the Ents were animated... they didn't seem to have weight. Watch the T-Rex in Jurassic Park. Every time it stomped the camera shook. The animators failed to translate this weight on to the screen. If their surrounding environment wasn't there to give us a sense of scale I'd say the Ents were about 2-feet tall.

4. I assume the White Wizard that Treebeard takes Merry and Pippin to see is Gandalf. If so, what happened? Merry and Pippin say nothing about it later. Neither does Gandalf. ??? weird.

5. I was impressed with the Gollum animation. But felt the animators used cartoon style movement rather than real-life movement. Gollum moved like a character out of Toy Story instead of something that was supposed to be real. Good animation? Yes. Lifelike? No. The only guy I've seen who's been able to animate creatures with lifelike believability is Phil Tippett. And puppets still work better than anything. Look at E.T.! No computer graphics, yet he's real as can be. CG character animation still has a long way to go before it fools me into thinking the character is real.

6. King Theoden of Rohan. This guy pissed me off. Was he a strong man? Was he a weak man? Was he courageous? Was he a wimp? The script couldn't make up its' mind. And the hair. Nice wig Goldilocks.

7. If Saruman could cause an avalanche from hundreds of miles away in FOTR, why did he stand there so helplessly as the Ents destroyed Isengard? He just stood on the balcony looking around for 10 minutes.

8. Lady Eowyn showed skill with a sword. She disappears during battle at Helmsdeep. I know she's underground with the people of Rohan, but they could've at least shown her a couple more times. She was just gone. It's like they built up her character as an Aragorn love interest and possible warrior like she was going to be somebody and then pretty much eliminated her character after Aragon returns from his fall off the cliff. Why? I felt ripped off.

9. And finally, why the hell did it take Gandalf (a powerful wizard) 5 frickin' days to find the riders of Rohan for the battle at Helmsdeep?

Okay, I'm done.

Posted by Ocyurus on 01-29-2003 10:18 PM:

quote:
Originally posted by Pra3t0
I didn't like it as much as FOTR.

Here's my list of TTT nitpicks....

1. I don't know why, Peter Jackson just wanted to make sure you knew that Merry and Pippin rode around on top of Treebeard whenever he took them somewhere....

2. Blame the 'Neverending Story' feeling that you got on the animators, I personally liked the way they animated the Ents (almost but I would have changed a few things). And Tolkien described the Ents very well and you can't just get rid of their eyes (they were the most distinguised part of them), mouth, nose, beard so on... And another thing about that is you are a jerk and now I have that stupid song in my head and the only line that I know is "Neverending Story! LaLaLaLa! which just keeps playing over and over in my head! (grrrr!

)

3. Another thing I probably would have changed but just blame it on the animators, perhaps that is why Merry and Pip are always on top of him to show that he is 14' high?

4. When Gandalf met Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli he said "You track a band of two young hobbits? They passed this way, the day before yesterday. They met someone they did not expect!"

5. Andy Serkis who not only did the voice for Gollum also did the movements wearing some sort of suit (don't ask me what kind, some kinda suit that captures movements...) to help the animators with Gollum's movements so if he doesn't move right then it is just because he is bleedin' 500 year old wretched, slimy creature that has a spine that points at a 45 degree angle

6. Umm, what? In the books he was very courageous, he struck me as a bit indecisive but still brave in the movie. He was just a victim of them trying to make every character in the movie go against what the audience wants them to do until the very finale when they all changed their minds (i.e. Theoden, Treebeard, Faramir...)

7. In the book he didn't make the avalanche, the mountain just didn't like people climbing it... As for Saruman, what could he have done? He had emptied his entire army to Helm's Deep, he was alone in the tower of Orthanc. He did put up quite a bit of a fight in the book but that was cut out for time constraints. (He sprayed napalm on one of the ents for example)

8. She will come back big time in The Return of the King, she'll almost get killed too but you'll see. We can just say Frodo will have one less enemy...

9. And you suppose it would take you less time to ride on horse-back 500 leagues out over a very wide plain to gather several thousand men of an infantry and guide them 1000 leagues to a huge battle so they can slide down a rocky steep cliff onto a wall of pikes?

Well if that is all hope it helped, oh and read the books!

Posted by Pra3t0 on 01-30-2003 04:10 PM:

I think most people would liked to have seen Merry & Pippin do more than just sit in a tree the whole movie.

"...a Neh-ver-en-ding Stor-oreee! Ah-uh-ah... ah-uh-ah... ah-uh-ah..."

Okay, so Gandalf DID mention he saw Merry & Pippin afterall. So why was he hanging out in Fangorn forest waiting for Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli to come by? Why didn't he just go directly to them and meet up with them halfway?

I'd like to see somebody put on a motion capture suit and move around the same way Gollum did in the film. I saw a lot of impossible physics going on. Those movements are so noticeable. And when they aren't, they register in the subconscious as "fake".

Theoden in the books is probably a great guy. In the film he's "Let's get 'em!!!" one minute and "Game over man..." the next. Every time he got down, Aragorn had to give him a pep talk. This happened a couple of times, at which point my eyes rolled back in my head.

In FOTR, Saruman DOES cause the avalanche. You need to stop talking about what happens in the books. I'm talking about the movies. I would've liked to have seen something incredible from Saruman. A couple of powerful wizard attempts to stop the Ents. Attempts which fail but provide us with some great visual effects. And also demonstrate Saruman's power and why someone can't simply just walk up and stab the guy.

I think the way Eowyn's character is shown in TTT is a result of the mistakes that can be made when you film three movies at the same time. Peter Jackson can't add footage he doesn't have. And it's too late to go back and reshoot now.

Someone else could've been sent to gather infantry. Gandalf would've been more useful standing behind Helmsdeep's walls, casting spells, etc. He could've stopped the bomb. He could've thrown all the Orcs off the bridge. Cool stuff like that.

I'm nitpicking the movie. Stop mentioning the books! I'm sure they're very good.

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:20 PM.

Show all 28 posts from this thread on one page