TFotR vs TTT [Archive]

WallRocker

02-18-2003, 10:57 PM

Originally posted by Elvellyn
Instead I spent half the time thinking to myself "thats not how it happened in the book!"
and "they can't do that!"

That's what happened to me! I couldn't follow the movie half the time because I kept thinking "they're gonna do this, thy're gonna do that" and then it didn't happen! Boy was that frustrating... so of course I had to see it four more times to makes up for it:D I liked TTT better, but I also didn't see FotR at the theater, so that explains a lot...

Elvengirl

02-19-2003, 10:07 AM

Originally posted by WallRocker
That's what happened to me! I couldn't follow the movie half the time because I kept thinking "they're gonna do this, thy're gonna do that" and then it didn't happen! Boy was that frustrating... so of course I had to see it four more times to makes up for it:D I liked TTT better, but I also didn't see FotR at the theater, so that explains a lot...

ME Too. I went in to FOTR with no expectation and I was blown away. In TTT I was hanging my head throughout. I had to see it again to find what I liked. But still FOTR was better.

Fimbrethil

02-19-2003, 03:21 PM

I liked both movies but if I had to chose one I'd say FOTR. Because while TTT was alot more action packed PJ did make me a little made because of all the things he changed.

Lalaith

02-19-2003, 04:41 PM

FotR was brilliant but I have to say I loved TTT more. Just more action and not this looooong beginning like FotR (actually I love the introduction in the beginning of FotR when Cate Blanchett is speaking).

Aralyn

02-20-2003, 10:07 PM

to answer the Shelob question, PJ decided he wanted that part as an intro to the next movie so he left it out. Unfortunately cause thats my sec fave part. And he's leaving out The Scouring Of The Shire completely

Aralyn

02-20-2003, 10:15 PM

I liked TTT better but then its my fave book to. I feel like I have to stay loyal to it no matter what.

three things that bugged me about ttt

1. They mutilated Faramir I mean they had him take Frodo and Sam miles out of thier way to Osgilliath. And they made him more evil like. I LOVE Faramir and that was unfair.

2. The whole 'Aragorn falls over a Cliff' thing bugged me.

3. The Riders of Rohan ran? I mean in the book they totally went to fight!!:mad:

Oh well, it was good and I couldnt do any better so I'm done complaining:rolleyes: :p

azalea

06-02-2003, 09:46 PM

Here you go, lil pippin took.:)

Lalaith

06-04-2003, 01:02 PM

TTT. Definitely. FotR needed such a long time to come to the culmination.

gimli7410

06-05-2003, 12:29 AM

its hard to say which movie is better.fotr was great for a introductory movie but i thought TTT was better because it showed aragorns more heroic side and leadership. but he was also a leader and hero in the first one and of course gimli was great except for when pj stole his dignity:mad:

straight_face

06-05-2003, 09:43 AM

I must say that both movies were done beautifully. One can compare attributes in one movie over the other, but both have equally likable and unlikable qualities. The Fellowship was my movie of 2001, and I saw it two or three times before it went out of theaters. Personally I don't favor extreme fighting sequences, and when saying that I am implying the amplified battle of Helm's Deep. Weeks after the Two Tower's first release, I was approached several times by people who had been to the movie and were curious if I had. Only once had I seen the Two Towers, which I thought was a very successful film minus a few mess-ups. Walking away, my colleague responded, "I liked the battle of Helm's Deep." I was not surprised that such people would take interest in that. Theoden, in my perspective, had a bit of an askew portrayal, and the parts with Arwen were absolutely sickening. I'm going to give you a simile now. I wrote a three-part story a long time ago. The first part was the prelude, introduction of characters, general plot, and conflict and/or motivation. The second part tied everything together and advanced the plot until the second part's end in which the characters reach their major destination. The third part is the most revealing and later ties all ends together, one can say, and ends the story quite nicely when the solution or end of the conflict is at hand. This is a bit how I view the Lord of the Rings. The Fellowship, starting out quite brightly, gets darker and darker as the company continues forward. The Two Towers has little light and is quite dark, similiar to the Return of the King which starts out dark and ends brightly. If you don't understand my "logic", that's okay. In conclusion, I can say that my expectations for the Return of the King are high, considering I'm drained of speech.

