First Review Of Return Of The King 757
dipfan writes "Newsweek has a first review of the third instalment of LOTR - and gives it two thumbs up: "Judging from a recent Newsweek screening in New Zealand, The Return Of The King is a sure contender for best picture. More than that, it could be the first franchise ever that didn't, at the end of the day, let audiences down--either because of laziness, pretension, greed or other phantom menaces. This is an especially poignant possibility at a time when we can all still smell the smoke from the wreckage of The Matrix." Fingers crossed. There's also an entertaining piece on LOTR gaffes with comments from Peter Jackson (such as 'Well, it's too late to fire anyone,' and 'We didn't think Elijah looked very good with pus')."
Quote... (Score:5, Funny)
Yea (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Yea (Score:5, Funny)
I can already see it now... Keanu Reeves as Tanis Half-Elven, Tara Reid as Laurana, a CGI-reduced Kris Kristofferson as Flint and Pauly Shore as Tasselhoff... okay, I have to stop, I'm making myself sick.
Re:Yea (Score:5, Funny)
I can already see it now... Keanu Reeves as Tanis Half-Elven, Tara Reid as Laurana, a CGI-reduced Kris Kristofferson as Flint and Pauly Shore as Tasselhoff... okay, I have to stop, I'm making myself sick.
As long as there aren't any Baldwins in it.
Secrets? (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, those are well kept secrets.
Sometimes it doesn't matter (Score:5, Insightful)
Funny- but, you know what? Good story-telling means that knowing the ending doesn't matter.
Case and point- when Gandalf fell at the end of the first movie- you could have heard a pin drop in the theater, and I found it to be a very, very powerful scene. Nearly everyone in the audience knew damn well he was fine and would return -but the power of the imagery of the comrades loosing their leader and friend just grips you to the point that, even though you know otherwise(and if you were smart, you'd realize it takes more to bump off Gandalf)- you really feel like he just died.
I think the difference is that too many movies substitute "what's gonna happen next? Find out!" for a good story. That is, however, not to say that all mysteries are bad- quite the opposite, I love mysteries/suspense(not the slasher kind though). If you want a good example, pick up one of Le Carre's spy novels; I strongly recommend reading from the first, especially if you're reading any of his first half dozen books or so- some of them -are- chronologically important.
Another good example is, believe it or not- Marathon. That game came at a time when Doom was "the" game- you ran around blowing up monsters and that was pretty much it. In Marathon, you had a non-linear play, you could suddenly find yourself on any one of three sides(even mid-level, if I remember right!); you had to do a lot of searching and pay close attention to details. It was the best FPS plot-wise I've ever played. You can currently play the demo on any modern OS- search for Aleph One. You can get the demo files from bungie's site, and if you have the original CDs, you can play the entire game. I'm replaying the thing from scratch right now, as a matter of fact.
Re:Sometimes it doesn't matter (Score:3, Informative)
Case and point
Just a nit: the phrase is "case in point [m-w.com]".
Re:Sometimes it doesn't matter (Score:5, Funny)
WHAT?!?!??!?!?!
Man! I knew I should have seen the second movie! ;)
Re:Secrets? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Secrets? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Secrets? (Score:3, Insightful)
Watching a movie and reading a book have very similar levels of recreational activity.
Recreation == re-creation. It's not necessarily physical activity. And anyone who thinks watching a movie, in which the imagination is pre-packaged, and reading a book are on the same level re-creationally, is just plain daft.
Re:Secrets? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Secrets? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Secrets? (Score:3, Informative)
"Lord of the Rings" was the second best selling book in western literature (behind the Bible) for years.
Now I think it's averaging at #3 behind "Dianetics".
Too bad their movie ("Battlefield Earth") wasn't as good.
It was already written for a different audience (Score:5, Insightful)
Tolkien wrote his works for a narrow literate audience, wrote it alone based on his personal experiences, and the fact it wouldn't fit in just one book made it a trilogy.
The LOTR movie is based on that book. The others were based on merchandising.
Re:It was already written for a different audience (Score:5, Funny)
You've just inspired me. I am going to try the opposite strategy and write a book for a large illiterate audience. Looks like I just found calling.
