|
Related Topics:
| Yuck! Could be worse! - Did y'all read about how JK Rowling is suing to prevent someone from a reference work about Harry Potter? Thank Eru that the Tolkien estate never thought that way! -- FotW Reality is for those who cannot cope with
ROTK EXT ED - Hi all, I apologise if this has been asked before - but I've been away for a bit. Does anyone know the release date for the extended edition of the ROTK and is their any on what scenes have been from the cinematic
Just seen ROTK - I came out with tears in my eyes. This film was superbly executed and I wouldn't have it any other way. My only gripe two gripes was no scouring of the shire. No face off between Gandalf and Saruman. I hope this is addressed in the EE. -- ChrisC -..
ROTK: Where are the Easterlings? - I noticed that the we saw entering the black gate in the TT movie are never seen again and are not in ROTK. Why did PJ show them in TT if he didn't intend to use them later in ROTK? What role did the play in the ROTK book, if..
Any news on RotK:EE? - This DVD title was supposed to be out in August but it's been put off to December as has been Is there any news on it, does anyone know if it's ready yet? Are there any scenes we know will be in there? BR, -JJ
|
|
| Author |
Message |
External
Since: Mar 01, 2004
Posts: 36
|
(Msg. 1) Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2003 11:09 am
Post subject: ROTK: Yuck
Archived from groups: rec>arts>books>tolkien (more info?)
|
|
|
Just got back from a midnight showing of ROTK.
Yuck. Just... yuck.
My patience was utterly spent by the time we were "treated" to a flaming
Denethor running from his pyre across the entire length of the city before
plunging over the wall into the battlefield below. That utter tripe simply
killed the last of my lingering respect for Peter Jackson.
How did this go so wrong? FELLOWSHIP OF THE RINGS was a masterpiece of film. It
was faithful as an adaptation. It was powerful as a piece of cinema. It is
arguably the finest fantasy film ever produced. It was, in short, about as
close to perfect as one could hope for.
How can the very same production have reduced itself to such utter ruin as THE
RETURN OF THE KING?
Justin Bacon
triad3204.DeleteThis@aol.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
 | |
External
Since: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: 10
|
(Msg. 2) Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2003 11:09 am
Post subject: Re: ROTK: Yuck [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
[Justin Bacon (triad3204@aol.com)]
[17 Dec 2003 11:09:06 GMT]
:How can the very same production have reduced itself to such utter ruin as THE
:RETURN OF THE KING?
First of all, how about a SPOILERS FROM DISGRUNTLED TOLKIEN STUCK-
BUTTONED FAN WITH AN AGENDA AGAINST THE MOVIES AND PETER JACKSON warning
in your subject header?
Secondly, you've made it pretty clear over time that there was
absolutely nothing Return of the King as shown by Peter Jackson could do
or show to get a good review from you, Justin. Your mind was made up
before you went. You couldn't follow along in the movie by simply
turning pages in your copy of Tolkien's ROTK.. therefore, it's a horrid
abomination, etc, etc, etc. Spare us.
I think it's pretty apparent that your review can be safely ignored.
--
Bryan S. Slick, bryan_s at slick-family dot net
"To those who have fought for it,
freedom has a flavor the protected will never know." |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Nov 26, 2003
Posts: 26
|
(Msg. 3) Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2003 12:13 pm
Post subject: Re: ROTK: Yuck [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Justin Bacon wrote:
> Just got back from a midnight showing of ROTK.
>
> Yuck. Just... yuck.
Quelle surprise, M. Bacon disliked ROTK. I wonder why you bothered to go
to a midnight showing, or any showing for that matter?
-JJ >> Stay informed about: ROTK: Yuck |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Feb 18, 2004
Posts: 58
|
(Msg. 4) Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2003 12:13 pm
Post subject: Re: ROTK: Yuck [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Jussi Jaatinen wrote:
>
> Justin Bacon wrote:
>
> Quelle surprise, M. Bacon disliked ROTK. I wonder why you bothered to go
> to a midnight showing, or any showing for that matter?
I wasn't overly impressed with the first two movies. And I will
certainly offer my opinion, pro or otherwise, about this latest film.
Do you think I shouldn't be able to see it? >> Stay informed about: ROTK: Yuck |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Dec 01, 2003
Posts: 14
|
(Msg. 5) Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2003 1:58 pm
Post subject: Re: ROTK: Yuck [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
> [Justin Bacon (triad3204@aol.com)]
> [17 Dec 2003 11:09:06 GMT]
>
> :How can the very same production have reduced itself to such utter ruin
as THE
> :RETURN OF THE KING?
Hey Justin, PJ send his regards. >> Stay informed about: ROTK: Yuck |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 31, 2004
Posts: 189
|
(Msg. 6) Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2003 3:40 pm
Post subject: Re: ROTK: Yuck [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Bryan S. Slick" <bryan_s.RemoveThis@slick-family.not> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a4a0a94c9cddbea989809@news2.usenetrocket.com...
