Slashdot Mirror
LOTR: Two Towers Extended Edition Reviewed
akahige writes "The Digital Bits has just posted an exhaustive review and analysis of extended edition of The Two Towers, everybody that can't wait to get theirs -- or wait even longer to see the uber-cut in the theatre -- check it out. There's 43 minutes of new footage (not including the extended credits), and comparable extras to the extended version of Fellowship: 4 commentaries, documentaries, behind the scenes, etc. " I felt that FotR's Extended Edition was far superior to the theatrical release- usually these extra cuts add little, but this was the exception. I've been waiting with held breath for this one. I just wish it would ship a few days early!
You mean they've made the movie even longer?
I hope the new DVD has an extra-special "toilet break" feature!
It's probably been ToRN'ed (theonering.net)...
.sig? No.
TEXT OF THE ARTICLE
review by Bill Hunt, editor of The Digital Bits
Film Rating: A
Disc Ratings (Video/Extras): A/A+
Audio Ratings (DD/DTS): A-/A
Specs and Features
Disc One: The Film - Extended Version, Part I
Part I - 107 mins (approx 236 mins total - includes 20 min fan club credit roll on Disc Two), PG-13, letterboxed widescreen (2.35:1), 16x9 enhanced, single-sided, RSDL dual-layered (layer switch at 50:42, at the start of chapter 15), custom slipcase with fold-out Digipack packaging (featuring production sketches and artwork), all commentaries feature on-screen text to identify speaker, audio commentary (with director Peter Jackson and writers Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens), audio commentary (with design team members Richard Taylor, Tania Rodger, Grant Major, Alan Lee, John Howe, Dan Hennah and Chris Hennah), audio commentary (with production and post-production team members Barrie Osborne, Mark Ordesky, Andrew Lesnie, Mike Horton, Jabez Olssen, Rick Porras, Howard Shore, Jim Rygiel, Joe Letteri, Ethan Van der Ryn, Mike Hopkins, Randy Cook, Christian Rivers, Brian Van't Hull and Alex Funke), audio commentary (with cast members Elijah Wood, Sean Astin, John Rhys-Davies, Billy Boyd, Dominic Monaghan, Orlando Bloom, Christopher Lee, Sean Bean, Bernard Hill, Miranda Otto, David Wenham, Brad Dourif, Karl Urban, John Noble, Craig Parker and Andy Serkis), 8-page booklet with foldout appendices map, Easter egg, animated film-themed menus with sound and music, scene access (31 chapters), languages: English (DD 5.1 EX, DTS 6.1 ES & DD 2.0 Surround), subtitles: English, Closed Captioned
Disc Two: The Film - Extended Version, Part II
Part II - 129 mins (approx 236 mins total - includes 20 min fan club credit roll on Disc Two), PG-13, letterboxed widescreen (2.35:1), 16x9 enhanced, single-sided, RSDL dual-layered (layer switch at at 59:56, in chapter 18), all commentaries feature on-screen text to identify speaker, audio commentary (with director Peter Jackson and writers Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens), audio commentary (with design team members Richard Taylor, Tania Rodger, Grant Major, Alan Lee, John Howe, Dan Hennah and Chris Hennah), audio commentary (with production and post-production team members Barrie Osborne, Mark Ordesky, Andrew Lesnie, Mike Horton, Jabez Olssen, Rick Porras, Howard Shore, Jim Rygiel, Joe Letteri, Ethan Van der Ryn, Mike Hopkins, Randy Cook, Christian Rivers, Brian Van't Hull and Alex Funke), audio commentary (with cast members Elijah Wood, Sean Astin, John Rhys-Davies, Billy Boyd, Dominic Monaghan, Orlando Bloom, Christopher Lee, Sean Bean, Bernard Hill, Miranda Otto, David Wenham, Brad Dourif, Karl Urban, John Noble, Craig Parker and Andy Serkis), animated film-themed menus with sound and music, scene access (39 chapters), languages: English (DD 5.1 EX, DTS 6.1 ES & DD 2.0 Surround), subtitles: English, Closed Captioned
Discs Three & Four (See Page Two)
"It is an army bred for a single purpose... to destroy the world of men."
And so we come to the crossroads. The Two Towers is the second installment in Peter Jackson's epic film adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkein's The Lord of the Rings - the installment poised to make or break the trilogy. Could Jackson and company follow up on the blockbuster success of 2001's The Fellowship of the Ring? Would the film continue with the same level of quality? Would the momentum of the story build upon the climax of the first film, and prepare audiences for the ultimate confrontation between good and evil in the soon to be released final chapter, The Return of the King? The answer to all of these questions, of course, is a resounding yes.
As the film opens, we find ourselves plunged into the dark mines of Moria, to relive a few moments of Gandalf's confrontation with the fiery Balrog. But instead of playing out as we remember it in Fellowship of the Ring, this time, when Gandalf falls into the abyss, we fall with him to watch as his fight continues. The conseq
I'm waiting for the 36 hour super extended expansive authorative double wide big mac and fries too many pies massive elongated turgid spactular extravaganza sustained another beer please endless superbit DVD release.
You aren't a true fan unless you buy one. And with every purchase you get a free Lucasarts (tm) branded marquee to store it in.
Beep beep.
Does he really now? *spoilers* then who bites off frodo's finger in Mt. Doom? Sam? if Sam falls into Mt. Doom with the ring, then who replants all the trees in the shire if Sam (with Lorien-seed) is burning up in Udun? Oh wait, there is no scouring in the ROTK movie (ARGH!); Obviously, you're correct. Why'd you have to go and tell me that, then? Now i'm sad.
The Braying and Neighing of Barnyard Animals Follows.
Here are the added/lengthened scenes:
"Among the new treasures in store for fans are several more moments with Gollum, more background on the Ents and additional scenes involving Treebeard in Fangorn Forest, Gandalf telling Aragorn that Sauron is afraid of what he may one day become, Theodred's funeral at Edoras, more of Faramir capturing Frodo and Sam, new scenes between Aragorn and Eowyn on the road to Helm's Deep, more intense footage during all of the major battles... and this is just scratching the surface. There's also a major new flashback scene in which we see Faramir with his brother, Boromir, and their father, Denethor, who is the Steward of Gondor. We learn why Boromir tried to take the Ring from Frodo in the last film, and why Faramir struggles with the same decision here. It's fantastic stuff that really fleshes out both Faramir and Boromir. It's also important for introducing us to the character of Denethor, who plays a larger part in the forthcoming Return of the King."
I've been waiting with held breath for this one. I just wish it would ship a few days early!
Let's put it this way... if you're holding your breath, and it doesn't ship a few days early, you're not going to get a chance to see it.
Tarsnap: Online backups for the truly paranoid
In a previous story there was rumors of theatres that would be showing the entire trilogy on the same day... Anybody got any lists of theatres that will be doing this with dates and times....
I hope the local theatre here will be doing this. I will be checking shortly. I guess I am just slow, I won't be seeing the third Matrix until tomorrow.
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
Do you think they could offer a version that returns to the book continuity, without the gratuitous appearance of Arwen in Rohan and the silly Aragorn dream sequence?
Or am I asking too much?
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
one movie, TWO movies, the second movie extended, and when i was the library the other day i realized there was even a book about this stuff!
Check out the video to Ben Hur, there's a 5 minute "interlude" included on the video itself which had me chuckling.
It demands to be honoured. Pop out and relieve yourself, AND make a cup of tea, without using the accursed pause button.
'tis for wimps.
ooooooh! What does this button do? - DeeDee, Dexters Lab.
Its already available in select stores on DVD - i'm going to pick up my copy later today :-)
Who likes buying a DVD and having a movie that is exactly the same as it when first shown in a theatre? While extra scenes and goodies are fun, there is generally a good reason why scenes end up on the the cutting room floor. LOR has gone way overboard trying maximize revenue by marketing an insane amount of releases to their overloyal fans, but people here seem to eat it up.
I know I'm going to get flamed and mod'ed into oblivion for this, but seriously, what's the big deal about LotR? Why do people lash out viciously at movies that actually make an attempt a real depth (Matrix), while simultaneously holding up the LotR as the cinematic "Gold Standard?" I mean, sure, it's a moderately interesting story, but does it need 9+ hours to be told? Sure, some interesting fights happen along the way, and the effects are great, but are there subtle metaphors, philosophical references, and character dualities (besides Golem, obviously) that I'm missing?
Why do people bitch and complain that the Matrix was too much gobbledygook (translation: they didn't understand, and hate movies that challenge them to think about it anywhere beyond the concession stand on their way out), then act like LotR is this untouchable masterpiece?
There's this ring. It's evil. It has to be destroyed. That's where we left off after the first one. "Two Towers" and 3 hours later, that's STILL where we are. Still got that ring. Still has to be destroyed.
Why is this such amazing work, while the Wachowskis out-of-the-box conclusion to the Matrix (everyone's pretty pissed, but no one expected it, did they now), is seen as hack-work?
I don't get it. I'm not a Tolkien fanboy, but I watched the first two, and I'll watch the third. But there's really nothing cool to discuss about them, is there? The Matrix movies work because there are so many different interpretations of what they mean and how they all interrelate, and it's fun to discuss. But, as far as I can tell, the LotR "is what it is," isn't it? They lay the whole story out there in front of you, and hold your hand. They don't challenge you to try and figure out what the ring really represents, or if maybe, just maybe, the good NEEDS the evil to give it a purpose to exist? The Matrix suggests these kinds of things, but the LotR seems to shy completely away from them, afraid of challenging (and alienating) their audience.
Am I wrong? What gives?
Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
I really don't think Peter Jackson sees himself in such authority to re-write the story that much.
