-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
RTTP: The Lord of the Rings (The Motion Picture)
- Thread starter zero shift
- Start date
- Status
Agreed. Nearly every single scene from those movies feel soulless. The score, special effects, cinematography and charachters does absolutely nothing for me.
zero shift
Banned
PerezDeCorcho
Member
Some stories are timeless. This is one of them.
There are plenty out there who haven't experienced these movies.
Lynd7
Member
bananafactory
Banned
Fellowship EE is an outstanding film!
Even a decade later you can discover small details like Aragon taking Boromirs bracers after his death.
"I do not know what strength is in my blood, but I swear to you, I will not let the White City fall, nor our people fail."
The scene is a second or two long, so it is easy to miss, but Aragorn wears the bracers in both The Two Towers and The Return of the King. He only takes them off after fullfilling his promise.
Damn, I remember the scene with him strapping them on but didn't connect that they were Boromir's. Holy shit
bananafactory
Banned
But TTT has one of the best scenes in the whole trilogy (Faramir/Boromir in Osgiliath). You're wrong. It's OK to be wrong.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
ROTK is probably the weakest, structurally, especially the theatrical release. They fell in love with that Smeagol scene which either should have been in Fellowship or dropped entirely, and leaving out Saruman's fate is a REALLY big problem.
Still, it's utterly and completely cathartic by the end.
Still, it's utterly and completely cathartic by the end.
That's EE only though, no? TTT was the most improved one of the three, the extended cut is great.
Helm's Deep is great too, it's much more focused than Pelennor Fields and the ending with Rohirrim Charge is simply magical.
bananafactory
Banned
Yeah it is EE, to be honest I haven't watched the theatrical cuts since seeing them in theatres, it's impossible to go back after viewing the EEs. Other than the scene I mentioned, for the most part I couldn't tell you what was added and what's missing. The EEs are now the official movies for me.
The whole self-defeating nature of evil doesn't really work as a cinematic theme the way it does in literature, I think.
Explain how three films essentially copying the three part nature of the novel which together represent the same narrative with a beginning, middle and end magically end up not being one film?
Chopping the story into three for both novels and films was about size and consumption - in both cases it was to make it less intimidating to experience and easier to produce.
You watch all three films that are each a part in a row and by the end you've watched The Lord of the Rings.
You read all three books that are each a part in a row and by the end you've read The Lord of the Rings.
If you only read The Fellowship of the Ring you've only seen read the first third of the story. Ditto if you only watch The Fellowship of the Ring.
It's one work chopped up in both mediums period. People are viewing the films as if Jackson made huge changes. It's an adoption and all they really did was cut out stuff to shorter it (something they magically reversed with The Hobbit) and changed the sequencing of events to better suit film (in the books Tolkein splits the strands up in the last two thirds in a way that wouldn't fit as well with film). Not to diminish the effort but the filmakers were working from a complete manuscript that guaranteed a consistent narrative (unlike the messy state of affairs you get with most film trilogies were each is created after the other in isolation trying to stitch them together).
To hammer this home one last time their is one, single story called The Lord of the Rings that is so large in most formats its traditionally split into three parts following the initial publication called Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers and The Return of the King.
When I was in like fourth or fifth grade, I read the Hobbit and loved it, I even listened to the audio cassette book version from the library on a long trip with the family. I was also a huge fan of the Rankin-Bass animation growing up as well. This was uh...30 years ago. Flash forward to now? These Hobbit films are very upsetting and overall horrible to me to the point that I refuse to waste anymore time with them by watching the third part of the bloated mess Jackson created. I was otherwise not much of a Tolkien fan but I do appreciate what he brought to the genre and in some ways helped to create and popularize.
I tried reading the LOTR books later on and just couldn't make it through...The original Dragonlance Chronicles was more my tastes back in 1985.
Having just rewatched Fellowship recently thanks to Google giving it away for free the other week, it really brought back how much love and care Jackson put into it compared to the CGI shit fest that is the Hobbit trilogy. Whereas I didn't plow my way through the LOTR books, this and Two Towers were really great and I love the 'dirty' and raw feel they have. The Hobbit films really do feel like what Lucas did with the prequels - the soul was gone. I was checking out all the models, and practical effects...the amazing sets...the way they filmed with the forced perspective. It was depressing and watching Fellowship just made it feel even more so because it was such a lovely film. Return of the King kind of fizzled a bit at the end with its long dragged out endings, but the first film was just a really fun romp of an adventure.