Re:It was already written for a different audience (Score:4, Insightful)
Erm I think you've been beaten to it, it was called The Phantom Menace.
Re:It was already written for a different audience (Score:3, Insightful)
Now, if you had said FHM or Maxim or Gear or Stuff or Penthouse, you would've had a valid point. But not Playboy.
Playboy has content that's on much the same level as Vanity Fair, just with a few more nipples. Vanity Fair is of course a fuckload higher on the intellectual food chain than "Entertainment Weekly" or "People" or "Cosmo".
Re:It was already written for a different audience (Score:5, Insightful)
It was a first hand account? Wow, I'm even more impressed by Tolkien than I used to be.
O.K., so that was a cheap shot... He did also have some amazing real life experiences, such as being a junior officer in (IIRC) the Battle of the Somme, which (again IIRC) had the highest single-day casualties in English military history - something over 20,000 dead. Just a tiny change to history, and he'd have been one of them, and the world would never have known what we had missed. How many would-be Tolkiens/Einsteins did we lose to war without knowing?
Re:Up to A(nother) Point, Lord Copper (Score:3, Insightful)
OK, I don't know very much about Tolkien: in fact, I base my opinion almost entirely on a Tolkien documentary that has been shown on the Australian TV channel SBS twice. Nevertheless I wonder a little: was Tolkien really that surprised? Are we sure we can't put at least some of that 'surprise' down to some sort of English 'oh-I'm-just-an-Oxbridge-don-only-did-this-in-my-c ellar-it's-nothing-in-particular-old-chap kind of attitude? (I.e. less 'surprise' m
LOTR - Best Trilogy (Score:4, Interesting)
Tolkien spent such a huge portion of his life designing one of the best fantasy books ever created, and it's only right that he be rewarded with the respect that a movie created in his books name will be the best ever.
Star Wars (now a trilogy * 2) is still good, but I hate to say it -- the world that LOTR represents, immerses me more into something amazing than Star Wars could ever hope to do. I will be proud to walk in and out of that movie knowing that I spent my 7.50 USD well.
So, my 0.02 USD tells me: LOTR is poised to be the best trilogy ever.
Re:LOTR - Best Trilogy (Score:5, Interesting)
J.J.R Tolkien not only witnessed the political build up to world-wide conflict, he had to personally face the horrors of war. He also understood the delicate balancing act that mankind performs within nature. Beyond all that, he truly understood and loved the many facets of human emotion. Many base humanistic truths shine in his story.
Not to take anything away from the exquisite acting, top-notched special effects, and perfect atmosphere of the films, but, Tolkien's story brings the movie to life - not the other way around.
Re:LOTR - Best Trilogy (Score:5, Funny)
Sashdlot - news for Dysgraphics [dyslexia-ca.org]. Tsuff that satterm.
Re:LOTR - Best Trilogy (Score:3, Funny)
TOLR? The of lord rings?
Re:LOTR - Best Trilogy (Score:5, Insightful)
Tolkien sold the movie rights himself for 100K to settle a tax bill.
The first attempt to make it into a movie was a disaster, it was a disney style cartoon. I would have walked out if I hadn't been the projectionist.
Even if they read it later, the experience will have been forever ruined for them.
Oh please save us the sanctimonious claptrap. There are several hundred thousand books published each year and of those no more than two on average will be made into a big budget film. There is plenty of Tolkein left in its pristine unfilmed state, the Silymarilyn, book of lost tales that were found behind the dresser, etc.
Of course the only way those works are ever going to make it to a wider audience is if they are turned into films because Tolkein's attempt to immitate nordic sagas leads to tedious prose.
Re:LOTR - Best Trilogy (Score:4, Interesting)
Don't knock it. That cartoon wasn't stylized like a cheap, Korean-made, Saturday morning toy advertisement cartoon. I would have preferred live action, but special effects being what they were in the 1960s, I can see why they tried the animated approach. The "cartoon" still managed to incorporate more of the elements and the spirit of the books than Jackson could ever do with any amount of run-time. The difference is that Peter Jackson completed his adaptation, and for that I applaud him.