Else he'd be thrown into the fire of Mt.Doom by Tolken fans with big feet.
They are still fantastic movies, of course. But when I watched the Two Towers again, recently, with my wife, every time she asked me, "Was that in the book?" I found that I had to say, "Well, no, not really."
philcrissman.com.
Lucasarts?
A complete listing of showings for the marathon can be seen here
The Braying and Neighing of Barnyard Animals Follows.
In Toklein's TTT, the cliff-hanger ending is Shelob the spider almost ends the quest. I guess Jackson moved this to the part III for some reason or the other.
Personally, I think of each movie as being a 6-disc special edition. If they released it that way all at once, the total cost would end up about the same, so what difference does it make?
LordBodak's journal.
How is it rude?
Is it rude for Nissan to offer 3 versions of the Z-350? Or is it extra rude for Cadillac to come out with a V-6 version of the CTS and then release a more expensive V-8 CTS. Or horrors GM comes out with a 70K Corvette called the XLR then later comes out with the real Corvetter for 55K.
"Its a sick way to make $$ and a slap in the face to the fans."
It's not like anyone is forcing anyone to go buy both versions of TTT or FoTR.
The first version is for your casual consumer. The second has extra stuff for your serious fanboy.
Sorry if someone actually coming out with different versions of a DVD for different tastes bothers you to your core.
there's a reason why there's an extended edition -- unlike the previously cut footage in other movies, the new stuff in the LOTR movies add real scenes with real purpose. the reason they were cut in the first place was to keep the length of the movie down. after all, who's gonna sit through a 4-hour movie in the theater?
i saw the extra hour or so added back into FOTR, and i was very impressed. it really fleshed out certain parts of the movie.
i can tell you're not a real LOTR fan. oh yeah, and for whiners like you, the movie was released in its original format months ago
You'll like being a dude!
However the thought of three Uber-editions running sequentially in a theatre (think a total of a tad over 11 hours running time) would bring a whole new meaning to the Ring Cycle and endurance. Even Germans, raised on Wagnerian opera may have problems there (usually the other Ring is shown on consecutive nights so you get serious R&R imbetween performances).
In any case, it kind of dwarfs the other trilogies that have been shown of late (i.e., Matrix).
See my journal, I write things there
Yes, but they sold out within hours after the tickets were offered online.
DVD-R is out.. so for those that have connections we get it early :P
...hopefully they purchased the extended version of the warranty on their web server as well, now that Slashdot's melted it as if it were dropped directly into the Crack of Doom!
OtakuBooty.com: Smart, funny, sexy nerds.
I presume all three movies plus outtakes can be molded into a 12-15 hour special edition. I'd guess there is certain "background material" out there like the description of Hobbittown, the doom of the elves, the earlier wars, etc. that has been filmed, and can be more creatively presented in an expanded edition.
is it too much to ask for patience? do what alot of the rest of us did, wait for the collectors edition. he told us from the start that there would be 2 versions, if you wanted the version with everything all you had to do was wait a few months.
I would say that he isn't just tryinhg to make money there are two different audiences for the lotr films, the normal moviegoers who want it as they saw it, and the lotr fans who want the full thing. he's catering for both and everyone knew it.
so don't complain that he's ripping you off just because you didn't have the patience to wait for the version you wanted when it was well known that it would be around a few months later.
dave
I've seen only a portion of the trilogy (saw part of "The Two Towers" while snowbound at a con in Baltimore), but my feeling has been to wait until "Return of the King" comes out on DVD, and then collect the set in a Super Extended mode.
My wife brought up a good point: if the DVD(s) is will be stoked with so many "extra features", how much of an effect will that have on getting people to see the movie? Why bother going at all?
Mod Karma -1: I sed bad wurds. If I cep my mouf shut, I wud be at riyses.
Our DVD of Oklahoma has the intermission.
Come to think of it, we have a VHS copy of Chitty-Chitty-Bang-Bang, and it includes the intermission as well.
------ "Darn floor. Big bite." (Koko the gorilla's best attempt at explaining the experience of an earthquake.)
LIST OF THEATERS
Pretentiousness
That's what separates the Rings trilogy from the Matrix's gobbledygook.
They are both fantasy stories, but Rings doesn't try to be much else. Rings isn't trying to mix heavy religious themes, moral allegory (Tolkien himself hated allegory) and pseudo-philosophy into it's storyline. It's just a cool fantasy story.
The Matrix on the other hand, tries to look "deep" and "heavy" where in reality, the themes and ideas it presents have already been exhaustively discussed in PHIL 101. The Matrix trilogy tries so hard to be important that it ends up a parody of itself.
except that it's not mentioned on TORN, yet.
Actually, you can use the time between the first and second movie discs to do the call of nature, so there. ;-)
Tolkien created a world with such stunning depth that it would take a lifetime to get to know intimately.
It has languages, thousands of years of detailed histories, many epic tales as well as intense and interesting characters. Stories end and then stories begin.
The Wachowki's created a world in which people with cables in their brains become supermen and kick the crap out of computer programs. There is one interesting concept, how do we know that the world we experience with our senses exists away from our senses?
The rest of the Matrix "philosophy" is a mishmash of words or plays on words that imitate depth through ambiguity. Playing on words and their meanings is sophistry, not philosophy.
All in all the Matrix backstory is just to give geeks an excuse to proclaim the Matrix as cool not just because its about a hacker with a girlfriend that dresses in leather who learns kung-fu through a ROM chip and gets to shoot a lot of guns. Sex AND violence packaged with a nice 'deep' wrapper. Wow.
Give me five examples of depth in the Matrix?
Five from the Lord of Rings:
a) Boromir wants to use the ring to defeat Sauron. But the ring will warp its wielder to its masters will. The tool becomes the end.
b) The rebels of Rohan leave their king out of their love for their king.
c) The elves of Middle Earth help the men of Middle Earth even though they are leaving that land. Elves are immortal in normal circumstances but they do not flinch from death in combat.
d) Gondor is a shadow of itself at its height and in turn is a shadow of Numenor (the kingdom left by Gondor exiles when Sauron corrupted it). There is a rich and vibrant history behind everything. The films do not convey all of this but there is a complete absence of history behind the Matrix (apart from 30 mins of Animatrix).
e) Sauron is not defeated by force of arms but by a combination of luck (Gollum falls into Mount Doom) and heroism (Frodo and Sam). The interesting thing is that Frodo is not a messianic pure strong hero, at the end he betrays the trust in him by wielding the ring. Gollum seals Sauron's doom.
It wasn't released in the theaters this way. It was long enough to begin with, what's 43 extra minutes? Honestly, people who did not read the books, but followed the first movie gave a collective "huh?" with the second one. It was very hard to follow, with new characters being introducted every five minutes, and no feel for where the journey was taking the group. Yet there was always time for surfing elves and dwarf jokes.
But I'm just whining. I realize that it is impossible to adapt these books to film, and still keep them within budget and inside a comfortable viewing time for moviegoers. Two Towers was just not the high point of the trilogy so far.
Fred
"A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
-RMS
The Matrix is this huge, ordeal which has people deeply thinking about the odds and ends of the universe. If I want that, I'm going to read a book.
Ironic I would say that because LotR was originally a book, but the classic battle of Good v. Evil in LotR is one that appeals to everyone.
Plus, hey, it's got a hot elf, walking trees, and a resurrected Wizard.
Matrix had... humans... that looked albino... or like a CIA frontman... wow.
I have the restored version of Lawrence of Arabia with a running time of 228 minutes. This has the 'overture' and the intermission (time to change discs), still it is a good time to use the bathroom and to fetch more cold beer - watching all that sand makes me thirsty).
See my journal, I write things there
meanwhile you can find out your name in elvish and your hobbit name!!!
my blog
Well, I've read a few of the many (probably billions) of deconstructions of LotR, and I'm pretty sure that one large hunk of theme in the story is how the Industrial Revolution is evil and the end of good times for mankind. Even if Tolkien didn't mean it as instructional - it was definitely a theme of the times and it sure as hell looks like one of the larger foundation blocks for the story.
2001's entr'acte takes about ten minutes and is the single most annoying beginning to a movie ever...given that after you sit in total darkness for that long, you're treated to men dressed in ape suits running around for another 15 minutes. Grr. Way to go, Stanley!
> I only look human.
My mother is a hafling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
So, did your mother die in childbirth, or did she just pop near the end of the pregnancy?
Virg
P.S. You wouldn't happen to be Niami's kid, would you?
Well, I'm hoping that they release it in IMAX Digitally Remastered format. I saw the Matrix last night in this format and it's not something a home theatre system under $20,000 is even going to come close to. Most of the time though, I'm not prepared to pay the extortionate prices for the cinema and will wait for the DVD release (rental).
..."Things Losers Post on Slashdot".
Thanks so much for the information about the theaters. And please know that your politeness was greatly appreciated.
> My wife brought up a good point: if the DVD(s) is will be stoked with so many "extra features", how much of an effect will that have on getting people to see the movie? Why bother going at all?
Because some of us don't have 20ft wide TV screens and high quality sound systems.
- MugginsM
Obviously, you don't order and consume a 'super-sized' beverage that is at least twice the maximum human bladder capacity in the first hour of the film.
I missed the penultimate 15 minute segment of Lotr:FotR because I DID. I also discovered that when sufficiently motivated, I can be back in my seat in a time that would shame an Indy pit crew.