This image is pretty dragged out by now I guess but it perfectly sums it up for me...
Did Jackson not have time to craft another beautiful hobbit hole set this time?
I tried reading the LOTR books later on and just couldn't make it through...The original Dragonlance Chronicles was more my tastes back in 1985.
Having just rewatched Fellowship recently thanks to Google giving it away for free the other week, it really brought back how much love and care Jackson put into it compared to the CGI shit fest that is the Hobbit trilogy. Whereas I didn't plow my way through the LOTR books, this and Two Towers were really great and I love the 'dirty' and raw feel they have. The Hobbit films really do feel like what Lucas did with the prequels - the soul was gone. I was checking out all the models, and practical effects...the amazing sets...the way they filmed with the forced perspective. It was depressing and watching Fellowship just made it feel even more so because it was such a lovely film. Return of the King kind of fizzled a bit at the end with its long dragged out endings, but the first film was just a really fun romp of an adventure.
This image is pretty dragged out by now I guess but it perfectly sums it up for me...
Did Jackson not have time to craft another beautiful hobbit hole set this time?
The LOTR trilogy is one of the greatest film accomplishments of the last 25 years, in terms of both production and final product. Grand, epic movies with emotional cores, strong performances, beautiful environments, and stirring action. They're the complete package.
Before LOTR the holy trilogy was SW, Indiana Jones, and BTTF. LOTR and TDK trilogies join those three to form a pentalogy.
Before LOTR the holy trilogy was SW, Indiana Jones, and BTTF. LOTR and TDK trilogies join those three to form a pentalogy.
Wreck-It Ralph
Member
That is literally the only good scene in the entire movie, and it wasn't even in the theatrical cut.
They couldn't use the same forced perspective shots because they were filming in 3D.
And that picture and the whole story behind it are stupid. So an old man got a little emotional while filming one scene. I'd wager money that the LotR trilogy had scenes where forced perspective shots couldn't be done and they had to use a similar technique of compositing two shots together to make the hobbits look smaller. Not to mention the many times that characters interacted with CGI characters. Why didn't Ian McKellen get all, "Boo hoo, woe is me, this isn't why I became an actor
" when he was screaming "YOU SHALL NOT PASS!" at a big green screen?I swear, people just look for reasons to hate the Hobbit movies. "One time one of the actors had a bad day while filming, WORST MOVIES EVER!"
That is literally the only good scene in the entire movie, and it wasn't even in the theatrical cut.
They couldn't use the same forced perspective shots because they were filming in 3D.
And that picture and the whole story behind it are stupid. So an old man got a little emotional while filming one scene. I'd wager money that the LotR trilogy had scenes where forced perspective shots couldn't be done and they had to use a similar technique of compositing two shots together to make the hobbits look smaller. Not to mention the many times that characters interacted with CGI characters. Why didn't Ian McKellen get all, "Boo hoo, woe is me, this isn't why I became an actor
I swear, people just look for reasons to hate the Hobbit movies. "One time one of the actors had a bad day while filming, WORST MOVIES EVER!"
Viggo Mortensen was there for LOTR yet criticizes Jackson for relying too much on CGI now and losing what was real during the initial LOTR shoot.
Discotheque
Banned
The world feels so real. My GOAT. It's to me what I imagine the old Star Wars are to some people
Casting and music was fantastic too. But despite the whole product being great I think if Viggo hadn't replaced Townsend it wouldn't have been nearly as good
Casting and music was fantastic too. But despite the whole product being great I think if Viggo hadn't replaced Townsend it wouldn't have been nearly as good
vatstep
This poster pulses with an appeal so broad the typical restraints of our societies fall by the wayside.
I love the trilogy and will probably always consider them some of my favorite movies of all-time, but I have not watched any of them in years and just can't bring myself to do a re-watch; 11+ hours for the EEs, right? Maybe when I retire...
lastplayed
Member
Yeah the bag end set was physical.
The exterior still exists, in a much more real form than it did after the original triology.
Here's a photo I took a year ago!
And the view from the top of the hill.
ActuallyHulk
Banned
I saw FOTR 15 times in theaters. I went with friends. I went with family. I went alone. I went on holidays. I just couldn't stop going. LOTR is far and away my favorite movie trilogy of all time, and it's not even close to how much I love the books. My 12 year old self was completely and utterly captivated with the whole world.
