• ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️



    Film & Television

    Welcome Guest


    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
    Forum Rules Film Chit-Chat
    Recently Watched Best Documentaries
    ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
  • Film & TV Moderators: ghostfreak

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King

I saw some Arwens and other.. hobbitesque outfits but no elf ears really.

Freaks! ;)
 
WOW is all I can say, some will be upset that the scouring of the shire was left out, to me not that big of a deal and I can see why it was now,

This is a grand movie, a bit hard on the blatter clocking in at 3 hours and 25 minutes, My only advice there is don't get the jumbo size drink before it starts, because you do not wanna get up during it to go to the bathroom

I was on the edge of my seat the whole time giddy as a school child waiting for the next scene, I won't go into details for those who haven't seen it but the movie actually had me teary eyed during a few scenes.

Only advice I can give is go see this movie, you will not be dissapointed
 
randycaver said:
I saw some Arwens....but no elf ears really.


you have seen the movies haven't you

arwen.jpg


;)
 
LOL - no elf EARS - elf ATTIRE. And, poor attempts at elf attire, I might add. ;)
 
Mr_AuDiO said:
I am assuming you are talking about LOTR III, there havent been screenings in melbourne yet have they? Or is this sydney or elsewhere?

Hmm who knows, I will comment next week when I see it, late!

No there haven't... these evil evil people reside in the US so they get LOTR - ROTK about a week before we unforunate Aussies do. We still have to wait until Boxing Day :\

CB :)
 
michael said:
well, i for one already know what happens, so i wouldn't be afraid of missing anything in a lame 'lite' version. perhaps being high would even make it interesting to watch.


if it's that deep, why even go...?

the fact is, to actually have taken that book word-for-word
would have needed at least 2 more films...
 
Last edited:
If there's a better movie than the Return of the King, I haven't seen it.
I absolutely loved this movie, in fact, when I think about them movie I get goose bumps. I didn't read the books, so all I know is what I see on film.

The battles and fighting in this movie made the battle @ Helms Deep look like sunday school.
I especially liked when Sam picked up Frodo at the end and helped carry him, when Arragorn was given the re-forged sword, the beginning with Smeagol, the spider scene, etc. So many great parts, so much I could say.

I'll probably go see this 2-4 more times while it's still in theatres.

Although it seemed odd without Christopher Lee, I still give it 4 out of 4 stars :)
 
I saw this yesterday on my MSN homepage link and i thought it was interesting. I thought i would post it here.:

from:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3540652

Dec. 1 issue - It ain’t easy making movies. Tiny blunders—the kind normal folks don’t notice—get made all the time. But nothing escapes the hawks at moviemistakes.com. For kicks, NEWSWEEK ran the site’s best catches past Peter Jackson to get his side of the screw-up.



‘THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING’

Blunder No. 1: “During the scene with Sam and Frodo in the field with a scarecrow, you can plainly see a car cruising past in the distance, from left to right.”
Jackson: We actually didn’t know about the car until we were cutting the movie. The smoke [from the exhaust] and dust wasn’t so bad because there was already lots of it around, but the bloody windshield was reflecting the sun back into the camera lens. So we erased it for the DVD. I think some people were upset because they tried to show it to their friends and it was gone.

Blunder No. 2: “While Arwen is carrying Frodo to the Ford, a close-up of his face shows his eyes and mouth covered in a green, pus-type substance. Moments later, his face is clean.”
Jackson: Yeah, we started with the pus and then we got just a bit revolted by it. So we eased back on the pus. We didn’t think Elijah looked very good with pus.

Blunder No. 3: “When Arwen and Frodo are being chased on horseback by the Ringwraiths, the soundtrack to the scene is a cantering horse. A canter is three beats, whereas a gallop—which is what the horses on screen are doing—is four very fast beats that often sound like a single beat.”
Jackson: I should’ve—well, it’s too late to fire anyone. The damage has been done.

Blunder No. 4: “When the hobbits enter Bree, there’s a distance shot from above in which the principal actors have clearly been replaced by shorter doubles. Also, the sizes of the doubles are completely wrong. The last hobbit into Bree is really, really fat—and he isn’t even the double for Sam, who’s the stockiest of the hobbits. It’s actually Merry, who’s very thin.”
Jackson: [ Giggles ] It’s true. There are definitely little doubles in that shot, and we did have four standard hobbits who were all about four feet high. So if you’re really paying attention, there are shots where you can sense that someone’s body shape is suddenly slightly different.

Blunder No. 5: “During the scene in which the hobbits ask Strider where he’s taking them, he answers, ‘Into the wild.’ A second later, as Viggo Mortensen walks past the camera, the bow he carries on his back bumps into the camera, nudging the screen a bit.”
Jackson: It does, yeah. But it was the best take. We did three or four takes, and for various reasons his movement past the camera just wasn’t as dynamic. So I chose the one that has a little bit of a bump. I was just hoping people wouldn’t notice. [ Laughs ] This is fun. Live Vote


' The Two Towers '

Blunder No. 1: “As people are fleeing Edoras, there are many shots of Eowyn—and in all of them, her hairstyle is different.”
Jackson: [ Laughs ] That shouldn’t be! Maybe it was the wind. It was really windy there.

Blunder No. 2: “The Uruk-hai are these huge, ferocious, twisted, unbelievably strong warriors—and yet the hobbits keep laying them out by tossing rocks at them.”
Jackson: In the books, hobbits are renowned for stone-throwing, so I guess if you’re going to rely on somebody to bring down an Uruk-hai with a stone, it’d be a hobbit.

Blunder No. 3: “When Saruman is talking to Sauron through the palantir, his lips aren’t moving.”
Jackson: Well, that’s because he’s engaged in a psychic session. That was deliberate.

Blunder No. 4: “In shots of Fangorn Forest from a distance, it’s an evergreen forest. Seen from up close or inside, it’s a deciduous forest.”
Jackson: Wow. Well, when you see it from the outside, it’s a real beech forest on the South Island of New Zealand. But seen from the inside, it’s a miniature forest that we built. [ Pause ] You’ve got pages and pages there. And those are all mistakes they’ve spotted?
 
randycaver said:
what Blue Adonis wrote=SPOILERS!

Who in the world will come into this discussion and expect not to read some sort of discussion about the movie? That just doesn't make any sense.
shrug.gif
 
It's an anticipation thread, not a review thread.

Return of the King was fun to watch, though a bit drawn out in the end. I can clearly see what will be included in the extended version...well at least one element that was only hinted at by the images on the screen for the theatrical version. Some Tolkien fans may not be happy with how that went down, but now I just can't wait for 11 months to pass so I can own the extended version.
 
BlueAdonis said:
Who in the world will come into this discussion and expect not to read some sort of discussion about the movie? That just doesn't make any sense.
shrug.gif


ok, who gives a flying fuck what you want to call it?

I mean its still SPOILERS. I didnt say OMG STOP DISCUSSION, I said what you put is spoilers, because they were - so you can take your little shrugging icon and stick it.

/end grouchy mode
 
Mods would it be possible to split this thread into the anticipation thread and the review thread please for us we plebs in other countries who still have to fuckin wait for ROTK to come out?

CB :)
 
ok, i agree. i did my best to split this into a thread for people who wish to discuss it but have not yet seen it and another thread for those which wish to discuss it and have seen it (this thread).

given the epic nature of the topic, i think two threads are ok.

alasdair
 
ok, i agree. i did my best to split this into a thread for people who wish to discuss it but have not yet seen it (this thread) and another thread for those which wish to discuss it and have seen it.

given the epic nature of the topic, i think two threads are ok.

alasdair
 
Top