I know I'm going to get flamed and mod'ed into oblivion for this, but seriously, what's the big deal about The Matrix? Why do people lash out viciously at movies that actually make an attempt a real depth (LOTR), while simultaneously holding up the Matrix as the cinematic "Gold Standard?" I mean, sure, it's a moderately interesting story, but does it need more than 10 minutes to be told? Sure, some interesting fights happen along the way, and the effects are great, but are there subtle metaphors, philosophical references, and character dualities (besides the obvious Keanu=Christ thing, obviously) that I'm missing?
Why do people bitch and complain that LOTR was too much gobbledygook (translation: they didn't understand, and hate movies that challenge them to think about it anywhere beyond the concession stand on their way out), then act like The Matrix is this untouchable masterpiece?
There's this bunch of machines. They're evil. They has to be destroyed. That's where we left off after the first one. "Matrix Revisited" and 3 hours later, that's STILL where we are. Still got those evil thingies. Still has to be destroyed.
Why is this such amazing work, while Peter Jackson's out-of-the-book conclusion to LOTR is seen as hack-work?
I don't get it. I'm not a Matrix fanboy, but I watched the first one, and I'll watch the second and third (when they reach TV). But there's really nothing cool to discuss about them, is there? The LOTR movies work because there are so many different interpretations of what they mean and how they all interrelate, and it's fun to discuss. But, as far as I can tell, the Matrix trilogy "is what it is," isn't it? They lay the whole story out there in front of you, and hold your hand. They don't challenge you to try and figure out what Neo really represents, or if maybe, just maybe, the good NEEDS the evil to give it a purpose to exist? The LOTR suggests these kinds of things, but the Matrix seems to shy completely away from them, afraid of challenging (and alienating) their audience.
Am I wrong? What gives?
I was so kindly informed that my first post with a link to a theater listing was incorrect. So... here is a link that is sure to help. Simply enter your zip code and it will show you the closest theater showing the trilogy.
FIND A THEATER
> For me, that isn't a good reason. Tell me how long it is beforehand, keep it good and interesting and you can make it as long as you want.
Well, I'm with you 100 percent, and I'll be picking this extended version up posthaste, but the reason for reducing the movie isn't because viewers won't sit that long (although it is for some). The main reason theaters like movies under three hours is because with that time frame, they can get more showings in in a day. If a movie is just 20 minutes over three hours, they lose a showing per day, and that's a lot of ticket sales lost. Movie makers are sensitive to this fact, and so they make directors cut it down to size. In this particular case, Jackson did it under the promise that he'd get to release the mondo-massive version on DVD, which is what this extended set represents.
Virg
Where I live, a "small" drink at the movies is roughly equivalent to two or three cans of pop. A large looks like about two litres. I can understand the need for a bathroom break after draining one of these, but a refill?
"I'm not impatient. I just hate waiting." - My Dad
Ade_
Big Bubbles (no troubles) - what sucks, who sucks and you suck
Yeah, I wasn't the only one that was REALLY pissed when I brought home the first edition of the first movie and there's a fucking promo for the extended edition in it. I started scrveaming at my TV "What the fuck did I just drop $25 on this DVD for then????"
Hence, I've waited for THIS edition and I didn't waste my $ on the first one of TT. I'm watching all four hours on Saturday. I got it for Xmas and never watched it. Ha!
I can pick up the 2 disc version for half price as soon as this one comes out!
When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
It's spelled Uruk-Hai.
"I'm not impatient. I just hate waiting." - My Dad
No. Why?
does anyone know if there's going to be a collector edition of TTT as there was for FotR...?
I'm a lvl25 Artist in the game of Life (tm)
Every time I see a movie that comes out with extra footage, I wonder which is the 'real' vision of the movie, or if there really was one. If it's the theatrical release, then we're wasting our time and money by getting the extras. If it's the extended DVD version, then why the hell did we pay $$$ to watch an incomplete movie in the theatre? If it's neither or both, then does the director really know what he's doing with the movie?
I'm all for commentary and 'behind the scenes' stuff, but it seems to me that a director is supposed to be the one who ties everything together into a single, cohesive story. Where's the single story here?
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
I'll take a shot at this one.
> Gandalf is trapped on a tower deep in enemy territory, and all of a sudden a giant eagle magically comes outta nowhere and delivers him to safety.
Well, Isengard wasn't "deep in enemy territory", it was next to the lands of Rohan (remember that Saruman's treachery was pivotal to the speed that was required to stop him). Also, Gwaihir (the big eagle) didn't come out of nowhere, Gandalf called to him for aid. In the movie (and the book), Gandalf told a moth to fetch Gwaihir.
> Of course, said eagle can't possibly be used elsewhere in the story!
Said eagle is the king of the eagles, and he does indeed take part in the major battle at the end of The Return of the King.
> Why can't Frodo hop on the eagle and fly to Mount Doom?
Because, like the Elves, the eagles didn't much care about the fate of humans in Middle Earth until very late in the battle (when they realized that Sauron represented a threat to more than just the humans), and by that time the eagles were more badly needed to defend Minas Tirith. Also, it's reasonable that the reason Sauron didn't throw an army after Frodo is that Sauron couldn't find Frodo, and Frodo flying across Mordor would have been much easier to find and intercept than Frodo sneaking across Mordor.
Virg
I've got you beat for "great stuff missed through sheer bladder-related lack of foresight". I missed (a significant chunk of) the architect scene from Reloaded in exactly the same way you're describing. In a movie with half a dozen ten-minute content-free fight scenes, I had to pick the moment where information is being thrown at you faster than you can process it already.
Like yourself, I found that almost superhuman speed was available to me when so motivated.
However, I didn't actually get to see the bits I missed until about 10 days ago. I've vowed never to drink in a movie theatre ever again.
I would agree, except that they TOLD YOU FROM THE OUTSET they were going to do this. If you were a bit pissed when they did it for FoTR, I would agree to an extent because I got "screwed" with it too that time. This time though, the two releases were not hidden facts in the least, they actually told you the exact release dates for each edition right up front! If you bought the first edition, you have no right to be pissed because you KNEW what was going to happen, you should have waited if you didn't want to pay twice. It's not like you have been living under a rock and didn't know what was going on, were you?!?
Also, most people I know love this story so much and love how these movies have been done that paying twice doesn't bother us in the least. When artists produce something of this caliber, paying them twice (five times in my case, the twice I saw it in the theater, the once I rented it and now the twice I've purchased it) is not a problem to me, they deserve it.
Besides, do like I did with FoTR: the first one is now a Christmas present for someone you love. Not a bad deal really.
If a pion (n-) collides with a proton in the woods & noone is there to hear it, does lamdba decay into the source pa
Eowyn's role in these movies represents what I hate about Hollywood.
In the books she was a minor character. I don't think she had a single line until the end of the series when she has some long talks with Frodo after the ring is destroyed.
Hollywood felt that the story just wasn't good enough without a love story (LOTR not a good enough story???), so her character took over other parts, and new content was created for her. New content created from nothing when they are having to chop out so much due to time constraints????
There was even pressure to make her part of the fellowship that the director and cast resisted.
Everytime she's on screen I get pissed. Really pissed. It was bad enough in the first one, but in Two Towers they fabricated a long extended sequence that both detracted and distracted from the real story, just so that two of them could invent an excuse for the two of them to have some face time together. I almost walked out. I really want a version with her gone.
plus-good, double-plus-good
You can drink. You see, the cup they give you can have more than one use. Just be creative.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
All 3 movies in one day uninterrupted?
You are going to need a catheter in your urethra and a rectal probe as well!
Why should he spend that much?
The engineer's dillema rears its ugly head here as much as it does everywhere else in life.
One of these is every bit as efficient as a catheter bag, and less than 1/24th the cost of a colostomy (and far less permanent). The only (arguable) trade-off is that it's going to be slightly less pretty than a catheter bag, but that depends on the bag being well sealed.
You learn these things, when there's MST3K marathons running.
Folk with fireplaces in their dens might also consider getting a couple of kabob-skewers for saugages, marshamallows, etc. Using those and warm beer, you cut out the need for both a microwave and a dorm fridge.
Happy marathoning!
Which edition of the DVD do I need to buy to see the scene where Faramir passes the test and lets Frodo and Sam go without taking them to Osgiliath?
--
E_NOSIG
Either get an account, which is free, or quit being an AC, if you already have one. Then go to your settings and check, "willing to moderate".
Then you can show us your IQ and sense of humor when you're called on to moderate.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
If anybody wants it early, just try Amazon. I know of instances where they have shipped stuff a day early!
I love NetHack.
Er, or so I've been told anyway. ;-)
Reason why there is hope for the future generation #364:
"I wish my grass was emo so it could cut itself."
In the VHS release, "Jeremiah Johnson" goes the full route with entr'acte and intermission inserted, and the movie is only 108 minutes!
108 minutues is right about where I'll begin thinking about pausing the extended-DVD version of FOTR.
"Deserves it! I daresay he does. Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement."
--Gandalf (J. R. R. Tolkien)
If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe. -- Carl Sagan
I'm with you. For the original "Matrix" film, the bladder pain was so extreme, I had to run out during the chase scene at the end after the subway. One of the main climax scenes has a personal connection with me as I ran out of the theatre, into the restroom, and back -- all in time to see Neo entering the room and being shot by Agent Smith.
Every time I watch that scene, I think back to my own chase scene...
"If you fight, fight without fear. If you love, love without reservation." -- J. Michael Straczynski, Babylon 5
I am looking forward to see what sort of "package" deal come out once all three are out on DVD. Some sort of 10 disc special edition set.
Michael Merry
Merryworks
they told everyone that their were 2 versions of FOTR comeing out way before the first version came out.
Besides we are only talking 15 bucks or the 'short' version, i've gotten 6 packs that cost more than that.