(If you want to read my story, it's called There and Not Back Again, and it's in the fan fiction section of this site. Between you and me, I can say that I really don't like the story, for it can't compare to other ones that I have written)

Ornelírë Mistë

06-11-2003, 03:06 PM

I thought FoTR was far better than the Two Towers. I couldn't stand the scenes with Arwen, I didn't like alterations such as Aragorn fell into the river. The battle, in my opinion, was fair. Programming thousands of people is impressive, but I didn't like the way the fort looked. My major problems with the movies is that they are so different than the way I imagined them. Not that I can really expect things to be exactly as I picture them, but it's not fun when you see that they aren't. FoTR was closer to my imaginings than TT. TT had an excellent Rohan, I must say though. FoTR seemed to be better organized than TT.
Earlier people mentioned Shelob not being there. Isn't she going to be in RoTK?

EDIT: Also, TT seemed more of a flick than FoTR did.

Salquënòrëwen

06-11-2003, 03:08 PM

Thats what I heard: Shelob is going to be in RotK.

Silpion

06-11-2003, 09:29 PM

Although both The Fellowship of the Ring and The Two Towers were good movies, I enjoyed The Fellowship of the Ring between the two films. (This is my opinion for the theatrical versions.)

hectorberlioz

06-23-2003, 06:56 PM

Originally posted by Nilore
I thought this movie was much much better but it missed out Shelob?

Nilore

i wouldnt despair much if i were you, sure peter jackson left out shelob in the two towers ( a part i was curious to see how he did it, and still am) the return of the king ( not elvis the king) will definitely have it. peter jackson put it in the beggining.
-hectorberlioz

Firekitten2006

06-23-2003, 07:10 PM

I think i prefer FOTR to TTT. maybe its because the Fellowship is my favorite book out of the three, and TTT is my least fave. But I did like Rohan. I somehow pictured Shadowfax with a bit more human personality, but oh well.

thranduil

11-04-2003, 12:07 PM

quite simple, debate and argue for your favorite film. Even if you hate them both, you should still prefer one film better than the other. Why is it better? Truer to the book, less action? Well in my opinion The Fellowship is a much better movie than the TTT. It stays more focused, it isn't as jumpy. It gives all charachters developing time and the needed screen time to give the charachters the justice that they deserve. And the movie sticks to what is important, and what Tolkein emphasized on. At least more true than TTT.

Black Breathalizer

11-04-2003, 02:49 PM

I personally think you can't separate the two. They are part of the same story. Once ROTK comes out, the separate identities of all three movies will blur as fans come to look at the entire film series as one big story (the same as people feel about the books.)

Lizra

11-04-2003, 02:53 PM

I like FoTR better. No big ugly battle, more elves and dwarves. More varied places, more positive. TTT is pretty depressing. I'm that way with the books also. FoTR is much more "beautiful" and appealing to my artist's eye. The Shire, Rivendell, Lothlorien, Moria...good stuff! :)