> [Justin Bacon (triad3204@aol.com)]
> [17 Dec 2003 11:09:06 GMT]
>
> :How can the very same production have reduced itself to such utter ruin as
THE
> :RETURN OF THE KING?
>
> First of all, how about a SPOILERS FROM DISGRUNTLED TOLKIEN STUCK-
> BUTTONED FAN WITH AN AGENDA AGAINST THE MOVIES AND PETER
> JACKSON warning in your subject header?
And you have no agenda, have you, like badmouthing all people
disagreeing with Peter Jackson's "vision", right?
> Secondly, you've made it pretty clear over time that there was
> absolutely nothing Return of the King as shown by Peter Jackson could do
> or show to get a good review from you, Justin.
Yeah, and I'm sure people will say the same about me, won't they?
You have now made it pretty clear that my own failure to agree to
Peter Jackson's moronic decisions, means that my informed opinion
when actually stated, will likewise be ignored -- just as Justin Bacon's
has.
> I think it's pretty apparent that your review can be safely ignored.
As opposed to yours? You who have already decided he'll completely
adore the film?
Aris Katsaris >> Stay informed about: ROTK: Yuck |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 30, 2004
Posts: 63
|
(Msg. 7) Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2003 3:40 pm
Post subject: Re: ROTK: Yuck [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
> As opposed to yours? You who have already decided he'll completely
> adore the film?
i like plan nine from outer space
and howard the duck >> Stay informed about: ROTK: Yuck |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Dec 11, 2003
Posts: 3
|
(Msg. 8) Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2003 3:40 pm
Post subject: Re: ROTK: Yuck [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 15:40:48 +0200, "Aris Katsaris"
<katsaris DeleteThis @otenet.gr> wrote:
>
>"Bryan S. Slick" <bryan_s DeleteThis @slick-family.not> wrote in message
>news:MPG.1a4a0a94c9cddbea989809@news2.usenetrocket.com...
>> [Justin Bacon (triad3204@aol.com)]
>> [17 Dec 2003 11:09:06 GMT]
>>
>> :How can the very same production have reduced itself to such utter ruin as
>THE
>> :RETURN OF THE KING?
>>
>> First of all, how about a SPOILERS FROM DISGRUNTLED TOLKIEN STUCK-
>> BUTTONED FAN WITH AN AGENDA AGAINST THE MOVIES AND PETER
>> JACKSON warning in your subject header?
>
>And you have no agenda, have you, like badmouthing all people
>disagreeing with Peter Jackson's "vision", right?
>
>> Secondly, you've made it pretty clear over time that there was
>> absolutely nothing Return of the King as shown by Peter Jackson could do
>> or show to get a good review from you, Justin.
>
>Yeah, and I'm sure people will say the same about me, won't they?
>You have now made it pretty clear that my own failure to agree to
>Peter Jackson's moronic decisions, means that my informed opinion
>when actually stated, will likewise be ignored -- just as Justin Bacon's
>has.
>
>> I think it's pretty apparent that your review can be safely ignored.
>
>As opposed to yours? You who have already decided he'll completely
>adore the film?
>
>Aris Katsaris
>
Rather more troubling is the fact that there is an increasing tendency
here for people not to indicate that they have snipped text
In this case, what was omitted upthread was
>How did this go so wrong? FELLOWSHIP OF THE RINGS was a masterpiece of film. It
>was faithful as an adaptation. It was powerful as a piece of cinema. It is
>arguably the finest fantasy film ever produced. It was, in short, about as
>close to perfect as one could hope for.
>
>How can the very same production have reduced itself to such utter ruin as THE
>RETURN OF THE KING?
Hence, the poster was *praising* peter Jackson's work, but disputing
it in the current instance. However, this fact was inconvenient for
their kneejerk reaction so it was omitted.
Not all ardent movie supporter are lackwits.
But it is a fair assumption.
Me, I'm going to see the movie and try to see it just as a film where
any resmblance to Tolkien will be incidental. It may be a decent
fantasy film, in and of itself.
But I doubt I would seek out a novelization. And I doubt that that
themes and message of the film would result in a work that people have
turned to for about a half century.
For that, you need Tolkien.
Sindamor
--
No, I don't hate all the changes; just the changes that are hateful. >> Stay informed about: ROTK: Yuck |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 04, 2004
Posts: 9
|
(Msg. 9) Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2003 3:40 pm
Post subject: Re: ROTK: Yuck [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
<stealthy_tanuki.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3fe06b13.1326387@netnews.worldnet.att.net...
<snipped >
> Me, I'm going to see the movie and try to see it just as a film where
> any resmblance to Tolkien will be incidental. It may be a decent
> fantasy film, in and of itself.
>
> But I doubt I would seek out a novelization. And I doubt that that
> themes and message of the film would result in a work that people have
> turned to for about a half century.
>
> For that, you need Tolkien.
