Reply With Quote
The weakest of the trilogy, expected though being the middle film. Unfortunately I've lost all interest in them since the craptastic Hobbit movies were released.
Nothing else on but even with commercials, it's pretty good.
6.5/10
The weakest of the trilogy, expected though being the middle film. Unfortunately I've lost all interest in them since the craptastic Hobbit movies were released.
yes. I couldn't make it through 30 minutes of The Hobbit. Didn't finish it or try DOS.
nice try. Perfect movie from a perfect trilogy
Makes them even better tbh
It's a trilogy like Rocky is a trilogy. It's not. There's 5 of them.
The 3rd Hobbit movie was pretty tight. Basically one 3 hour long battle scene. Great for the action and visuals.
LotR trilogy has no such thing.
The Hobbit ones are mega trash.
The main ones are the . I saw all 3 a few months ago. The extended editions.
I've read all 12 Conan books (that REH had, the others were rip offs). Read all 11 books in the John Carter on Mars saga. Most of the Elric books, but damn if I can read Tolkiens Lord of the Ring epic and I've tried numerous times. If there is such a thing as a movie-s being better than the book-s this must be it.
Definitely not. Tolkien is an amazing storyteller, plus the fact he created an entire Elven language and Map of the Middle Earth is extremely impressive. He went from writing a short story for his son, to creating an entire Universe. He was way ahead of his time, like most visionaries and geniuses are.
You talked me into it, I'll ty it again. It's just me.
there's 3 LotR movies. It's a trilogy. If you want to include The Hobbit movies for whatever reason then that would be 6. Your math skills suck more than your movie taste
The 1st is the only decent one and only cause of the first act. The visuals in the 3rd were over-the-top CGI garbage and some of the didn't even make sense, like when the elves jump over the formation to take in the charge. Thrilling at first until you ask "why the would they do that?" The first was at least more down to earth and personal. I mean we now know that Jackson had to wing basically the entire trilogy cause of studio pressure on the timing. It shows painfully.
& inserting characters specifically for the purpose of legacy and touchy-feely romance. Everyone who read the book knows that Legolas had nothing to do any of the plots in the Hobbit... but ladies love Orlando Bloom so they know he sells. Still, nothing was a bigger spit on Tolkien's grave than the Kili/Tauriel thing.
Ooof, yes. Tauriel in general was bad enough, but have a weird romance with conveniently the only good looking Dwarf in all of Middle Earth and it became a "is this really happening?" kinda thing
Two Towers is my favorite of the trilogy. Helm's deep was fun, though not as good as Minas Tirith. The Ents were awesome. Gandalf the White making his first appearance. The siege of Isengard. And the Rohan theme kicks so much ass.
And considering that, he should have kept it simple and just film the book instead of puliing nine hours of garbage out of his ass. The Hobbit should be a two hour movie.
My math is fine. I didn't know that there were 3 for the Hobbit. So the first three Rockys can be the "Rocky vs. Negro" trilogy.
SO much yes. And when it kicks in when they charge on Pelennor Field it's the most chill bump inducing part of the trilogy, well after the initial horn you hear when they arrive after Gandalf gets defeated
This tbh. Two towers is best middle earth movie by far. The 1st LOTR is pretty damn good too. The 3rd LOTR and the 3 Hobbits trail way behind. Too slow and ing boring.
Hopefully they'll remake them soon.
Come again? How could you come even close to comparing those? Return of the King is 4 hours of incredible battles, TRULY beautiful visuals, and emotional climaxes. The only complaint I can understand is the ending and that's cause of awkward editing. All of those conclusions needed to be done but it was done so to where everyone now says "it has like 20 endings hurhurhur!" The first 3 and a half hours are flawless though
Not to mention, Tauriel being only 900 years old to be "closer" to Kili's age (still roughly the square of his age though, LOL) kind of ruined the "Arwen being the last elf" plot consistent with the books and the LOTR movies... though Arwen was roughly 2,000 years old and married Aragorn, age 89 at the time of their marriage at Minas Tirith well after the ring had been destroyed (Aragorn himself descended from a line of elves and men who interbred -- the Dunedain -- and lived to be 500-1200 years old themselves)... there was no precedent of an elf and a dwarf marrying or procreating, never ever, as even mere friendship between the two races was frowned upon in both the elven and dwarven cultures. Might as well date an orc or something.
Great point. Now the whole 6 part series is full of holes, rendering it unwatchable. 5/10 for the first three. 2/10 for the rest. This is why I hope they will remake it. Maybe with Michael Bay.
Very much agree. My biggest beef with TTT is that the middle drags. Peter Jackson said he felt the need to "recap" events for those who hadn't seen Fellowship in a year. All the Elrond/Galadriel conversations and Aragorn/Arwen flashbacks were pointless and dragged the movie down. Plus I would've preferred that the Helms Deep battle played out more like the book without Elven involvement.
For what it's worth, Fellowship is easily my favorite movie of the series.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