Tuor of Gondolin

11-04-2003, 03:49 PM

Originally posted by Lizra
"I like FoTR better. No big ugly battle, more elves and dwarves. More varied places, more positive. TTT is pretty depressing. I'm that way with the books also. FoTR is much more "beautiful" and appealing to my artist's eye. The Shire, Rivendell, Lothlorien, Moria...good stuff! "
_______________________________________________
Hmm. While BB may not agree, this is actually an argument for keeping the films more (I didn't say slavishly so) to the book in the TT. There would be a briefer battle, and a number of places that, while some would be "dark", would be interesting to an artist. How about Ithilien in general- and Henneth Annun in particular, Minas Morgul and its fields, the stairs of Cirith Ungol, Shelob's lair, (PJ did do a great job on the Dead Marshes and Emyn Muil), and Minas Morgul has been moved to ROTK in the movies.
There's also Fangorn Forest (with a lesser battle more could have been done there) and Pippin and Gandalf riding to Minas Tirith.
But it is true that the last two thirds of LOTR is increasingly halfling and human centered. Some legitimate elf and dwarf interest could also be incorporated by giving brief scenes by PJ of the orc attacks on Lorien and the Battle of Dale, easily explained with Gandalf voiceovers before, during, or after Pelennor Fields.

While I understand why The Scouring of the Shire is out, I'm still not convinced that it would have been dramatically impossible to move some of the TT book material from the ROTK movie to the TT movie (cutting back on the trek to and Battle of Helm's Deep, and then put a fairly short, movie reworked version of the shire incidents in ROTK as a bracket for the three movies.

thranduil

11-04-2003, 04:16 PM

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
I personally think you can't separate the two. They are part of the same story. Once ROTK comes out, the separate identities of all three movies will blur as fans come to look at the entire film series as one big story (the same as people feel about the books.)

I hardly aggree. It might just be me, but I didn't feel a smooth transition from FOTR to TTT. These movies are greatly seperated in my opinion. I highly doubt that even with the ROTK that they will blend together.

Lizra

11-04-2003, 05:19 PM

Yeah, I agree how TTT could've been more "beautiful". This was made apparent to me again, when I bought the new page a day calendar for 2004. (from TTT) I LOVED my FoTR calendar for 2003. So many beautiful scenes and character shots. Sigh! :)
TTT one is yuck! At least two thirds of the pictures are dark, almost poorer quality shots of Helms deep type battle scenes, or ....ick...Gollum! :eek: Like I want to look at his ugly bug eyed puss on a daily basis! :mad:

Bridgette

11-04-2003, 07:09 PM

*reminds self to think twice before purchasing TT Day-by-day* I think i like FotR better. I agree, it is was more artisticly intriging (not that that is a big factor for me personally), and it didn't jump from character to character, place to place. Mostly, the scenes weren't to long or to short, making it not quite so...... dull in some places. (Reading that would make you think I dislike TTT, but I actually don't. I think its brill!)

The Gaffer

11-05-2003, 05:54 AM

I have a theory: (clears throat)

The brontosaurus was very thin at one end, very thick in the middle and...
oops, sorry wrong theory

People who loved the books liked FOTR best; people who hadn't read the books liked TTT best.

However, I'll go for ROTK if they have me in it. And if they have me saying "what's become o his weskit?" I'll go mental and run round the cinema with my shirt over my head like footballers do when they score the winning goal

Black Breathalizer

11-05-2003, 10:01 AM

Both of the first two films will pale in comparison to The Return of the King. None other than Elijah Wood, himself, said ROTK is better than 1 and 2 combined.

The countdown is beginning!!! :)

Melko Belcha

11-05-2003, 10:14 AM

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
Both of the first two films will pale in comparison to The Return of the King. None other than Elijah Wood, himself, said ROTK is better than 1 and 2 combined.

The countdown is beginning!!! :)

Do you think the star of the movie would say any different? He also said that TTT was way better then FotR and that turned out to be a lie.

Black Breathalizer

11-05-2003, 10:17 AM

Originally posted by Melko Belcha
Do you think the star of the movie would say any different? He also said that TTT was way better then FotR and that turned out to be a lie. Your quote is a lie. Wood said many things contrasting the first two films, that didn't happen to be one of them.

azalea

11-05-2003, 11:29 AM

I merged the new thread with the already existing thread of the same subject.

thranduil

11-05-2003, 11:33 AM

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
Your quote is a lie. Wood said many things contrasting the first two films, that didn't happen to be one of them.
Ha you are pretty straight forward:p Oh look I'm talking to myself.