> What makes LoTR even more ridiculous is the way the ring was taken from whatever-was-his-name : chopped off by a broken sword. Sheesh, that ring must really be powerful. However, nobody seems to find that a problem.
Two things to consider: first, the broken sword used to cut Sauron's hand off was very powerfully magical, and yet doing the deed was enough to break it, and second, in the battle (this was better addressed in the book than the movie) the Elves present had been using every bit of magical power they could muster in an effort to weaken Sauron's power, and despite the concerted efforts of hundreds of mages of considerable power, they were still only barely successful, and to top it off the ring corrupted Isildur almost as soon as he touched it. After that, the ring knew how long it had to wait for its master to regather his power, then directly affected fate to bring itself back into the flow of history. It corrupted everyone who touched it save one demigod, and even the Istari (Gandalf and Saruman and the few other powerful wizards mentioned) were no match for it. So yeah, it was rather powerful.
Virg
I doubt this will ever happen since the maximum length of an IMAX movie is 120 minutes.
They had to cut 20 minutes out of Star Wars Episode II when it was shown on IMAX.
What, me worry?
There has already been mention of both trilogy's backstories. I feel that it is worth mentioning that LOTR's backstory is epic, and The Matrix's backstory (the Animatrix) is CRAP. Did you watch that idiotic thing about the machines founding a city called "01" in Iraq? It was so insulting, so phoned in, that it left me wondering why they didn't bother even trying.
Now I'll admit that the bulk of The Silmarillion is difficult to read, particularly the story of the Elves' battle with Morgoth (the first age). The idea of the story was solid, though, and the references to it in LOTR work incredibly well. In fact it is widely recognized as a groundbreaking work of literature for good reason. The story of Numenor (the second age) was gripping. In fact, I wish Peter Jackson would make another epic trilogy based on that. Can you imagine how much better it would be than the latest Star Wars, where we watched George Lucas, surrounded by sycophantic yes-men, defacate on his legacy.
How is this rude and inconsiderate. Just pretend they're only releasing one of each, if that makes you feel better. Meanwhile, people like me will be able to enjoy seeing both the regular and extended versions.
2. If your considered its etymology from French, you'd realise this.
You're correct that your parent poster used it incorrectly. He meant overture.
You tell me how "whilst" differs from "while," and I'll stop calling you a pretentious jackass.
True...in every film prior to LotR where extra material never intended for the original release was filmed. Get a clue.
Your facts must be wrong:
The Matrix Revolutions : The IMAX Experience(R) (DMR)
At 130 minutes, it's not that much longer. I don't see why they can't split in to two movies if it's too long though...
You mean like this?
That's one thing that really annoys me. That's why I don't buy food at the theaters, I don't WANT 32-64 ounces of pop and a giant tub of popcorn. A 12 ounce can, and a small thing of popcorn would be enough, thanks, but since I can't buy the sizes I want, I buy nothing, I just make sure I eat before I go to the theater.
:)
They give you massive quantities so they can justify charging you up out the ass for it, it's just annoying. I know the arguement behind it, the theater makes all their money on the consessions, well too bad, if they want to make money on me, they have one of two options, charge less for concessions, or charge more for the ticket.
Sure you could argue that I buy the big gulp and not drink all of it, but I'm just a dumb animal, I'll eat/drink whatever's put in front of me to completion, which leaves me needing the pit stop. And wait a minute, it took you 15 minutes to take a piss, or did you drop the kids off at the pool while you were at it?
In many movies, scenes are cut from the theatre showing and added to DVD or a later "special edition movie" simply to nab a few more bucks. I think in this case however, it was honestly that the movie was *damn long*, and they had to cut it somewhere.
For all those that were disappointed by some of those cuts, it does seem to catch certain plot-points that were not in the first release. Nice to see that sometimes they really do think of the fans. I mean, sure - they still want your money - but at least you're getting a little something bonus that is somewhat worth it
For all those that haven't seen the original movie but will see the Extended Edition, I'd recommend that you take a bathroom break just around the time the Ents get really angry. Otherwise, with all the extra footage, the flood scene later might remind you a little forcibly about how hard a full LOTR viewing is on one's bladder...
Ok, I think I have the post to end all of this silly complaints. Right here on Slashdot before FOTR was released on DVD is a warning to wait for the extended version.
I'm pretty sure other sources like lordoftherings.net had info about the release dates sooner but I'm too lazy to do any more searching.
So quit whining people. If you care enough about LOTR to actually want to see the extra footage, you should've also known well ahead of time about the extended versions.
Recently, the Charles Theatre in Baltimore began a Kurosawa marathon. They'll be showing a different one of his movies each week, once on Saturday night and once on Thursday night.
I had actually never seen the Seven Samurai before, so I figured this was the time. My martial arts teacher gave me permission to skip class for something so important ("I would not be completely unhappy if you skipped class to see the Seven Samurai.")
For those who don't know, it's over 3 hours; it started at 9:30 with no ads or trailers, and we got out of the theatre at about 12:40. When that intermission (5 minutes, IIRC) hit in the middle, I was pretty glad, and it looked like at least half of the theatre was too. I had even made sure not to drink vast amounts of anything (I usually drink a lot of water), but of course, Murphy's Law WILL bring the magical feeling upon you right in the middle of a great movie.
WMBC freeform/independent online radio.
well your wife's point of view is from that of someone who has not spent the last year/decade/lifetime frothing at the lips for this
Peace!
Jim
'Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?'
From digitalbits.com:
Discs 1 and 2
[tech stuff snipped]
"It is an army bred for a single purpose... to destroy the world of men."
And so we come to the crossroads. The Two Towers is the second installment in Peter Jackson's epic film adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkein's The Lord of the Rings - the installment poised to make or break the trilogy. Could Jackson and company follow up on the blockbuster success of 2001's The Fellowship of the Ring? Would the film continue with the same level of quality? Would the momentum of the story build upon the climax of the first film, and prepare audiences for the ultimate confrontation between good and evil in the soon to be released final chapter, The Return of the King? The answer to all of these questions, of course, is a resounding yes.
As the film opens, we find ourselves plunged into the dark mines of Moria, to relive a few moments of Gandalf's confrontation with the fiery Balrog. But instead of playing out as we remember it in Fellowship of the Ring, this time, when Gandalf falls into the abyss, we fall with him to watch as his fight continues. The consequences of these moments will resound throughout much of the remainder of the story, as Frodo and Sam continue their quest to carry the One Ring into Mordor, and Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli race to save Merry and Pippin from the orcs. Along the way, two important new story elements come into play. The first is the character of Gollum, who is bound to the Ring in such a way that he simply must follow it to Mordor. As we watch, Gollum's dual personalities fight for dominance, one wishing to help Frodo and Sam in their quest, and the other seeking to kill them and take back the Ring that was stolen from him (as told in The Hobbit). Meanwhile, Aragorn and company have made their way into the horse realm of Rohan, whose king has fallen under Saruman's dark spell. The people of Rohan are made to suffer too, for Saruman has built a army of murderous orcs numbering ten thousand strong. Together, the white wizard and the dark lord, Sauron, mean to rule Middle-earth, and their first step in this conquest is to wipe out the kingdom of Rohan, and all of Mankind, once and for all. What follows is nothing less than a truly epic battle, in which the fate of both Middle-earth and the Quest of the Ring literally hang in the balance. Trust me when I say, it's like nothing you've ever seen before on film.
What I appreciate most about The Two Towers is that Jackson has made no compromises for the audience. Middle-earth is a world where violence is commonplace, much blood is shed and evil stands a very real chance of winning and must be confronted head-on. There is no sugar coating on these bitter pills to make them easier to digest. As a result, the journey one takes in this film is just that much more satisfying. An additional compromise that Jackson manages to avoid is obvious right from the opening frames of The Two Towers. You simply MUST have seen the previous film in order to understand what's going on, because there is no recap of the action. Other than the very brief opening flashback, this film launches you immediately into the story, picking up right where Fellowship left you hanging. And the pace throughout much of the film is relentless, pausing only occasionally to let you catch your breath.
In addition to Jackson's deft direction, the savvy adaptation and great performances by cast members new and old, there is much technically to be impressed with here as well. The character of Gollum, entirely created by computer graphics, is astonishing. At last, we have a CG character that gives a real dramatic performance on screen. This is thanks to the work of WETA Digital, as well as the strong acting of Andy Serkis. Serkis not only provides Gollum his voice, but his movent as well thanks to the process of motion capture. Serkis also performed the character on set with the actors, lending the final digital creation a particular presence and immediacy it would otherwise have lacke
They completely ruined the starting of the movie and really broke the timining of the whole thing. The editing on the original release was much tighter and moved alot smoother. Adding random bit and piece here and there doesn't make it better except to the hardcore fans desperate to see any second of more footage. Most of the time directors are entirly too close to the movie to be a good editor. Dirtector cuts usually suffer from this. Look at Blade Runner or LoTR.
I was going off the info from the Star Wars IMAX page:
At almost 400 pounds, you can see why they can't just switch reels during the production. I wonder if that website mentioned above didn't just paste the normal running length of the movie onto the website (or they could've gotten the 150 minute upgrade).
What, me worry?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I'm a theater employee, and I can sympathize with you on the bladder-capacity issue. If I have even the smallest amount of soda, I will inevitably have to run the the bathroom. I got lucky in LotR:FotR -- even though I didn't buy any concessions, I still had to dash, and got back just in time to watch Gandalf's fight with the Balrog. (The upside is that concessions can make certain movies more bearable, however.)
if they want to make money on me, they have one of two options, charge less for concessions, or charge more for the ticket.
