No no no....

[cat_crimson]

...despite me enjoying it much more on a second run through than watching it at the cinema ( where I *did* enjoy it but had huge issues with all of the films esp the casting ) having now watched the last of the LOTR trilogy on t'telly again, the last 20-25 mins of Return of the King are the amongst the lamest & most fuckawful in film history. Oh

Comments

[cat_fiadhaich]

Just be thankful that they decided to cut more of Arwen's scenes out. Evidence suggest that she was also orignally at Helm's deep and that it was she who took the sword to Aragon though.

Bloody filmakers. I accept that you now a story needs to be tweaked because of the inherent differences between book and film but sone of those changes in LOTR weren't necessary.

And I never thought of hobbiton being teletubby land. Now it's going to get stuck in my brain.

Seriously though, have you watched the extended version. I can't stand the cinema version it jumps all around the place. The extended version at least makes some things make more sense and is better to watch because there's more connection between things.

[herneoakshield]

Well I have to say I love the films, Before I get pounced on let me put it this way... I adore the books and will always have them. The way I look at the films is the way it was intended by Peter Jackson/Fran Walsh/Philipa Boyens it is one set of fans version of the stories, its not meant as an exact book to film copy because that would be impossible to do...

Yes there are things in it that I don't like the way they were done such as not having Frodo's birthday on the day of Bilbo's in the fellowship, there is more of Arwen in it than in the book (understandably though I mean you need the love interest in a way) looking specifically at film three, I hate the way they killed Saruman I think that they should have done something with the Scouring of the shire as well... and yes I did find the Emo Hobbits to be "over played"

all in all though despite the bolloxing about in places I think its a pretty good version of the books. (my comments are based on the extended cut versions)

[cat_crimson]

I wouldnt have expected an exact book to film copy, even though I too love the books and read them through end to end at least twice a year. But I had major issues with quite a few things they did. In some respects not so much Peter Jacksons fault direct as some of the cast and performances. And I am basing my opinion on the non extended version cos thats what Ive watched

[cat_fiadhaich]

you sound like me after I had first seen the movies. My boyfriend hadn't read the books so I was ranting on and on and he had no idea what I was on about.

I wish that had left more background stuff in but then again they were lucky to do 3 movies, originally it was slated as two movies. I wish they had left the scouring of the shire in.

I wish they had used someone less akward then Liv Taylor for Arwen, someone who can act and left the role like it was int the book.

I have a few of the books that came out on the movie, like the artwork and costumes and stuff because it's interesting and some places it was very well done. I just wished they paid the same attention to the story.I prefer the extended version mainly because there are a few points better done in the extended where as in the orignal cinema release had me going wtf are they on. Thing's like Faramir's quality remark.

Now I'm off and ranting.

I love Tolkien's work, he was incredibly gifted in so many areas.