Black Breathalizer

11-05-2003, 01:05 PM

Originally posted by thranduil
Ha you are pretty straight forward:p Oh look I'm talking to myself. Actually, it's no joking matter. It's jerseydevil's recent halfwitted posts that led to the newbie thread being closed. Rather than chastise our resident new jersey purist for inappropriate off-topic posts, the moderators have decided to play his little game too. The real reason for the closing of the thread was that it was perceived to be a vehicle for my supposed puppets.

I admit that 90% of the time I make my points with a grin and a wink. But its no laughing matter being bullied by moderators who's sole purpose for exercising their power is to see if they can get a rise out of me. It's one thing for jerseydevil to act like jerseydevil. It's quite another to have our esteemed moderators do their own jerseydevil impersonations.

I do have to wonder sometimes why I continue to brighten this forum with my always brilliant and insightful commentary.

Sister Golden Hair

11-05-2003, 01:10 PM

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
Actually, it's no joking matter. It's jerseydevil's recent halfwitted posts that led to the newbie thread being closed. Rather than chastise our resident new jersey purist for inappropriate off-topic posts, the moderators have decided to play his little game too. The real reason for the closing of the thread was that it was perceived to be a vehicle for my supposed puppets.

I admit that 90% of the time I make my points with a grin and a wink. But its no laughing matter being bullied by moderators who's sole purpose for exercising their power is to see if they can get a rise out of me. It's one thing for jerseydevil to act like jerseydevil. It's quite another to have our esteemed moderators do their own jerseydevil impersonations.

I do have to wonder sometimes why I continue to brighten this forum with my always brilliant and insightful commentary. BB, azalea did nothing spiteful in your direction. So now who's being paranoid? The policy of this board is that duplicate threads are forbidden in multiple forums. The General Messages forum already contains a sticky "welcome newbies" thread. It's that simple. Maybe if you spent some time in forums other than this one, you would have known that before you posted your thread.:rolleyes:

Earniel

11-05-2003, 01:32 PM

Originally posted by azalea
I merged the new thread with the already existing thread of the same subject.

Oh, so here it is. I suddenly had a invalid link when I wanted to access it from my e-mail.

Black Breathalizer

11-05-2003, 01:49 PM

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
Maybe if you spent some time in forums other than this one, you would have known that before you posted your thread.:rolleyes: Why should anyone feel obligated to visit another forum besides this one? This is THE ONE AND ONLY forum for discussion of the Lord of the Rings films. As per your own policies--EVERYTHING related to the movies and Peter Jackson is fair game for this place.

Many people come to this site specifically for movie discussion and are not all that interested in the other stuff. This category used to include me. For nearly a year, I hardly ever visited any of the other forums. Why should I be forced to visit other sites if my interest is in discussing Jackson's film adaptations of Tolkien's story?

What moderators like you need to understand is that just because you see a relationship between these board forums doesn't mean that others do. Each forum has its own agenda and user community dynamics.

Sister Golden Hair

11-05-2003, 02:05 PM

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
Why should anyone feel obligated to visit another forum besides this one? This is THE ONE AND ONLY forum for discussion of the Lord of the Rings films. As per your own policies--EVERYTHING related to the movies and Peter Jackson is fair game for this place.

Many people come to this site specifically for movie discussion and are not all that interested in the other stuff. This category used to include me. For nearly a year, I hardly ever visited any of the other forums. Why should I be forced to visit other sites if my interest is in discussing Jackson's film adaptations of Tolkien's story?