Sadly, the second option isn't available to us -- the studio wants its cut of the ticket, whether we charge $4 or $10, because in that case we're making money off "their" movie. This is why groups can't passes for a fundraiser (ie. they buy $4 passes and sell for $5), because the studio wants that money. We make nothing off the tickets regardless of how much we sell them for -- every theater is a popcorn-and-pop shop that happens to show movies, which is why we can't charge much less for concessions either.
I know the situation sucks, but there's not really a whole lot the theaters can do about it. Blame the studios, not us.
Now, this would have two side effects:
In other words, just like any other badly thought out ??AA plan.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
lack of patience!
Sorry, I can wait for the extended set's to come out to buy the DVD of it.
But there's such a long time between the movie's in the theaters and the extended DVD's come out. I just can't wait that long. So I go see it at the show.
And anymore, I really do dread going to the theaters. All the idiots showing up late trying to fit 5 people into the middle while there's tons of seats open at the bottom, cellphones being answered, people talking and crap. But I can't wait, and those huge screens keep tempting me back...
http://slashdot.org/~tf23/journal
let alone dragging the hobbits ... of course Sam had that great line, akin to "We should not be here Mr. Frodo"
We have Peter Jackson's LOTR, not Tolkien
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
4 analogies and all of them about cars. I guess that's the only thing you know about.
...thus it is true.
that's the only thing you know about.
that's the only thing you know about.
that's the only thing you know about.
Hey, you have to be fast when the snake pit has as many snakes as the Well of the Souls.
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
I was on a car kick this morning, sue me.
Want more?
Apple makes a 15" LCD iMac and a 17" LCD iMac...damn them for giving people choices!
Boeing Makes two models of widebody jets and two models of narrow body jets and two models of multi-role strike fighters...damn them for giving people choices.
I mean the F-15E was out then they came out with the F-18A/B then the -18C/D and now the extra big -18E/F...damn them!
Apple sells a 10 user licence of X Server and an unlimited user licence...why? Are they trying to make money or something!?
> My wife brought up a good point: if the DVD(s) is will be stoked with so many "extra features", how much of an effect will that have on getting people to see the movie? Why bother going at all?
Even seeing a movie like this on a huge TV with a great home theater sound system does not stand up to seeing it on a 30 foot screen. I wait for many, many movies on DVD since they don't lose much going to video, but epics and action films are just more engrossing in the theater.
Virg
Not only that, but the fscking elves were cut down like wheat, which throws Tolkein's idea of the supercapable elf warrior right out the window. According to orthodoxy, the elves are supposed to be the best individual fighters in Middle Earth.
==============
Together, we will drive the rats from the tundra.
a) the Parent is not a troll, before moderating, understand WHAT THE HELL EACH THING MEANS.
b) Stanley Kubrick: you love him or you hate him... Take AI, if you love Stanley, the movie is great, and on scale with the rest of his movies, if you don't like Stanley, you wonder how Spielburg could have made such a "bad movie" hahahaha
Warning, this entire post should be considered spoiler bait !
First off, I'm a big fan of the original books. FotR (the movie) did not impress me greatly - too much of the books ended up on the cutting room floor, and stuff that had no point (like that damn staircase sequence in the middle of the balrog chase) ended up replacing stuff that should have been in the film, like the gift-giving scene in Lorien. Yes, the basic plot of the story was adhered to, but there were huge gaps that just rubbed me the wrong way.
FotR (extended edition) made up for that in my mind - the gifts were added back in, and some other minor scenes that added good flavor to the film brought it up to a respectable tribute to something that is essentially unfilmable. I even forgave Peter for his staircase sequence.
TTT, on the other hand, brought strongly mixed emotions from me. Golumn is an incredible work, and his portrayal was the first time I was ever able to really pity him as a character. On the other hand, the portrayal of ents as a bunch of idiots that had to be hoodwinked into taking down Saruman, as well as the major changes to the character of Faramir, and the mess that was the battle of Helm's deep (don't get me started about Legolas, or the elves, or the sudden conclusion of the battle) did not impress me.
(Ok, I'll get started about Legolas. Here's a complete badass, who has so far has a greater than 1:1 kill ratio with his arrows against orcs (he kills 2 orcs with one shot in FotR) who puts TWO arrows into the torch carrier, but doesn't drop him, and then immediately afterwards shoots FOUR orcs and drops all four WHILE SURFING DOWN A STAIRCASE ON A SHIELD! Sheesh.)
What I'm getting at is that the problems with FotR were not for the most part structural, but instead a problem of omission, while the problems that I have seen in TTT are structural, and not a problem of omission. I'm still getting the extended edition, and I will be interested to see how it works out, but I fear that out of the trilogy, TTT does not give me great hope for RotK...
Oh, and yes, I do expect to be flamed to Holy Hell and back for this. Still, it had to be said.
InThane
My problem will be that I can run 6 DVD's in a row. I guess when all three are out it'll be the LotR - Exploded Bladder edition for me. :-}
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
Troll? Perhaps, though I stand by the statement that it was a boring movie. Both my wife and I watched it, and were tempted to leave early. As I understand it, Frodo needs to destroy the ring. He's still got it, and doesn't appear much closer to getting rid of it. The whole 10000-Orc battle just seemed to be a CG animator's wet dream, and a distraction from the main plot line. The combat was pedantic at best, and cartoonish at worst. It failed to draw me into the storyline, and that left me without emotional interest in the outcome.
... nevermind.
I'm not sure I really care about additional footage showing the romantic interest between Aragorn and Eowyn, unless their child grows up to ultimately fight his father and save the Empire. Oh wait, that'd require Natalie Portman and her cardboard performance
> I dont recall the moth in the book.
Dang, I don't recall any mention of a lucky break. It's been a long time, so I'll have to dust off my copy and reread that part. It seems my memory is being corrupted a bit by the forces of evil.
Virg
Why see any movie in the theaters when you can wait up to a year (or longer) to see it on DVD?....Because if people like it, they want to see it again, and again.
So why aren't movie tickets $1. I know I would see a lot more movies if it wasn't $20 for my wife and I.
Because it is not mentioned in the story or any of the highly modded comments yet, I thought I'd remind the masses once again that the extended version of The Two Towers will be released to the masses on November 18. I will be among the first in line!
who cares? this is why people who like computers are considered to be dorks. this movie and tron and star wars and star trek have NOTHING to do with why enthusiasts like computers and operating systems. this type of crap is for mal adjusted dorks who cannot handle dealing with real people and real situations AKA life. these are the real geeks. YIKES.
yeah yeah yeah, of course you're right. now shut it then.
The Matrix has depth? What depth? I had the big secret figured out about 5 minutes into the first Matrix. The rest of the plot is simply a ludicrous framework upon which to show off action sequences. After all, what possible logical reason is there for a completely computer generated world to need kung-fu? ROFL. For a far superior take on virtual reality, see "The 13th Floor".
It's rude, because he knows that the publishers know that he will still dish out too much money for every edition of LOTR published in the next 25 years. Then, the 25th anniversary edition will come out only starting the madness, yet again. He will be living in a rusted-out trailer in a flood zone with anemic kids, but still be proud of his 100% complete mint collection of all the LOTR stuff marketed since the first edition of the book was published way back when. When a hurricane wipes out his trailer taking his collection to the museum in the sky, he'll be the one on camera crying about how his whole life was destroyed, in spite of the fact that his wife and kids are fine and standing right next to him.
Healthcare article at Kuro5hin
If it wasnt for the funny bits with Gimli and Legolas I probably would have fallen asleep. Is it just me or was Gollum the worst of an overacting cartoon in movie history ?
Mmmmmmm. 12 hours of LOTR goodness.
"Trying is only the first step towards failure." - Homer
Does anyone know if they are including the "Return to Hobbiton" chapter at the end of ROTK in the movie?
Seems like it might be anti-climactic, but interesting? Anyone really know?
Maybe it will be something they add to the extended DVD version.
Strater
Good F'n call (but my guess would be that the studios make them charge that much)... as well, why not make the concession less pricey, then more people would buy it and you'd probably make more money.
What really struck me when I read the books the first few times was how attached I became to the characters. The range of human emotions that were present in the book - from fear to happiness to despair to anger to love - came through loud and clear. And it had nothing to do with the standard Hollywood method of forcing it down your throat (see Pearl Harbor or Armageddon for examples).
Also, don't forget that the original stories were published decades ago and spawned the entire fantasy genre. We look at them today and think they are just ripping off Dungeons and Dragons or Magic. Most people fail to realize how old LOTR is and that the above examples are actually rip offs of it not the other way around.
"Trying is only the first step towards failure." - Homer
I wouldn't want to deprive slashdot of the convenience of a correct link to Cure for Insomnia
That the Matrix deals with just exactly the issues you're saying it doesn't:
What Neo really represents: Is he human? Is he just another program introduced by the Architect to cull the dissenters from the Matrix and make ever-more-perfect iterations of the simulation world?
Good needing evil and vice versa: Not only in this case does good need evil, evil also needs good. In fact, Neo coming back from "death" and "killing" Agent Smith in the first movie is what showed Smith that the "purpose of life... is to end" but that it the end could come on his own terms, setting him free to pursue his own nefarious goals. Also, Smith's assimilation of first the Oracle and then Neo are what ultimately cause his demise - you can say this is because as total opposites of each other, Smith and Neo cannot exist without each other... or that Smith's "assimilating" Neo's abilities allowed Neo to eliminate him from the inside out. Either way you choose, once Neo dies, so does Smith. (And if the Oracle and Seraph are back at the end of the film, shouldn't that mean that Neo should also? They were all "killed" by Smith's assimilation, and you'd expect that programs would be more irreversably effected by Smith than Neo.)