Tolkien? Who's Tolkien? >> Stay informed about: ROTK: Yuck |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: 10
|
(Msg. 10) Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2003 3:40 pm
Post subject: Re: ROTK: Yuck [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
[stealthy_tanuki@yahoo.com (stealthy_tanuki@yahoo.com)]
[Wed, 17 Dec 2003 15:07:18 GMT]
:Hence, the poster was *praising* peter Jackson's work, but disputing
:it in the current instance. However, this fact was inconvenient for
:their kneejerk reaction so it was omitted.
:
:Not all ardent movie supporter are lackwits.
Excuse you, but you have no basis by which to make the above comment. I
do not snip statements due to their "inconvenience". You have some kind
of nerve. I snip what it is not relevant to my reply.. period.
--
Bryan S. Slick, bryan_s at slick-family dot net
"To those who have fought for it,
freedom has a flavor the protected will never know." >> Stay informed about: ROTK: Yuck |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Dec 06, 2003
Posts: 4
|
(Msg. 11) Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2003 4:18 pm
Post subject: Re: ROTK: Yuck [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
stealthy_tanuki DeleteThis @yahoo.com wrote:
> But I doubt I would seek out a novelization.
You mean there will be a novelization? Oh dear...
Berislav >> Stay informed about: ROTK: Yuck |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Dec 11, 2003
Posts: 3
|
(Msg. 12) Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2003 5:30 pm
Post subject: Re: ROTK: Yuck [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 11:45:26 -0500, Bryan S. Slick
<bryan_s.TakeThisOut@slick-family.not> wrote:
>[stealthy_tanuki@yahoo.com (stealthy_tanuki@yahoo.com)]
>[Wed, 17 Dec 2003 15:07:18 GMT]
>
>:Hence, the poster was *praising* peter Jackson's work, but disputing
>:it in the current instance. However, this fact was inconvenient for
>:their kneejerk reaction so it was omitted.
>:
>:Not all ardent movie supporter are lackwits.
>
>Excuse you, but you have no basis by which to make the above comment. I
>do not snip statements due to their "inconvenience". You have some kind
>of nerve. I snip what it is not relevant to my reply.. period.
Quite right
The facts are not relevent to your reply.
Thank you for confirming this.
Have a nice day.
--
No, I don't hate all the changes; just the changes that are hateful. >> Stay informed about: ROTK: Yuck |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Dec 11, 2003
Posts: 3
|
(Msg. 13) Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2003 5:39 pm
Post subject: Re: ROTK: Yuck [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 11:45:26 -0500, Bryan S. Slick
<bryan_s DeleteThis @slick-family.not> wrote:
>[stealthy_tanuki@yahoo.com (stealthy_tanuki@yahoo.com)]
>[Wed, 17 Dec 2003 15:07:18 GMT]
>
>:Hence, the poster was *praising* peter Jackson's work, but disputing
>:it in the current instance. However, this fact was inconvenient for
>:their kneejerk reaction so it was omitted.
>:
>:Not all ardent movie supporter are lackwits.
>
>Excuse you, but I have some kind
>of nerve. I snip what it is not relevant to my period.
I am sorry for so miscontruing you. I had no idea it what time of the
month it was for you and I was completely mistaken as to your gender.
Sindamor
:: speaking very slowly::
Yes, I am making a point.
--
No, I don't hate all the changes; just the changes that are hateful. >> Stay informed about: ROTK: Yuck |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jul 30, 2003
Posts: 9
|
(Msg. 14) Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2003 5:51 pm
Post subject: Re: ROTK: Yuck [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Bryan S <bryan_s.RemoveThis@slick-family.not> wrote:
: You couldn't follow along in the movie by simply turning pages in your
: copy of Tolkien's ROTK.. therefore, it's a horrid
: abomination, etc, etc, etc. Spare us.
: I think it's pretty apparent that your review can be safely ignored.
Bryan,it is those who approach the films with any attitude
OTHER than what you describe above who have opinions unworthy
of attention.
-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed. >> Stay informed about: ROTK: Yuck |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Dec 17, 2003
Posts: 10
|
(Msg. 15) Posted: Wed Dec 17, 2003 6:57 pm
Post subject: Re: ROTK: Yuck [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
[stealthy_tanuki@yahoo.com (stealthy_tanuki@yahoo.com)]
[Wed, 17 Dec 2003 17:39:08 GMT]
:I am sorry for so miscontruing you. I had no idea it what time of the
:month it was for you and I was completely mistaken as to your gender.
:
:Sindamor
:
: :: speaking very slowly::
: Yes, I am making a point.
Actually, you THINK you are making a point. I didn't snip anything mid-
sentence or anything remotely intended to misconstrue anything at all.
--
Bryan S. Slick, bryan_s at slick-family dot net
"To those who have fought for it,
freedom has a flavor the protected will never know." >> Stay informed about: ROTK: Yuck |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
FAQ
Search
Profile
Private Messages
Log in/Register/Password