Re: LOTR - Best Trilogy (Score:4, Interesting)
> > The first attempt to make it into a movie was a disaster, it was a disney style cartoon...
> Don't knock it. That cartoon wasn't stylized like a cheap, Korean-made, Saturday morning toy advertisement cartoon. I would have preferred live action, but special effects being what they were in the 1960s, I can see why they tried the animated approach. The "cartoon" still managed to incorporate more of the elements and the spirit of the books than Jackson could ever do with any amount of run-time. The difference is that Peter Jackson completed his adaptation, and for that I applaud him.
The problem I had with the cartoon - other than failure to deliver the complete story - is that it was patched together of apparently random stylistic changes. It looked like they farmed segments of the project out to independent teams and didn't enforce an overall plan for how it would be done. IIRC it ranged from "Disney style cartoon" to rotoscoped live action film.
Remember also that this was at the time when the cult film Wizards [imdb.com] was popular, an innovative and impressive film at the time, and with a similar theme. The animated take on LoTR might have been a hit, if done better and completed.
Re: LOTR - Best Trilogy (Score:4, Insightful)
The first attempt to make it into a movie was a disaster, it was a disney style cartoon...
(snip...)
Remember also that this was at the time when the cult film Wizards was popular, an innovative and impressive film at the time, and with a similar theme. The animated take on LoTR might have been a hit, if done better and completed
If, by "the first attempt", you're speaking of the 1978 animated movie, it was directed by Ralph Bakshi, who also had done Wizards. Others more knowledgeable than I claim that Wizards was Bakshi's training wheels for LOTR. Don't know if it helped too much.
Also, Bakshi's take on LOTR you saw in 1978 was not supposed to be complete ; the first film ends, IIRC, right after Helm's Deep. A promised second-part never appeared, at least not by Bakshi's hand. A made-for-TV-something called "The Return of the King" did appear,a few years later (1980?/81?), done by Rankin and Bass (the folks behind the original animation of the Hobbit). I remember being just amazingly disappointed with it, especially considering the two had done a great adaptation of the Hobbit a few years earlier.
As a card-carrying member of the Tolkien lunatic fringe, I'm not thrilled by a few of the editorial liberties taken by Jackson, but overall it's a much more satisfying experience than the earlier attempts were. I do urge people I've talked to who have seen the movie to read the books, as they are much richer in experience than a 3-hour adaptation of each part could ever be. But Jackson' films definitely present the same aura of wonder, power and, for lack of a better phrase, the bigness of things the books projected as well. And that's nice to see visualized.
Re: LOTR - Best Trilogy (Score:4, Funny)
Let's see if Peter Jackson has the balls to include that in his fancy shmancy live action mega-movie. HAH! (It also better be on the soundtrack.)
Re:LOTR - Best Trilogy (Score:5, Funny)
The Silmarillion isn't that tedious, really. Some of the other stuff that doesn't have the LotR references to string you along can be bad, but my 10 year old nephew did Silmarillion without much trouble.
Except, of course, that he agreed to it. (Score:5, Informative)
Some of his published letters describe his feelings on the possibility of a movie. He didn't like the idea for the same reason that many of the die-hard fans don't -- it's impossible to translate everything onto the screen.
But he wasn't dead-set against the idea. He gave his reluctant permission. (Then got really disgusted at the screenplays.)
Hollywoodized LOTR (Score:5, Funny)
> his masterpeace hollywoodized for the consumption of the illiterate masses.
If LoTR was produced by the usual Hollywood crowd...
- Hobbit "Merry" would be a faggot with a penchant for saying things that made everyone else in the movie think he was "Gay", though the audience would know better.
- The ringwraiths would be top-secret robotic soldiers with lasers on their heads, taken over by a "hacker" (Sauron).
- The flight from the Shire to Rivendell would be a car chase.
- The barrow wights would be drug dealers, angry because the car chase crashed through the warehouse right when their big deal was going down.