Fellowship is one of my favorite films of all time. The Ringwraiths were beautifully, hauntingly shot, the danger of the quest felt the most real, and there are some incredible moments that still get to me 13 years after release (Merry and Pippin distracting the Uruks, Boromir's death, the race to Brandywine Bridge, Gandalf's sacrifice, and the end with Frodo accepting the responsibility and jumping into the boat by himself...). Sean Bean is incredible as Boromir.
Two Towers doesn't hit me the same way. It's where they introduced a lot of pointless unnecessary elements that really cheapened the whole thing for me. Aragorn falling off the cliff, the constant Arwen scenes ("oh I'm breaking up with you." "No you're not." "Okay."), Gimli becoming excessive comic relief. And really, the reveal that the Nazgul were still alive felt so underwhelming compared to how beautifully haunting they were in FotR. That said, some elements they added did help. Faramir feeling the temptation of the Ring was a lot more interesting than him just kinda shrugging it off as he does in the book. If they had been completely faithful to the book in that regard, it really would've belittled the power of the Ring. Having the elves come to Helms Deep was a nice idea. A shame they made Legolas some fucking super-elf while the others got carved down like it was nothing. It's still a good movie with great moments, but it's uneven.
Return of the King is an amazing movie. Some of the trilogy's strongest moments, some incredible spectacle, a beautifully cathartic finale. Unfortunately, again, it still kinda suffers from the overdone Gimli comic relief stuff from Two Towers, and the Legolas/Oliphant scene felt so out of place. But Denethor was beautifully portrayed, Frodo and Sam's friendship was rang truest, the Nazgul were scary again. The movie is not without its missteps in some moments but it's still an excellent movie.
Two Towers doesn't hit me the same way. It's where they introduced a lot of pointless unnecessary elements that really cheapened the whole thing for me. Aragorn falling off the cliff, the constant Arwen scenes ("oh I'm breaking up with you." "No you're not." "Okay."), Gimli becoming excessive comic relief. And really, the reveal that the Nazgul were still alive felt so underwhelming compared to how beautifully haunting they were in FotR. That said, some elements they added did help. Faramir feeling the temptation of the Ring was a lot more interesting than him just kinda shrugging it off as he does in the book. If they had been completely faithful to the book in that regard, it really would've belittled the power of the Ring. Having the elves come to Helms Deep was a nice idea. A shame they made Legolas some fucking super-elf while the others got carved down like it was nothing. It's still a good movie with great moments, but it's uneven.
Return of the King is an amazing movie. Some of the trilogy's strongest moments, some incredible spectacle, a beautifully cathartic finale. Unfortunately, again, it still kinda suffers from the overdone Gimli comic relief stuff from Two Towers, and the Legolas/Oliphant scene felt so out of place. But Denethor was beautifully portrayed, Frodo and Sam's friendship was rang truest, the Nazgul were scary again. The movie is not without its missteps in some moments but it's still an excellent movie.
Secret Fawful
Member
You're forgetting all of the scenes that give Gollum much-needed depth. The fact that it's all for naught doesn't cheapen it. He goes through a strong character dilemma and his struggles are just as real as and as interesting as Frodo's.
ConfusingJazz
Member
I am literally watching the actor's commentary to Fellowship right now. Looking back, I think the CGI abuse in RoTK is a dark foreshadowing of Peter Jackson's career post LoTR.
I agree with Viggo on his critique on Jackson's The Hobbit.
And I am rooting for the airplanes during King Kong.
The LoTR trilogy, specifically the EE, is still a few of my favorite films of all time. But Jesus, I wish Peter would stop it with the CGI.
I agree with Viggo on his critique on Jackson's The Hobbit.
And I am rooting for the airplanes during King Kong.
The LoTR trilogy, specifically the EE, is still a few of my favorite films of all time. But Jesus, I wish Peter would stop it with the CGI.
Tricky I Shadow
Banned
What a coincidence - I too just finished watching all three films again recently.
Return of the King is definitely my favourite followed by The Fellowship of the Ring and then The Two Towers. Every scene with the tress in The Two Towers can be a pretty big test of patience and it drags the movie down. But yeah, The Return of the King is just something truly special. The thing that stood out the most was just how fantastic it still looks. Everything just has a gritty realness to it and for the most part it could be released today and still look really impressive. You can tell that a ton of love was poured into it. Too many scenes to name are just so memorable and perfectly executed.