Not to mention, the whole "world as illusion" motif from the first movie, which certainly took a bit of time to wrap your mind around. At which point, they showed us Neo's ability to sense and act within the two overlapping worlds... gave us the Architect's speech and its ramifications... there's plenty to think about here if you want to look deeper than the very cool fight scenes and special effects.
Last but not least, do a search on Amazon and get a listing of all the books that have sprung up dealing with the series and its origins in (and perspectives on) theologies, mythologies, and general world views...
Having said all that, I whole-heartedly agree that LOTR is a much deeper creation, because it was first created as a book, for which more detail is just a part of the process. (A process which Tolkien took to a much more impressive length than most other authors.) Still, the Matrix movies are fun to watch, and while there may be plot holes and imprefections... when was the last time any action movie really gave you any deep topics to discuss in a coffee shop or theology class?
Mod the parent up! Absolutely hysterical Matrix Revolutions script parody beyond the link, definitely worth the read.
The sound and seats at my home are better than what I find in all but a few special theatres. I cringed from the over boosted treble I heard when I saw the first Lord of the Rings; swords fights were excruciating and my ears were ringing at the end. It was a relief when the movie was over.
I like a big screen; but the downside of seeing a movie with people that won't shut up, on uncomfortable seats, at great expense, completely outweighs the upside of screen size.
And, in the case of Lord of the Rings, the extended DVD version is much better than what they showed in the theatre!
-- Pot is safer than Beer
Please, /. is mostly ADHD geeks that have no proplem spending 5-6 hours straight playing video games, hammering code, reading techinial books...but often can't remember to match their socks...
First off, let me be clear... I didn't like what happened to Faramir.
However, let's assume you're someone who hasn't ever read the books. Throughout all of the movies, you've heard how powerfully corrupting this Ring is. You've seen Gandalf refuse to touch it. You've seen Boromir betray the Fellowship for it. And now you see this random guy, who turns out to be Boromir's brother, presented with an opportunity to take the Ring.
If you're someone who doesn't know what's "supposed" to happen, you're EXPECTING Faramir to want the Ring. If he just says "Ah, ok, you two random little people can take this powerful weapon into the hands of the enemy" you're not going to think "Oh, how noble of you". You're going to think "Hello Big Freakin' Plot Hole". There wasn't time to develop Faramir's character in the hidden caves (I forgot their name). So they had to do something else to rationalize Faramir releasing Frodo.
They weren't fighting in single combat. They were fighting as an army, not to mention they were fighting with a human army, in the style of human combat. Who knows how the elves would have fared by themselves, with equal numbers.
When Titanic was out in theatres, my family went to see it with some other relatives. Right after dinner. And was parked in the middle of the row with some sizable people around.
:-)
Started having to go to the bathroom within the first 15-30 minutes. And what did the majority of the end of the movie (at least that I bothered watching) have to do with? Right. Water. Nice flushing sounds as the water is going through the ship..
Oh yeah, and to spoil it for anyone who hasn't seen it: The ship sinks!
I missed the penultimate 15 minute segment of Lotr:FotR because I DID. I also discovered that when sufficiently motivated, I can be back in my seat in a time that would shame an Indy pit crew.
Man, I didn't miss any of the movie, but since you bring this up, the only time i've really -had- to leave a movie due to drinking a 'large' soda (is it just me? or do the movie theater larges remind anyone else of the bladder buster soda from LSL2? heh) anyhow, I didn't miss any of the movie (didn't piss myself either, if you're wondering) but that f'ing scene toward the end of LOTR:TTT where there was massive flooding -everywhere- was excruciatingly painful.
-matt
I'm at work, so I've only had a chance to skim the article and the higher modded comments, but does anyone know if they'll be including a coupon for a free showing of ROTK like they did for TTT when the FotR extended release came out?
For those who didn't buy the FOTR extended release straight out of the blocks last year, they came with coupons worth one admission to TTT that had to be used by the end of the year (i.e.: you had two weeks to use the coupon).
Made a $25 purchase all the more worthwhile once you factored in the $10 (NYC) free showing of TTT.
-- secret asIAN man (not Secret Asian Man)
Come on, be creative: install a toilet IN your couch!
I'm thinking the overclocking, water cooling, and see-through side with the neon lighting wouldn't be a good idea for such a project.
I wouldn't dare post it on slash dot for fear of enciting all the core dump jokes...
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
6. The machines could put the food they are feeding the humans to more efficient use by using it to generate power directly. It is a tremendous waste of energy to use humans as AA Energizers. This is Thermodynamics 101. Why are the machines so damned stupid?
When these movies comes to network television, with so much content, they could probably get a whole season of one hour episodes out of it, rather then show it as a series of movies.
If you include the extras there are 12 hours of movie. If you add time for commercials and introductions, credits, reviews and previews, you could extand that to 17 hours. Add some "making of" stuff to each episode you could get a bit more.
With it's leangth there may not be any other pratical way to put it on network television.
the big deal for me is that LoTR doesn't blow huge holes in it's plot as matrix did. He can stop bullets with his mind, but in the same scene has to fight H2H? riiiiight.... He can reach into Trinity and fix her heart, but he can no longer jump into Agents like in the first one?? OoooooKaaay.... Oh, but wait, there were "upgrades." Too bad he was mostly fighting outdated rogue programs. It's just bad writing, and makes no sense. And talk about a need for editing, jeebus that rave scene sucked. Couldn't they have released that on the "extended" edition, and left it out of the theater?
Not to mention the CGI was a bit overused and cheesey looking. I sure couldn't have animated human models that well, but still, it didn't look so great.
Too many flaws in the Matrix, LoTR wins.
I'm a stickler for precision...
*entracte* is the intermission, not the musical opening. It means 'between acts' in french (and doesn't have punctuation in the middle)
Yes it is. This December, selected theaters across North America (and possibly some worldwide) will be getting on the 5th a special extended print of FotR, on the 12th a special extended print of TT, and then on the 16th will be showing both of these prints back-to-back with RotK.
My local theater is one of the selected ones, the event starts in the afternoon and runs till after midnight. (I can't remember the exact showtimes, I think it's something like 1:30pm, 5pm, and 10pm, but as I said, I don't know and those don't sound quite right.)
Okay, the movies were the same thing over and over. I just thought they were boring. The lack of endings on the first two movies was terrible, no form of closure whatsoever. And "THE PRESCIOUS" drove me absolutely nuts.
Themes and allegory are different things. A theme is really just an idea--allegory is having one story symbolically stand in for another story.
Example:
The Ring Trilogy most definitely has an anti-industrial, pro-bucolic theme. It also has less savory themes such as being pro-monarchy and more than a little racist.
The Matrix has themes, but it also has allegory. Neo is a stand-in for Christ. "Waking up from the Matrix" is a stand-in for any number of Gnostic myths about the same subject.
When people thought the Ring Trilogy was an allegory about the rise of fascism in Europe, Tolkien wrote that he hated allegory and if he wanted to write about the rise of fascism in Europe, he'd damn well write about it instead of using allegory.
Basically Tolkien thought allegory was a cop-out for authors who weren't sure they really wanted to write about their actual subject matter, so they invented a symbolic buffer between the subject and the reader.
I'm not sure the Wachowski brothers chose the Matrix instead of a movie about religion and philosophy as a cop-out, but it's certainly allegorical.
If you watch any of the interviews where Peter Jackson is talking about the extended versions, he answers the question as to which is the 'real' version and why the extended versions were produced.
"Director's cut implies that the theatrical version was not the movie I wanted to make." is what he says. The Extended Versions were created for the purpose of giving that little something extra to the fans.
For those of us who do buy both ... If they had repeated the extras from the first disc, it would have made the new extra stuff SHORTER and I would have felt like I was paying for the second crap twice.
How is that better?
Ebay auctions here
Be prepared to pay... people are bidding these up to around $50 a ticket.
One guy bid $1299 for 2 tickets to the Hollywood screening.
Remember the days when Republicans were the party of fiscal responsibility?
Because it's better to see the movie at a theatre with better sound and large screen, months earlier than you can on a small tv with crappy speakers after already everyone saw it and was telling you how great it is?
Don't trust a bull's horn, a doberman's tooth, a runaway horse or me.
There has been discussion (by, e.g., Ian McKellan) of Peter Jackson directing _The Hobbit_ as a television series. McKellan thinks that because of the self-contained nature of each chapter, _The Hobbit_ would be perfect for such a production, with one episode per chapter.
Sounds like a great idea to me, except that I don't watch TV.
Actually, there is an EE print of FOTR. They're only showing it once, on Dec. 16th, along with EE TTT and ROTK. A DAY before ROTK opens!
I got tickets too... WOOHOO.
I doubt there are any left.
1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d Capitalization really works: i helped my uncle jack off a horse
At the place where I rent videos, they have tried to push the theatrical version DVD on me. Well, I wouldn't bother to try to explain why I don't generally buy DVD's in the first place, or that the LOTR series are the only films I expect to see in a theatre, this year or next. But I did see fit to try to explain that I didn't want to buy that version, but that I'd be happy to make a pre-order for the extended version. I did this a few times. Consistent reaction from the clerks. It's like, if you work in a video store, and you DON'T EVEN KNOW that there's going to be an extended version (like there was on the first one, duh?) that's a great way to lose whatever respect I had for you.
I have a similar attitude toward the guys who work in mall software stores who are somehow not at all hip to what's coming out. I'm not even a GAMER, and I know what titles they don't have in their store. Bizarre... I mean when it's your job, it seems reasonable to expect you to know this stuff, even if it is a shiddy job.