- Strider would be a 6'1" Brazilian lesbian who wore a chainmail bikini and prefered kickboxing to broadswords. The camera would linger lovingly at the appropriate places, and she would give Arwen a hot kiss in the trailer.
- When the Hobbits first met Strider at Bree, there would be a pole dancer in the background while they talked.
- After the skirmish at weathertop, Elven paratroopers would drop in to rescue the heros just after they had driven off the ringwraiths and didn't need help anymore.
- At the Ford of Isen, the flash flood would be caused because one of the Bad Guys' Henchmen set off the charge and blew the dam a few seconds too late. The cars washed down the river by the flood would go over a waterfall and explode in mid air.
- There would be an enemy mole in the Fellowship, motivated by jealousy over somebody or another.
- The tentacled thingy outside the Gates of Moria would drag the mole to his death. Papers found on his body afterward would tip the Fellowship off that he had been a mole.
- The orcs in Moria would be more drug dealers, angry because the Fellowship interrupted another big deal. Or maybe terrorists planning an attack on the Shire, angry at being discovered before carrying out the plot. The Fellowship would kill about 900 in hand-to-hand combat before they had to flee.
- Ms. Strider would wrestle the balrog while the others fled, losing her top duing the fight but having it CGBra'd back on to preserve the film's rating.
- Lots of explosions in the Moria fight, even though everyone was fighting with knives and crowbars.
- Everyone would get laid at the visit to Galadriel's haven. (Except for Merry, who would spend the evening putting off the advances of a Gay Elven Warrior who came out of the closet due to Merry's charms.) Frodo and Strider would rate a threesome with Galadriel herself.
- Lembas would give the heros Amazing Powers, which would fade just when they needed it most.
- Boromir would break up the Fellowship by making a pass at Merry, never previously having a queer urge in his life. Merry's dignity would be saved by a timely Orc raid.
- ...
Somone else can take it from there...Re:Hollywoodized LOTR (Score:5, Funny)
Sauron: You know, I have one simple request. And that is to have ringwraiths with frickin' laser beams attached to their heads!
Re:Hollywoodized LOTR (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, there is a point in The Two Towers, where we see an orcs head on a stick - Peter Jackson said that WETA has CGI'ed a helmet to cover this - apparently this is needed for american TV
Re:Hollywoodized LOTR (Score:5, Funny)
Is it just me or.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Is it just me or.. (Score:3, Insightful)
So you can be told how you should feel about the movie?
Re:Is it just me or.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Is it just me or.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, other people's ideas can be useful! Even for brilliant people who know everything already.
* This assumes that one watches movies that require thought/are worth thinking about.
It's just you.. (Score:3, Insightful)
If you've already decided to see a movie, I agree with you.
Re:Is it just me or.. (Score:4, Funny)
and by the same token, whats the point of reading the review after watching the movie? The deed's been done. Why dwell on it?
Quite a conundrum, ain't it?
Re:Is it just me or.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:(comic book guy says) "Worst Post EVER" (Score:3, Insightful)
Now if ents really were as stupid as Jackson suggests, why weren't they destroyed or perverted in all those 7000+ years of existence?
Gaffes interview ending... (Score:5, Funny)
Mr. Jackson, you must be new around here.
I Am There! (Score:5, Interesting)
I am in Wellington, New Zealand and the whole city is getting ready for the World Premiere here next week. There is Lord of the Rings images, statues, effects all over the pace. An unknowing visitor at the airport would get a hell of a sock at the warriars and dragons etc. leering down at them.
RoTK will be awesome... (Score:4, Interesting)
The car blunder in FOTR (Score:5, Interesting)
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 call shennanigans! I haven't seen the FOTR:extended edition commentary, but I remember them saying, "We don't know what people are talking about...there's no car in this scene." So he's now admitting that they not only removed the car, but they lied about doing so in the commentary track.
Shennanigans all around. :)
P.S. I need to check, but I think they even removed the car in the Oscar screener. Or at least in the Hong Kong version of it. :)
Re:The car blunder in FOTR (Score:3, Insightful)
Let's see... why bring it up at all on the DVD if they were really trying to cover it up? I'll stake your life on it and say they were JOKING AROUND??
