The Return of the King

[TheRustyOne]

There was the baby in theater that kept crying, the mother tried NOT to shush it, despite being yelled at by about half the ppl in the theater, and took it out of the theater (finally) about 15 minutes till the end of the movie

 

[Elfan]

Originally posted by michaeledward
Long Ending ...

If you haven't read the end of the book, it certainly does seem like a long ending. The book ends with several lengthy chapters that wind down the events of the 4 hobbits.

From the book point of view ... Jackson cut a lot from the ending of the movie to keep it as short as he did.

About half the book was straight out cut to be precise.

 

[Seig]

Originally posted by Elfan
About half the book was straight out cut to be precise.

And it was still 3 1/2 hours long.......

 

[theletch1]

And it was still 3 1/2 hours long.......

Even as big a fanatic as Pete Jackson was he didn't have any choice but cut huge pieces of the book out to keep it to a length that people would sit through. I'd think that had every thing been left in (Tom Bobadill, the Scouring of the Shire and such) each movie would have been six or seven hours long.

 

[MA-Caver]

Last night watched the EXPANDED edition of the Fellowship on DVD and it had an additonal 30 minutes of footage which (IMO) REALLY helped the film along in terms of story line. The Two Towers added 43/46 minutes on the DVD and the same applies.

The absence of secondary characters (i.e. Tom Bombadill and Merry Goldweather) and other events does subtract from the (TRUE) Tolkien fan's memory of the books.

All in all still it's doubtful that anyone for a long time to come will be able to top Pete Jackson's work.

Now he's off to Skull Island to remake Kong then it's said he's going to work on the Hobbit

 

[TheRustyOne]

Originally posted by Seig
And it was still 3 1/2 hours long.......

I counted 4 hrs...

 

[Ender]

Damn..and I thot this was an ELVIS thread...*kicking dirt

 

[7starmantis]

I loved it, I haven't really been too in to the series, but I got to see this one the monday before it opened at a screaning, and it was pretty dang awesome.

7sm

 

[OULobo]

I was miffed at the loss of Tom in the movies. He was undoubtably my favorite character from the books. I always love someone who fits in between the lines and answers to no one, but himself. I was also asked by a friend how a hobbit with a knife could harm someone that "could not be killed by any man." I told him that Jackson dropped the ball on that one.

Without throwing up a contraversey, did anyone else get a little bit of ethnicity to the oliphant riders and their army, that could be construed as racist. I mean the oliphant riders had an central african flavor to them and the oliphant crews had a north african / arabic flavor to them.

 

[Blindside]

I really don't like the Tom Bombadil chapter in Fellowship, even as a kid I usually skipped that part. In this respect, the movie version was just fine for me.

The accusation of Tolkien of racial stereotyping is an old one. He was trying to create a mythology for northern Europe and for England in particular. He describes the Easterlings (a race of men who followed Sauron) as swarthy and bearded like dwarves. Construe that any way you want.

Lamont

 

[OULobo]

Originally posted by Blindside
I really don't like the Tom Bombadil chapter in Fellowship, even as a kid I usually skipped that part. In this respect, the movie version was just fine for me.

The accusation of Tolkien of racial stereotyping is an old one. He was trying to create a mythology for northern Europe and for England in particular. He describes the Easterlings (a race of men who followed Sauron) as swarthy and bearded like dwarves. Construe that any way you want.

Lamont

How can you dislike Tom, he was a classic example of the character that brings to the table the reality that the quest of the protagonist is not the end of the world. Just their world. It left another story to explore. Some people say that the first Matrix was the best of the three for the same reason.

I'm just wondering why Mr. Jackson chose to portray the Easterlings in the manner he did. Tolkien may have alluded to the appearance of the Easterlings, but it was Jackson that gave them the visual appearance of Africans. Personally, I think that it is his right as an artist to portray them anyway he feels and I salute his gumption in continuing despite possible public distastes. I also don't think Tolkien cared much about claims of racisim when he penned the epic, and he realized his vision and the saga it became are what they are for better or worse and despite any criticism.

 

[michaeledward]

Originally posted by OULobo
Without throwing up a contraversey, did anyone else get a little bit of ethnicity to the oliphant riders and their army, that could be construed as racist. I mean the oliphant riders had an central african flavor to them and the oliphant crews had a north african / arabic flavor to them.

My copy of The Lord of the Rings (Red Book ISBN 0-395-19395-8) describes the Haradrim in 4 different ways:
1 - Easterlings with axes
2 - Variags of Khand
3 - Southrons in scarlet
4 - and out of Far Harad black men like half-trolls with white eyes and red tongues.

This comes from the chapter 'The Battle of the Pelennor Fields' on page 121 of my copy of the book.

Certainly not a very flattering view of what the man fighting in Saurons army. And in today's world it may be racist. I don't know about Tolkien's world. I think the bigger controversy is all the smoking that goes on ... by the good guys.

Peace - Mike

 

[Blindside]

I think the bigger controversy is all the smoking that goes on ... by the good guys.

And you wonder why the hobbits had the munchies all the time....

 

[Seig]

Originally posted by Blindside
And you wonder why the hobbits had the munchies all the time....

Yes, but what about second breakfast?

 

[hardheadjarhead]

I went to the 12:01 a.m. show when it was released here.

The charge of the Rohirrim nearly had me standing up and shouting. When Bernard Law led them in a cheer I nearly lost it. I fell in love with Eowyn about then.

GREAT MOVIE. GREAT BOOKS. GREAT DIRECTOR. GREAT AUTHOR.

For the Glory of Gondor,


Steve

 

[Andi]

Originally posted by hardheadjarhead
The charge of the Rohirrim nearly had me standing up and shouting.

YES. That was brilliant. My favourite bit of all the battle scenes so far I think. Can you imagine having 6000 angry horseman screaming "DEATH!!!" charging you? I want to go the cinema now.

 

[theletch1]

Yes, but what about second breakfast?

and elevensies, and afternoon tea.... and supper and dinner?

Can you imagine having 6000 angry horseman screaming "DEATH!!!" charging you?

Sure, when I have a couple of cave trolls to hide behind.

I imagine that the oliphant riders were garbed as they were to fit as much with Tolkiens concept (I'm sure there were drawings somewhere) as to contrast with the nordic look of the Riders of Rohan. Personally, I think they looked a lot like some of the 1980s punk rockers I knew. To point to these movies and think that they were racially motivated in any way seems to be a bit paranoid to me. They were entertainment, take it on that level.

 

[Andi]

Talking about the Oliphaunts, did anybody else think that when the Riders were trying to take them down, it was all a bit Star Wars trying to take down the AT-ATs? If only Eomer had Sam's magical elvish rope.

 

[arnisador]

Yes, I couldn't get that Star Wars picture out of my mind!

 

[Cthulhu]

I half expected Legolas to whip out a lightsaber and slit the thing's belly open.

Cthulhu