So Slashdot alerted me that this dvd was finally being released, and the preorder went to Amazon.
It's the only DVD I've bought since the last LOTR, making a total of two DVD's this year. It takes something like LOTR to make me cave on what is effectively a boycott of MPAA and RIAA materials.
those are its IPOO rights.
As I understand it, Frodo needs to destroy the ring
This has got to be worth some award as the most incredible inablity to understand a plot in the history of the human race.
Because the price charged for the ticket determines the class of the theater which determines how quickly said theater gets movies.
-- Terry
Can't get your eyes off his ass, eh? Well, maybe you should think about your sexual alignment then.. ;)
I had to run out during Matrix Revolutions, luckily there were plenty of opportunities!!!
Why do people lash out viciously at movies that actually make an attempt a real depth (LOTR), while simultaneously holding up the Matrix as the cinematic "Gold Standard?"
Why, oh why, is anyone "lashing out" at all? Me, I'm still deleriously happy that some one with reasonably good taste got himself ahold of an unlimited budget, and finally made a visually beautiful film of LotR. Then, my happiness is increased that some one else has written and made another interesting and visually spectacular sci-fi/fantasy trilogy in the Matrix.
You won't find me whining about whether my glass is half empty or half full -- because now I have two glasses, and there's tasty brew in both of them!
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
I got lucky in LotR:FotR -- even though I didn't buy any concessions, I still had to dash, and got back just in time to watch Gandalf's fight with the Balrog.
How many times do you use the bathroom during a given day?
I know not all of us have the same sized bladder... But I wonder if some of this isn't a result of conditioning. The lights go out, the music starts, and whammo, you've got to pee. Whether your bladder is full or not.
One word: community.
Movies were originally created for and meant to be experienced as a community. They were cheap entertainment in which audiences could escape the world in which they lived and be taken to any place and any time in history. They could escape the mundane lives they lived - even if just for a brief amount of time.
Viewing it in the theater - with a lot of other people - also gives the viewer comfort in that there are other people in the world right now who share their views. The viewer is reassured that somebody else has enjoyed the magnificent work of Tolkien. He/she is not alone. And in today's world, that is a very comforting thought.
Just my 2 cents...
Disclaimer: This comment was generated by a Flock of Trained Microsoft Programmers for Aqua_Geek.
I have been purchasing the theatrical release on VHS to share with friends. Then, I get the extended release on DVD for myself and friends that I would invite over.
Its said that "The Lion,the witch and the wardrobe" and LOTR were both written at the same time as an exercise in childrens writing, however, by all accounts tolkien didn't really like kids, thus Hobbits.
Both men critiqued each others work and were heavily influenced by the war. Tolkien later denied any metaphorical relation to Sauron to hitler, but reading the "Scour of the Shire" at the end of the books really makes me wonder. Clearly aslan is a christ figure in TLTWATW but Tolkien always denied this in Gandalf. While tolkien was just a practicing Anglican (i think) Lewis was a very pious Quaker.
Mr. Mathews is correct in that the ticket price determines how soon we get movies, and is also somewhat dependent on where the theater is. A standard adult ticket at the fiveplex I work at is $6.50, whereas in some places it can run as high as $10.
As a first-run movie theater, we cannot contractually sell tickets for less than $4, which is why $1 tickets won't fly. Again, it's not the theaters that are doing this, it's the movie studios.
Two reasons.
First, like another reply said it determines when the theatre can get the movie. Dollar movie theatres have older movies for a reason.
Second, because he's wrong. I also work at a movie theatre, and also used to think this was true. After talking to my Boss, she told me that our theatre makes roughly have of our money on tickets and the other half on concessions.
Probably not so good considering they don't FUCKING EXIST.
The theater gets a cut of the ticket sales. It's a sliding scale, very little during the first two weeks, much more when they keep the film longer.
is competition good, or is duplication of effort bad?
There is not meant to be complete closure until the end of RoTK. It's not like they are all separate entities; Tolkien did not write one and then decided that he wanted to write a sequel. They are meant to be read from Book 1 to 6, and consequently the movies are one continual story.
Be patient and rest assured that RoTK will finally deliver your complete closure.
Disclaimer: This comment was generated by a Flock of Trained Microsoft Programmers for Aqua_Geek.
Have you considered the cost of producing these extras? If they did a single release the cost to the consumer would have to be higher and then people would complain about that. Some people want to pay for all those extras and some don't.
Which is on Criterion and *highly* recommended.
Just one suggestion: read the books (again if you already have). Gollum had the ring for quite some time; it drove him mad. His only goal in life is to get it back. It has completely taken over his mind.
As for the worst overacting cartoon: um, did you see Episode I?? If you did, how can you put Gollum below Jar-Jar Binks??
"Meesa Golllum. Meesa wants dat ring dat yousa got."
Or how about: "Yousa saved me! Dat Faramir hesa was going to shoot meesa. Mount Doom? No, meesa can't go dersa. It is no goodsa - meesa will die-sa. OK, little hobbits, meesa show yousa the way to Gungan City - er - Mount Doom-sa."
Gollum, on the other hand, is not a rediculous character. Serkis does not overact, IMHO. Gollum is exactly how I pictured him while reading the books and I really have to give Serkis two thumbs up.
Disclaimer: This comment was generated by a Flock of Trained Microsoft Programmers for Aqua_Geek.
I've been waiting with held breath for this one. I just wish it would ship a few days early!
/. But you are taking it far to the extreme. Is LOTR truly the most important thing in your life? You're acting like it, and that's just too pathetic, even for /.
So sad. Now it's one thing to be a normal flute toting band dork like the vast majority of
Oh I think your confusing character and performance. Like him or not, Jar Jar Binks was exactly what he was supposed to be so, probabably could be considered a good performance. Gollum, on the other hand, is a character from a book that I felt was completely overacted and got about 10x more screen time then he should have.
It failed to draw you into the storyline? You were left without emotional interest in the outcome?
Let me get this straight:
You have a wife, and yet you could not connect with the characters? If they failed, the Uruks would have gone into the caves and massacred the women and children. The cross-cutting between the battle and the terrified families huddled in the caves failed to create any emotional connection? Seeing any "able-bodied men" - most of whom had "seen too many winters, or too few" - pulled away from their crying families, some never to see them again, did not in any way make you sympathize with them? Seeing terrified teenagers don weapons and armor failled to create any emotional interest in wheter they lived or died? Seeing the thousands of faces as they looked on in horror at the ten thousand approaching Uruks - who didn't care wheter they lived or died as they were "bred for a single purpose - to destroy the world of men" - failed to emotionally connect you in any way with the characters?
I don't know about you - but watching all of the above, a very strong emotional connection was created in me for the characters and the outcome.
Disclaimer: This comment was generated by a Flock of Trained Microsoft Programmers for Aqua_Geek.
"this type of crap is for mal adjusted dorks who cannot handle dealing with real people and real situations AKA life. these are the real geeks. YIKES."
/.? I really want to know how you deal with life. How do you purge your anger and hatred after dealing with someone who doesn't even know what a mouse does? How do you deal with life that qualifies you as "not a geek" - even though you read /. ("News for nerds - stuff that matters")?
Wow. I am completely speechless. So, what you're saying is that people who enjoy LoTR or Tron or Star Wars or Star Trek or any movie in which the audience has a chance to escape from the "real world" AKA life are the real dorks and these movies are for these "real" dorks who cannot deal with real people and real life?
We - yes, I guess I would have to be included in the "real dorks" catagory as I really enjoyed the LoTR books and the movies - enjoy escaping from life and our problems in it by watching these kind of movies. You, on the other hand, do what? Program a few hundred lines of code to make yourself feel better? Post comments on
Disclaimer: This comment was generated by a Flock of Trained Microsoft Programmers for Aqua_Geek.
I realize there is a difference between character and performance.
Here's a partial list of how I would define a performance as "good" or "bad:"
1. Is the performance appropriate for the character? I believe Serkis' performance is very on-par with the character portrayed by Tolkien. I gave the summary of Gollum's character to show how his performance is on-par. As for screen time, I don't think it was too much. He did have a lot, but as Gandalf forshadows, he does play a very key part in the end. Most of the time he got helps to delineate his character - his schizophrenic struggle and consequently his untrustworthiness. Serkis' performance isn't over-the-top. It rather is appropriate of the character.
2. Is the performance consistent? Again, yes. Serkis is the same schizophrenic Gollum throughout the whole film.
3. Expressiveness: the animators did a wonderful job with Gollum's body language and particularly his facial expressions and eyes. Take for example, the scene in which Gollum decides to have "her" kill off the nasty little hobbitses. His evil smirk and dark, squinted eyes give the audience a sense of his deep malice and insanity.
The list goes on.
If Lucas meant Jar-Jar to be annoying, then yes, his performance is "good." I think Serkis' performance as Gollum is very close to how Tolkien portrays the character in the books and therefore also "good." You may have pictured Gollum differently than I did, though, which would lead to your differing evaluation of his performance.
Disclaimer: This comment was generated by a Flock of Trained Microsoft Programmers for Aqua_Geek.
Since you brought it up, explain to me where my French was incorrect: does entre not mean between, or does acte not mean act?
My other statements concerned English.
You tell me how "whilst" differs from "while," and I'll stop calling you a pretentious jackass.
Check this thread at ShareReactor, an older posting on Slashdot or this Wikipedia entry.
You might actually like it. BTW, it also solves other problems mentioned in this thread, namely
fscking elves at the battle
Faramir taking Frodo and Sam to Osgiliath
bizzarre little side plot of ... Aragorn falling down
Theoden being posessed instead of manipulated
the ["Toss me!"] perversion of Gimli
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
(not including the extended credits)
An extra 30 minutes of fan club membership listings, again?