What moderators like you need to understand is that just because you see a relationship between these board forums doesn't mean that others do. Each forum has its own agenda and user community dynamics. No one is obligated or forced to visit other forums on the board. Do not twist my words and meaning around. I am just saying that if you confine yourself to one forum, you may not be aware of other existing threads, so when a duplicate thread gets closed it becomes a vendictive act on the part of the moderator, instead of the moderator just inforcing policy:rolleyes:

Why wouldn't everything related to PJ and the LotRs movies be fair game for this place? This is the movie forum. But creating a thread to welcome movie fans outside of the thread in GMs, which welcomes all new members, is not permitted. It may be that each forum has its own agenda, but the particular thread in question already exists in a broader forum that consists of more than one agenda or topic discussion, and that thread is meant to welcome all newbies, book fans, movie fans, and any other registered fan that comes to this community for whatever reason.

jerseydevil

11-05-2003, 02:15 PM

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
Actually, it's no joking matter. It's jerseydevil's recent halfwitted posts that led to the newbie thread being closed. Rather than chastise our resident new jersey purist for inappropriate off-topic posts, the moderators have decided to play his little game too. The real reason for the closing of the thread was that it was perceived to be a vehicle for my supposed puppets.

Me have inappropriate off topic posts? What do you mean? You're just upset that I was onto your game so quickly. :rolleyes:

I admit that 90% of the time I make my points with a grin and a wink. But its no laughing matter being bullied by moderators who's sole purpose for exercising their power is to see if they can get a rise out of me. It's one thing for jerseydevil to act like jerseydevil. It's quite another to have our esteemed moderators do their own jerseydevil impersonations.

What- offended I tell the truth?

I do have to wonder sometimes why I continue to brighten this forum with my always brilliant and insightful commentary.
We all wonder why you stick around too.:p Although the brilliant and insightful commentary is only that in your eyes and your 3 other personalities. :p

As for which one I think was better - I think TT was. The reason is that Fellowship went much further off on what the book was like. The book was slower pace - a build up of action - the beginning of the quest. Jackson made Fellowship way too action oriented. I also could stomach TT because I already had expected the hack job as demonstrated in FotR. Many thing annoyed me in TT - but I had already come to expect the crap representation of Lord of the Rings by Jackson.

BTW BB - what is a JerseyDevil impersonator exactly? Is it just anyone who agrees with me? :p

Sheeana

11-05-2003, 03:48 PM

Hmm, gaffer I don't think your theory really works with me either. I hated fellowship, but I quite enjoyed the one viewing of TT. Perhaps if I see it again, I'll not like it as much, who knows?

Rosie Gamgee

11-05-2003, 05:02 PM

In keeping with the topic of this thread:
I thought the Fellowship was much better than the Towers. The first one had a sense of unity, it was a single whole movie. Everything in it had a purpose, there were no stupid ring arounds that left the characters right back where they started. The special effects were great, but not overblown, the acting was good, and the characters were easily identified with.
In the Towers, it picks up in the middle of a story and ends in the middle of a story (yes, the books leave you with the same problem, but there's more of a cap to the end of the book). The acting seemed to have gotten fair (as opposed to good), and the three huge story changes ticked me off greatly (being: Elves at Helm's Deep, Elrond being a Total Jerk, and Mean Faramir).
What was the purpose of the Elves being at Helm's Deep? Can't Men weather a battle on their own? It gave the battle a sense of cheesiness, and also it kind of demeaned the Elves. They're no longer distant and mysterious. They come along with their swords and their bows and they go and die along with Men. It kind of lowered them to me.
What was up with Elrond. I know he was skeptical of Men, and that he didn't like his daughter marrying Aragorn, but what's the deal with the whole cheesy 'He's not coming back'. Why are all these predictions made of Men that aren't going to come true? It demeans Elrond (and Galadriel) when they make these dumb speeches that are totally false.
Also, what was the point of Faramir taking the Hobbits to Osgiliath? I understand that the Ring has strong powers, but our hero in the book rejected it, and so could have Faramir in the movies, without compromising the 'unwanted son' angle they wanted to play.