It's an absolute classic that fires on all cylinders and is the best movie I've ever seen. I doubt we’ll ever get anything like it again. If I were to give you the definition of 'epic' I'd say 'The Return of the King'. The Hobbit movies don't even come close (thank God they don't taint The Lord of the Rings trilogy since they fall under a different name even though its known that they're prequel movies). Also, this scene is the best scene ever captured on film for a motion picture.
I was watching all these the other day and it’s a great trip down memory lane:
All The Fellowship of the Ring TV Spots.
All The Two Towers TV Spots.
All The Return of the King TV Spots.
Return of the King is definitely my favourite followed by The Fellowship of the Ring and then The Two Towers. Every scene with the tress in The Two Towers can be a pretty big test of patience and it drags the movie down. But yeah, The Return of the King is just something truly special. The thing that stood out the most was just how fantastic it still looks. Everything just has a gritty realness to it and for the most part it could be released today and still look really impressive. You can tell that a ton of love was poured into it. Too many scenes to name are just so memorable and perfectly executed.
It's an absolute classic that fires on all cylinders and is the best movie I've ever seen. I doubt we’ll ever get anything like it again. If I were to give you the definition of 'epic' I'd say 'The Return of the King'. The Hobbit movies don't even come close (thank God they don't taint The Lord of the Rings trilogy since they fall under a different name even though its known that they're prequel movies). Also, this scene is the best scene ever captured on film for a motion picture.
I was watching all these the other day and it’s a great trip down memory lane:
All The Fellowship of the Ring TV Spots.
All The Two Towers TV Spots.
All The Return of the King TV Spots.
PhantomHound
Banned
We just watched these last night again...
I've really come to appreciate fellowship of the ring after repeated viewings. It's probably my favorite in the trilogy... a cinematic masterpiece.
I've really come to appreciate fellowship of the ring after repeated viewings. It's probably my favorite in the trilogy... a cinematic masterpiece.
My favorite films as well. I just find them very enjoyable on so many levels.
Fellowship is my favorite of the three though. I just really dig the road trip aspect of it and the smaller scale. Every scene feels meaningful and the pacing is perfect. It also has a lot of my favorite scenes in it.
There are just so many things I like about these movies. The casting is pretty much pitch perfect. The amount of work that went into the set design, camera technique, CGI etc... is mind blowing. The music... oh man the music. Just phenomenal.
The Hobbit movies weren't great, but they haven't diminished my love for LotR. The trilogy is just untouchable.
Fellowship is my favorite of the three though. I just really dig the road trip aspect of it and the smaller scale. Every scene feels meaningful and the pacing is perfect. It also has a lot of my favorite scenes in it.
There are just so many things I like about these movies. The casting is pretty much pitch perfect. The amount of work that went into the set design, camera technique, CGI etc... is mind blowing. The music... oh man the music. Just phenomenal.
The Hobbit movies weren't great, but they haven't diminished my love for LotR. The trilogy is just untouchable.
I agree. It's just so expertly done in every sense. It has such a well defined beginning, middle and end. The other movies do a good job closing out the story, but Fellowship has always been the one that stuck with me the most. I do think RotK suffers a bit from "epic battle with CGI" syndrome. The second movie is cool though and I really dug the tree ent stuff.
Yeah, it's pretty astounding. The Hobbit movies visually and aesthetic were good but didn't come together as well as LOTR did. Since I saw the LOTR films, I loved them so much I thought I'd be devastated by the time the Hobbit trilogy ended, but in an indescribable way it didn't really capture the sort of feeling Lord of the Rings did.
The closing on old Bilbo and the beginning scene from Fellowship and Billy Boyd did get to me a bit,
Jackson has been downhill since Fellowship with each film getting progressively worse.
Fellowship is fantastic. As stated, in a single movie they gave more character to those 9 than they did the entire group for the The Hobbit in 3. I still didn't know who the fuck anyone was but Bilbo, Gandalf and Thorin. And I would say Thorin was barely a character at times. For example, with the very little amount of time Sean Bean had in Fellowship. His character arc and impact was great than anything in the Hobbit. When ROTK came around and you're finding out this was his reason for desiring the ring. You felt the good intentions, but also how men can become corrupt too. It brought back those feelings. Nothing comparable in The Hobbits.