--Gollum dies, Bilbo dies, Gandalf dies, everybody dies. Mutant ninja penguins *pouring* out of the sky... I *loved* that scene in the third book.
:P
--Spock died too, but he got to come back once.
.
== WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
Roger Ebert writes in his review of Love Actually this week:
"I once had ballpoints printed up with the message, No good movie is too long. No bad movie is short enough."
Carthago delenda est!
Very interesting, I guess there may be more if it does ok. In any case, I am on the wrong continent for that one. Hey, do me a favour and enjoy it on my behalf!!!
See my journal, I write things there
movies that actually make an attempt a real depth (Matrix)
:)
Awww
This is why people should be made to read the classics, even if only for a year in school.
Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
You meant to say:
"You mean like the entirety of both of the Matrix sequals?"
> Obviously, you don't order and consume a 'super-sized' beverage that is at
> least twice the maximum human bladder capacity in the first hour of the film.
Either you have a very small bladder, or "super sized" beverages are much
larger in your area than around here (32 floz). If you really can't hold
32oz through a three-hour movie, you must have a uterus taking up the space
where your bladder would be if you were a real man, or something.
It wouldn't be any trouble for *me*. I can drink a 64oz glass of tea (black
tea, preferably orange pekoe blend, brewed strong, with sugar and vanilla) an
hour before bed and not need to use the facilities until morning, or drink a
64-oz Mt. Dew on an eight-hour car trip with no stops, so sitting through a
measley three-hour movie would certainly not be any problem.
Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
Argh!!! I had a hard enough time getting her to pay attention to it at three hours. Just wait until I can her to watch my 'Great Movie Run'.... All 6 Star Wars Films, LoTR Trillogy Extended Editions, and all three Matrix films.... err perhaps just the first Matrix film on the other hand.
Ludovico Technique with Geek Movies... perhaps she'll like them after all.
Tibbon
tibbon.com
Well with the recent tendency to release TV shows as anthologies on DVD would work great for you. That's probably the only way I'd watch it.
"We're not even supposed to be here!" -- Sam in Minas Tirith.
"Ain't no right way to do a wrong thing."
I kinda forgot about the whole percentage of ticket sales deal thing. Kinda sucks. I guess this is the case of we all know the problem, but no one can think of a solution.
But in reality, theaters have traditionally complained about getting screwed over, but I've yet to see a movie theater in this area close down due to lack of funds. So they must be doing ok--not rolling on the dough, but not bobbing for peanuts yet either.
Well there was this one $2 2nd run one that closed down, but that wasn't exactly unexpected, it was a dump and no one wanted to go there.
The amount of time it takes to deliver the vfx shots for the extended editions.
Other than running times, this is the major factor.
- The color palate is more subdued than that of Fellowship, but colors are accurate at all times.
We have the annoying typo where clueless people write palette (tablet used by painters for mixing holding and mixing colours) instead of pallet (portable platform for storing and moving goods), leading to interesting imagery. I didn't realize it went the other way, and these clueless people also misspelled palette as palate (the roof of the mouth, figuratively one's sense of taste). I wonder if the same people ever mispell palate as palette or palette as pallet. The mind boggles, constantly.Depends on the theater -- the one I work at makes pretty much *all* its money off of concessions. Each contract is different, but by in large if we didn't sell concessions we couldn't show movies, nor could we pay someone to sell tickets (and we're making federal minimum, remember).
I would guess it has something to do with how each chain runs.
- Heavy Metal
Oh, and, "...that's my lochnar, you bitch!"
IANA expert on bladders, but the average human bladder can hold about 13-oz of liquid (really, google it.)
;-)
So either you have an abnormally large bladder, abnormally high perspiration rate, or abnormally large penchant for bragging.
Just another comment:
Ever notice how when you hear about how well a movie did on opening weekend or whatever, it's ALWAYS reported as a dollar amount for gross ticket sales, NEVER the actual number of tickets sold? What do you suppose happens to that number when the theater charges a different price? A movie can be called "highest-grossing of all time" but will never be called "most watched" because those numbers are not reported.
Instead of first-run theaters being contractually obligated to charge at least $4/ticket, why not just charge them $4/ticket to show the movie? I'm sure how it works now is illegal in some other countries (Japan? I think I once heard something about Apple's price-fixing policy being a problem there).
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
We make nothing off the tickets regardless of how much we sell them for.
I believe that should be:
We make nothing off the tickets the first week regardless of how much we sell them for.
Studios get 100% of tickets sales the first week, and declining percentages after that.
Ridley Scott envisioned a darker, more ambivalent ending than the one the studio allowed him to do. The theatrical edition gives you no hints that Deckard may himself be a replicant. It also misses out on the unicorn dream which makes the little unicorn made by Gaff at the end seem out of place and without meaning. Add to that the voiceover (same thing was done with Dark City) to make the audience more able to understand the movie, and you have a different feel which is not what the director originally intended.
The Director's Cut fixes these issues, makes a darker, more sombre film, and is therefore easily the better for it.
I think (not having seen the Extended LotR editions yet) that Peter Jackson is doing the best he can for the fans, while keeping his corporate masters on side for the theatrical releases.
I personally haven't bought any LotR DVD yet, not because I don't consider them great movies, they are), but because I intend to buy only ONE version, and that will undoubtedly be a Trilogy Extended Box Set (even if it's just all three Extended Versions in one box).
Quizo69
Visceral Psyche Films
now i've heard everything :p
but seriously i would never have thought of doing that. u r big fweak d00d! ;)
This is my Sig, this is my Gun. One is for Slashdot and one is for Fun.
Who let this girl in here?
For anyone who's aware of bladder/stomach/solid waste issues: better get a bucket.
However, even the extended movie could be much more extended. Many many details have been simplified and unexplained, so people not so familiar with LoTR trilogy are confused.
...on this one: Jackson completely changed the fundamental nature of Faramir, for no particularly good reason.
Faramir started out as the little brother who could never live up to the expectations of his father or the example of his brother. He sought solace by hiding in the library from activities where he could never hope to best his brother. Then, one day, a strange wizard showed up, almost demanding to see the archives there. (Jackson even showed this research, which wasn't actually depicted in the book, only described.)
Denethor was annoyed by Gandalf's "arrogance," but let him have access. Faramir spied on the wizard and when Gandalf was not there he tried to figure out what was being studied. He learned much about Isildur's Bane (although he never guessed it was a ring). He even saw that Isildur was much like his brother. This gave him the understanding of why Isildur fell, the ability to predict that his brother would be similarly weak when he encountered the ring, and *no* inclination whatever to try to take the ring from Frodo.
He even laughs when Samwise imprudently gives away the secret. He tells them he's already guessed what they've been hiding from him.
The virtue of the scholarly was at least as important to Tolkein as the virtue of the valorous. But he understood that some did not understand it and he made Denethor as tragic exemplar of that lack of understanding. When Denethor saw his son sneaking off to be with the wizard he mistrusted, jealousy added to the reasons Faramir prefered his older son. When he looked into the palantir, Sauron saw all these weaknesses and used them to bend his will. While Denethor thought he was beating Sauron (in the battle of wills enabled by the palantir) by choosing to try to use the ring against the Dark Lord, this was actually what Sauron wanted.
When Denethor finds out that Faramir had the ringbearers in his grasp and let them take it to Mordor, it is the lack of any inclination on the part of his son to have done otherwise that sends him into madness. The steward-regent's madness is crucial to the sense that mighty Gondor could fall quickly and easily before help can arrive.
Before the king can return.
Such a story may be that would have been boring to the audience. I don't think so. I thought the Yet Another Good Guy Tempted story was a cop-out. And ultimately boring. Evil has many ways of winning, and that's the real scary thing. Some people can resist from their childhood...and still evil finds a way to use their resistance to corrupt others. Evil that has depth and layers is hardly boring.
Maybe this makes me some kind Middle-Earth nerd to "hyperventilate" over this, but I think changing the fundamental nature of a key character when that nature itself was a key plot point is a mistake. This is what makes the difference between a great movie and a typical, compromised adaptation. "The Fellowship of the Ring" was (for me) a great movie. I had no problem with the changes because they didn't compromise the real meaning of the story. "The Two Towers" was a decent adaptation which I only saw once because it made unnecessary compromises with the nature of key characters (Faramir and the Ents being the most egregious).
Eternal vigilance only works if you look in every direction.
...of the need for comic relief. And he put it in the books.
The primary delivery vehicle: hobbits, in particular Peregrin Took (Pippin). That all of the hobbits ultimately play a key role makes the choice of vehicle all the more delicious.
Sorry, on this one: Tolkien 1; Jackson/Rallion: 0
Eternal vigilance only works if you look in every direction.
First off, the average includes females (who have a couple of extra organs
crowding the bladder), children (who just have a smaller capacity generally),
and the elderly (ditto). I suspect 32oz capacity is common for an adult male.
Second, I think you'd be surprised at how much perspiration is normal; I
doubt half of what you drink ends up in your bladder, on average, though of
course it varies from person to person and from day to day based on an
assortment of factors.
Is 64oz capacity extra-large? Probably, but the other poster seemed to be
claiming that 32oz was more than twice the maximum anyone can handle, which
seems absurd to me.
Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
Jonadab, meet hyperbole.
> I think the perversion of Gimli is worse than the perversion of Faramir.
>
> "Toss me!" WTF? And him being a big whiner for the whole film just pissed me off right proper. Gimli's my favourite character.
Indeed. Gimli was supposed to be a heroic figure, not a comic relief.
in the book his character had depth, in the movie it was not memorable.