Okay, I'm done.;)

The Gaffer

11-05-2003, 05:10 PM

Originally posted by Sheeana
Hmm, gaffer I don't think your theory really works with me either. I hated fellowship, but I quite enjoyed the one viewing of TT. Perhaps if I see it again, I'll not like it as much, who knows?
Hey, the exception that proves the rule.

Actually I'm witholding judgment on TTT until I see it again, and that's not going to be till the EE comes out. Oh, and santa stuffs a copy in my hobbit sized stocking.

Black Breathalizer

11-05-2003, 08:14 PM

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
This is the movie forum. But creating a thread to welcome movie fans outside of the thread in GMs, which welcomes all new members, is not permitted. It may be that each forum has its own agenda, but the particular thread in question already exists in a broader forum that consists of more than one agenda or topic discussion, and that thread is meant to welcome all newbies, book fans, movie fans, and any other registered fan that comes to this community for whatever reason. You are once again reacting to one of my posts without stopping to actually think about what I said. As I stated, your so-called broader forum (actually the term is board) doesn't exist for everybody. It's simply an index of loosely related Tolkien communities. Many people don't care about the broader board or visit the other forums. If they did, the numbers of visitors to each forum would be relatively the same. But I strongly suspect they're not.

The bottom line is that when you guys look at this issue from your broader forum perspective, it comes at the expense of the Lord of the Rings Films community you are supposed to be serving. I rest my case.

Sister Golden Hair

11-05-2003, 08:31 PM

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
You are once again reacting to one of my posts without stopping to actually think about what I said. As I stated, your so-called broader forum (actually the term is board) doesn't exist for everybody. It's simply an index of loosely related Tolkien communities. Many people don't care about the broader board or visit the other forums. If they did, the numbers of visitors to each forum would be relatively the same. But I strongly suspect they're not.

The bottom line is that when you guys look at this issue from your broader forum perspective, it comes at the expense of the Lord of the Rings Films community you are supposed to be serving. I rest my case. And the rules are the rules, and they don't change just because BB thinks they should. The rule on posting duplicate threads applies to every forum, not just the movie forum. So please quit making it out as though the movie forum is being discriminated against.:rolleyes:

jerseydevil

11-06-2003, 01:10 AM

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
...it comes at the expense of the Lord of the Rings Films community you are supposed to be serving.
Actually it's the Lord of the Rings books which Ben is serving - everything else is secondary to them. Sorry - but film fans aren't the ones they serve - Ben just didn't want the book forums to be polluted with movie threads. :rolleyes:

Black Breathalizer

11-06-2003, 09:32 AM

Originally posted by Sister Golden Hair
And the rules are the rules, and they don't change just because BB thinks they should. Translation: BB is right again but I'm the boss. :)Originally posted by jerseydevil
Actually it's the Lord of the Rings books which Ben is serving - everything else is secondary to them. Sorry - but film fans aren't the ones they serve - Ben just didn't want the book forums to be polluted with movie threads.Telling fans of the film that we are second-class citizens here is like telling the Pope he's Catholic.

Seriously now, the next three months are going to be a magical time for Tolkienites. This forum should be using this opportunity to encourage new people to join our LOTR Film community. Instead, recent newbies here are being made to feel unwelcome and at times treated with downright contempt. It's one thing for long-time posters to go at each other because we've been around long enough to know it's LOTR Crossfire and not personal. It's quite another thing to bash a newbie.

At a time when the moderators should have opened a thread here themselves in an effort to make new posters to THIS FORUM feel welcome, they've chosen instead to contribute to the problem.

Sister Golden Hair

11-06-2003, 10:35 AM

Translation: BB is right again but I'm the boss.LOL! Your translation is wrong, and I'm not the boss, Ben is.:p And I'll suggest here as I have in a few other threads, get back on topic.

mithrand1r

11-06-2003, 10:42 AM

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
. . .
At a time when the moderators should have opened a thread here themselves in an effort to make new posters to THIS FORUM feel welcome, they've chosen instead to contribute to the problem.