P.S. I need to check, but I think they even removed the car in the Oscar screener.
Do you honestly think they create a new Oscar screener DVD from the film transfer? I am guessing they take it straig
Re:The car blunder in FOTR (Score:4, Interesting)
"Out flew a red-golden dragon -- not life-size, but terribly life-like: fire came from his jaws, his eyes glared down; there was a roar, and he whizzed three times over the heads of the crowd. They all ducked, and many fell flat on their faces. The dragon passed like an express train, turned a somersault, and burst over Bywater with a deafening explosion."
You think that's bad... (Score:5, Interesting)
...try time-travelling Elves.
We all know the inscription on the Doors of Durin: " blah blah blah, Lord of Moria, blah blah blah". And yes, it really does say "Moria," that's not just editorializing by Gandalf to entertain the Fellowship. The rest of the inscription says that the Doors were made by a famous Dwarf, and the inscription carved by a famous Elf, because the races got along okay at the time.
Except... moria is an insulting name. It means "Abyss" or (literally) "Black Pit." Nobody would have called the Kingdom of Khazad-Dum an abyss when it was at the height of its splendor. The name "Moria" was only earned long years later, after they woke the Balrog and abandoned the kingdom.
In any case, the Dwarves certainly wouldn't have let the Elves carve such an insulting name on the west entrance, and the Elves wouldn't have wanted to.
Oops. :-)
Just suck it up (Score:5, Interesting)
It's not going to break the damn film one way or the other. Christopher Lee is a screen legend and reads Lord of the Rings every year. This is the culmination of a lifelong dream for him, and frankly, the man does not have a wealth of years left to him. So many fans want to see it, and if Peter Jackson idolizes Christopher Lee so much he should do him the courtesy and the honor of letting him appear in what may well be the last great film he will appear in.
I am not confident that he will, but I really hope Jackson changes his mind on this at the last minute. Seven minutes out of three hours, out of nine or twelve plus hours of movie total -- what in the hell could it possibly hurt at this point?
Sorry to belabor this point, but reading the review led me to read some other Return of the King news, and how Christopher Lee will not be attending the premiere of Return of the King [fox23news.com] because he is so upset. After all that talk on the commentaries and documentary about what a close-knit bunch of friends they are, this seems like a cruel and unecessary snub to Mr. Lee.
Re:Just suck it up (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Just suck it up (Score:3, Informative)
it's not fucking redundant, someone mod parent up please, thanks, he makes some good points.
The reason it was modded redundant might have been because we have had at least two dedicated Slashdot topics on this, and every time LOTR comes up someone mentions it.
A History to live up to... (Score:3, Interesting)
SPOILER (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't like that there won't be (even on DVDs) Scouring of Shire. That's why I find LOTR so great - it's so bitter-sweet end that war has got consequences even in such an idylic places like Shire.
Re:SPOILER (Score:3, Informative)
Re:SPOILER (Score:5, Informative)
Re:SPOILER (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, he was influenced by it in a big way. That doesn't mean that whatever he wrote had to be about it! In any case, it seems you didn't read the first sentence of that quote...
Franchises (Score:5, Funny)
Actually, I think the Debbie Does Dallas franchise did a pretty decent job of keeping its audience up.
the problem (Score:3, Funny)
The first thing I thought of... (Score:5, Funny)
"In episode 2F09, when Itchy plays Scratchy's skeleton like a xylophone, he strikes the same rib twice in succession, yet he produces two clearly different tones. I mean, what are we to believe, that this is some sort of a magic xylophone or something? Boy, I really hope somebody got fired for that blunder."
(It's from the Poochie episode [snpp.com] of the Simpsons, for anyone who didn't get it immediately.)
Hey, the xeroxification of a new word.. (Score:3)
Did two people write the article?
Was one of them Roger Ebert?
-n
Peter - Please Make "The Hobbit"!!! (Score:4, Insightful)
It is a tremendous achivement that Peter was able to make all three at once and the director's cuts of 1 & 2 are also tremendous. Thank you for bringing such a favorite story of mine to life! If only someone could do it with Dune...
