sumarize

2004-11-26 [ArchangelGabriel]: Some very hard words i get what your saying and a agree with most of it. but although jackson made a mess out of it byou have to admitt it was a better mess than most directors could manage.

2004-11-27 [Kayne]: It remains a mess :) The lord of the ring-books weren't to be touched. Now they are doomed to life forever in the memory's for the people as blockbuster movies o.0. ( But they were quite adequate books but that is not enough ; they should be divine movies to be as good as the books )

2004-11-27 [ArchangelGabriel]: is it possible to live up to such majestic hights? At least it was Peter UJackson who got to them before anyone else did

2004-11-28 [windowframe]: ...I don't think Jackson 'ruined' the books w/ his films. :\ True, the films aren't as good as the books, but no copy is ever as good as the original; it's like if you keep tracing something, every time you do it fades a little more. However, the music to the film was fantastic, the cinematics were also fantastic. And the Argonath? There were better than I'd ever imagined. However, the stuff he did to Faramir did suck T_T People changing the plots to books when they make them into films has always been a pet peeve of mine, so in that respect I agree w/ what you're saying... but I don't think Jackson has stolen any credit.

2004-11-28 [windowframe]: plus, the oscars have always meant shit, they're biased

2004-11-28 [Kayne]: Mmm they used to ment something in my opinion. The music was indeed quite good. That was the only thing that was worth an oscar.

2005-01-20 [Aradon Templar]: Oscars are pathetic awards that are overrated. And yes, the plot was changed, for which I am occasionally annoyed, but dude, the movies were awesome. Until the movies were published, LotR was put on a side shelf. Book critics knew about it, but not many people actually did read it. Now, people have read it, and know more about it. There's some stuff about the movies I didn't like (y'know, the overdramatisation of most stuffs), but they did a fantastic job making such a fantasy world realistic. I mean, oliphaunts? They looked real enough to me. A very good job of portraying the story, I thought, and yes indeed, the sountrack is wonderful :)

2005-01-20 [Kayne]: Dude - you have no life. Anyway - but the question remains: is Peter Jackson a genius?

2005-01-20 [Aradon Templar]: Not so genius. But he did do a good job of portraying the LotR world.

2005-01-20 [Kayne]: I could live with that. The world seemed quite real. But I expected more. More. More. More. More. Anyway - I didn't thought the movie outstaged a "normal" movie. A übermovie needs a few things: Good performances - Good plot - Original plot - Good camera job ( Sorry for bad English). Lotr had not really any of these. I will admit that they can work quite oke with a computer.

2005-01-21 [Aradon Templar]: Good plot? It was supplied by the books... by saying that the plot was bad, you say the books' plot was bad... Performance was alright... Not too stunning (would a stunning example be Pirates of the Caribbean?) Plot was just as original as the books.... And the camera job was pretty decent. Keep in mind that it was designed with I-Max theater in mind...

2005-01-22 [Kayne]: The plot was like in the books? That is like saying teh plot of hp is like the ones in the books. In essence they are the same - but the little things ( You know - the things that make ik great ) were missing. Haven't seen potc yet. Stunning performancers: Dogivlle - Forrest Gump - Pulp Fiction - Reservoir Dogs - Amelie Poulain. What is wrong with I max theater?

2005-01-22 [Aradon Templar]: Never seen those movies :P Nothing's wrong with I-max. But when you make a film designed for I-max, the camera motion is different. It looks great in the I-max theater, but it just kinda looses its effect at home. All those scenes where it takes a huge dive downwards look stunning in I-max, but your tv isn't big enough to make the same impression.

2005-01-22 [Kayne]: I saw them in a cinema - so the effects should probably be similar. Still didn't thought they were that great. A movie with a sublime cameraman is "elephant".

2005-01-22 [ArchangelGabriel]: Thing is if the plot hadn't been tweaked in some ways he could never have got it to apeal to the average man in the street. The other thing is that there is a whole laod of cut footage that is being released which will put it much more into the ways of the book...

2005-01-22 [Kayne]: "LOTR Extended" I have heard about it. And if I judge on what I heard - it still sucked.

2005-05-02 [Maurer's conclusions]: LotR Extended sucked. It was a feeble attempt to appease the true LotR fans.