BB,

I would disagree with your assessment.

When I found this board,

[list=3]
I looked around the different areas seeing the topics posted
I read the faq to learn about general protocol, questions, and what was and what was not approved/tolerated
I even read a little of the welcome thread.
[/list=3]

I found this site in a search for information on the movies. I found that and more.

I think it is upon new visitors to learn about the board they are visiting before jumping into the fray, in a manner of speaking. It is the moderators' (or those responsible) reponsibility to make it clear to all visitors what the rules are and what is expected of participants in the board.

The faq button is visible on every page available to all view the faq.

I am not sure what you would expect this or any board on the internet to provide to make people feel welcomed.

Maybe a $20 USD gift certificate to the shopping store of your choice. (Moderators: hint. hint. ;))

Although I had problems with both films (as adaptations of LOTR) I prefered FOTR over TT. Primarily since I liked the greater variety of scenery in FOTR over TT.

jerseydevil

11-06-2003, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
This forum should be using this opportunity to encourage new people to join our LOTR Film community.

NO - it should be used to encrouage people who have never read the books - to read them. The movies are unimportant and are not Tolkien. Ben can take down the movie forum tomorrow and the board would still be serving it's purpose - that as a Tolkien board.

Earniel

11-06-2003, 02:00 PM

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
At a time when the moderators should have opened a thread here themselves in an effort to make new posters to THIS FORUM feel welcome, they've chosen instead to contribute to the problem. A question: When you go over to a friend's house, he'll probably welcome you at the door. But does he welcome you again when you enter the hall, again when you enter the living room, again when you enter the kitchen and so on? I think one welcome in a place where most people are wont to come (and here that's general messages) would suffice. Don't you?

IC:
I was talking to a friend during lunckbreak at school about the two LoTR-movies. My friend said that saying TTT was the more difficult movie of the trilogy to appeal to the public (since it is the middle book without a proper beginning or end) was nonsense. She said that FoTR's end was as 'proper' an ending as that of TTT. And that TTT was actually a little easier since it didn't have to bother with setting up the beginning of the tale. I was wondering if this feeling occured to some of the mooters as well.

Black Breathalizer

11-06-2003, 04:28 PM

Originally posted by Eärniel
A question: When you go over to a friend's house, he'll probably welcome you at the door. But does he welcome you again when you enter the hall, again when you enter the living room, again when you enter the kitchen and so on? I think one welcome in a place where most people are wont to come (and here that's general messages) would suffice. Don't you?Each forum is its own house because you don't have to go through the hallway to get to the living room.

We may create forum connections, but they are artificial because people don't need to pay any attention to them. Using your analogy, we don't need hallways. I can bookmark and instantly go to your kitchen, jerseydevil's basement, or the bedroom of Sister Gold...uh, well, you know what I'm trying to get at. uh, nevermind. :o

Cassius

11-07-2003, 05:20 PM

I have to say that I like the fellowship better because it starts off with the story in a nice happy hobbiton with all of the silly hobbits included.

Narsil's Master

11-12-2003, 01:52 PM

TTT was much better than fotr because it goes with the storyline better. It also had much more action which is always good.

thranduil

11-12-2003, 04:18 PM

Originally posted by Narsil's Master
TTT was much better than fotr because it goes with the storyline better. It also had much more action which is always good.

ttt isn't much better, in fact its not as good, action is not what makes a good movie, fotr is much better

Rosie Gamgee

11-13-2003, 03:25 PM

The action in and of itself was fine- I don't care that PJ added things like Aragorn and Gimli jumping onto the ramp and then Legolas pulling them back in with a rope. That's fine. The thing that I don't like is when, for the sake of making a movie more 'thrilling', he has to cut into time that could have been spent doing scenes from the book! And also, for the same reason, he detours from the storyline of the books. The books are thrilling and exciting enough without adding Aragorn falling off a cliff or Elrond being such an eggroll or evil Faramirs.