Two Towers while hampering the characters in some ways. I did not at all like Gandalf's return nor Aargon's relationship with the elf girl. They continued to build upon Sam and Frodo's relationship well. Sean Austin carried his role far better. Made Pip and Merry a bit more charming, but also showing how they are now involve permanently and the beginnings to Aargon becoming the King. Basically it set up most of the pay off for ROTK. Even the stuff with Theodin. TT was the best set up movie you could ask for in terms of development of characters.
The other thing Two Towers did exceptional well was still have a stand alone arc. Which is rare honestly. It manages to set up everything you need for the sequel, while still getting you involved. Helm's Deep is still the best action sequence in the entire trilogy. The movie sets it up with the unbeatable army vs the unbreakable fort. It showed how the humans are dividing amongst themselves and not listening to reason. It was also probably the last time the characters actually felt in danger. Complete with the Elves honoring the old agreements, Galdalf reuniting the Country, Aargon helping Theordin find what it is to be a King again. All of this came together.
TT was a step down from FOTR, So ROTK was a step down from TT. My issue is that most of the pay off, comes from the previous two films. The battles didn't have the same build. The use of CG started to hurt it too. Some of the final stuff was downright terrible to look at then. It dragged in parts it shouldn't and needed to change some things from the book.
I think TT at times gets unfairly shit on, because it doesn't quite have the same emotional hits as FOTR or ROTK. But it did more of the character development than ROTK. ROTK just got the payoff. Aargorn stepped out of the shadows to lead in TT. He showed he could inspire and motivated... and mainly unite men. All of that legwork was done in TT. ROTK was just him getting his damn crown.
Fellowship is fantastic. As stated, in a single movie they gave more character to those 9 than they did the entire group for the The Hobbit in 3. I still didn't know who the fuck anyone was but Bilbo, Gandalf and Thorin. And I would say Thorin was barely a character at times. For example, with the very little amount of time Sean Bean had in Fellowship. His character arc and impact was great than anything in the Hobbit. When ROTK came around and you're finding out this was his reason for desiring the ring. You felt the good intentions, but also how men can become corrupt too. It brought back those feelings. Nothing comparable in The Hobbits.
Two Towers while hampering the characters in some ways. I did not at all like Gandalf's return nor Aargon's relationship with the elf girl. They continued to build upon Sam and Frodo's relationship well. Sean Austin carried his role far better. Made Pip and Merry a bit more charming, but also showing how they are now involve permanently and the beginnings to Aargon becoming the King. Basically it set up most of the pay off for ROTK. Even the stuff with Theodin. TT was the best set up movie you could ask for in terms of development of characters.
The other thing Two Towers did exceptional well was still have a stand alone arc. Which is rare honestly. It manages to set up everything you need for the sequel, while still getting you involved. Helm's Deep is still the best action sequence in the entire trilogy. The movie sets it up with the unbeatable army vs the unbreakable fort. It showed how the humans are dividing amongst themselves and not listening to reason. It was also probably the last time the characters actually felt in danger. Complete with the Elves honoring the old agreements, Galdalf reuniting the Country, Aargon helping Theordin find what it is to be a King again. All of this came together.
TT was a step down from FOTR, So ROTK was a step down from TT. My issue is that most of the pay off, comes from the previous two films. The battles didn't have the same build. The use of CG started to hurt it too. Some of the final stuff was downright terrible to look at then. It dragged in parts it shouldn't and needed to change some things from the book.
I think TT at times gets unfairly shit on, because it doesn't quite have the same emotional hits as FOTR or ROTK. But it did more of the character development than ROTK. ROTK just got the payoff. Aargorn stepped out of the shadows to lead in TT. He showed he could inspire and motivated... and mainly unite men. All of that legwork was done in TT. ROTK was just him getting his damn crown.
That is literally the only good scene in the entire movie, and it wasn't even in the theatrical cut.
They couldn't use the same forced perspective shots because they were filming in 3D.
And that picture and the whole story behind it are stupid. So an old man got a little emotional while filming one scene. I'd wager money that the LotR trilogy had scenes where forced perspective shots couldn't be done and they had to use a similar technique of compositing two shots together to make the hobbits look smaller. Not to mention the many times that characters interacted with CGI characters. Why didn't Ian McKellen get all, "Boo hoo, woe is me, this isn't why I became an actor
I swear, people just look for reasons to hate the Hobbit movies. "One time one of the actors had a bad day while filming, WORST MOVIES EVER!"
Nope the bloat is sickening, but that is a typical complaint as well. As I said, the realness, the grit, of it all was lacking. I'm not saying CGI is bad, but the overabundance, and over reliance of it in the Hobbit films when compared to the original LOTR trilogy was really sad and completely noticeable. I felt more like I was watching a video game in the Hobbit than a living, breathing, existing world as in LOTR.
I'm not looking for a reason to hate the Hobbit films, but I really enjoyed the book over the years and to me it cannot compare with what Jackson did with the original set of films. If anything I expected to enjoy Hobbit more since that is my favorite Tolkien and LOTR as books literally put me asleep.
Count of Monte Sawed-Off
un33dab@dpu$$y
My issues with it outside of CGI is the absurdity of Sauron putting Gandalf in a cage. I mean REALLY!?! How stupid. And the over-reliance on his super orcs. Sauron wasn't some cartoon villain who sent out orc henchmen to do his bidding.....
In general The Hobbit films turned Sauron into a villain out of a saturday morning cartoon.
While in the original Hobbit Sauron was only known as the mysterious sorcerer the Necromancer who everyone feared. No one knew he was Sauron yet because he was smart and keeping a low profile but still exerted fear across the land. He wasn't going around sending out various Orc henchmen to hunt down random dwarf parties or locking someone he'd try to kill on the spot if he had the upper hand like Gandalf in a little suspended cage.
Jackson completely lost what the story was when he got so much right with LOTR. Changing the novel is fine to service the needs of a movie, which is what he did with LOTR. But literally destroying the entire point of the story and completely ruining the motivations of the major characters is unforgivable.
That is literally the only good scene in the entire movie, and it wasn't even in the theatrical cut.
They couldn't use the same forced perspective shots because they were filming in 3D.
And that picture and the whole story behind it are stupid. So an old man got a little emotional while filming one scene. I'd wager money that the LotR trilogy had scenes where forced perspective shots couldn't be done and they had to use a similar technique of compositing two shots together to make the hobbits look smaller. Not to mention the many times that characters interacted with CGI characters. Why didn't Ian McKellen get all, "Boo hoo, woe is me, this isn't why I became an actor
I swear, people just look for reasons to hate the Hobbit movies. "One time one of the actors had a bad day while filming, WORST MOVIES EVER!"
so this is why they don't look like dwarves at all? Soon as the trailer for the first Hobbit film came out I was like these guys don't look like dwarves, what the hell happened.
zero shift
Banned
So I decided to rewatch the special features as well.
It's excellent so much interesting content. Especially the bigatures.
It's excellent so much interesting content. Especially the bigatures.
Acerac
Banned
FOOL OF A TOOK!
THROW YOURSELF IN NEXT TIME AND RID US OF YOUR STUPIDITY!
Boromir's last stand against the Uruk-hai is one of the best scenes in the trilogy. The music is amazing - it's gut-wrenching to see Boromir shot with arrows as he continues to fight.
Fellowship was such a revelation - I don't think anyone outside of book readers was expecting the movies to be so emotionally gripping. Another favorite moment is when Frodo is on the shore and, after remembering Gandalf's wisdom about deciding what to do with the time given to oneself, he puts the ring in his pocket and walks to the canoe. That swooping camera combined with the score is another one of those moments that just sticks with you.
Fellowship was such a revelation - I don't think anyone outside of book readers was expecting the movies to be so emotionally gripping. Another favorite moment is when Frodo is on the shore and, after remembering Gandalf's wisdom about deciding what to do with the time given to oneself, he puts the ring in his pocket and walks to the canoe. That swooping camera combined with the score is another one of those moments that just sticks with you.
Man, now I know why your friends don't invite you to things
Usual Suspect
Member
My favority movies of all time.
Even if i have the Dvd extended version i bought this xmas the BlueRay extended version with 15 cd and going to watch it again soon.
Even if it's not so good i really enjoyed the hobbit trilogy and just last night i was watching some of the extras from the first film and it strikes me a coment from PJ that could explain the quality diference between the two trilogies.
He said that with the problems to greenlight the movie and the departure of Del Toro he only had 3 months to prepare and in Lotr he had one year and a half.
Even if i have the Dvd extended version i bought this xmas the BlueRay extended version with 15 cd and going to watch it again soon.
Even if it's not so good i really enjoyed the hobbit trilogy and just last night i was watching some of the extras from the first film and it strikes me a coment from PJ that could explain the quality diference between the two trilogies.
He said that with the problems to greenlight the movie and the departure of Del Toro he only had 3 months to prepare and in Lotr he had one year and a half.
- Status