I hope Peter Jackson is able to make The Hobbit with the same love and care as LOTR. I would love to see Smaug and the gold as seen by Peter and Co. Bring it on!!!
Bod
That was not a review. (Score:4, Informative)
#1. That was not a review. It was a promotional
article for the movie. Although the person writing the article appears to have seen the movie, he does not present his opinion about its quality.
#2. No where is the phrase "two thumbs up" used, this being something only done by Ebert & The Other Guy, who are not newsweek columnists.
#3. The word 'installment' has two Ls.
very interesting.. (Score:4, Interesting)
Freudian slip, intentiontional illusion, or sad irony? I pick all three. Damn Lucas to hell for his lack of faith.
As far as the final (pfah, yeah right. they'll likely make a second trilogy, because people will watch it! bastards) Matrix is concerned, I have no interest in seeing it after the second one fucked things up so severely. They completely abandoned any coherrence of plot or storytelling and replaced it with a shitload of jungfoo and bullshit special effects. From what I hear, that's what they did with the third as well.
Hollywood needs more directors like Jackson. Most directors seem to think that by cutting corners, they'll lower production costs, and thus have a higher return - which, naturally, will promise them further contracts with the studio. This is bullshit.
For example, look at LotR. It's not popular just because it's based off of Tolkien's world - it's popular because it's an awesome film, and stands on its own. I know of people that have watched the first two films, and have loved them - and they aren't fantasy fans in the least, and haven't even read the books.
Unfortunately, there simply aren't that many visionaries in Hollywood that are also good at managing people and directing well (which includes getting a good script, etc.). There are a few around nowadays: Quentin Tarantino, Peter Jackson, Sam Raimi, (possibly, given time) Troy Duffy, David Fincher (when he gets a decent script), and a couple others. Of course, there are other contributing factors to good film (good composers, actors, editors, and writers/storyboarders, mainly), and every director has his shortcomings and bad eggs, but these are some of the better ones out there, IMO. Anyone else have any directing favorites that I couldn't pull off the top?
I would have included Steven Spielberg and Lucas, but Spielburg seems a bit past his prime, at least in terms of quality film, and Lucas hasn't really done a damned thing of quality except for Star Wars - and it's debateable how much of that is really his, and how much of it is simply him falling into the seat of opportunity.
Re:The matrix. (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, the problem a lot of people had with The Matrix ending is that it sucked, much like the rest of the movie.
Let's not act like the W. brothers got very daring at the end, and didn't end it with a battle. The final hour was full of battles. The ending was nothing profound or gutsy, it was just lifeless, like the rest of the movie. The ending wasn't bad because they chose to have peace break out, it was bad because they decided that dialogue and characters wre unimportant.
Re:The matrix. (Score:5, Insightful)
What I didn't like was (to paraphrase a great post I read here) that the last 2 movies used vaguesness to simulate depth, and did it poorly.
I enjoyed the action, but the constant allusions to some deeper meaning, which is rarely delivered, got old quick.
Re: The matrix. (Score:5, Insightful)
> What I didn't like was (to paraphrase a great post I read here) that the last 2 movies used vaguesness to simulate depth, and did it poorly.
Significance by obscurity?
Re:The matrix. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The matrix. (Score:3, Insightful)
I actually think it might be one of those movies that was killed in the editing room. For example, I recall an actor from Alien 3 (much reviled as a stinker) say "well, we SHOT a good movie... but the studio destroyed it". Maybe that's the case here.
Oh, sorry. I didn't bite on that shiny hook
Re:The matrix. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:The matrix. (Score:3, Insightful)
Deciding ehether or not the viewer should need a primer/have a strong history background to 'get' the main thrust of the movie is left as an exercise for the reader...
(hint: no)
The Matrix vs. ROTK (Score:5, Funny)
I guess this means that all RotK items are going to rehash The Matrix Re: sequels until RotK is released?
I mean, didn't the last RotK item also quickly degenerate into a debate on the merits of The Matrix sequels.
I mean, that's what I do to fake term papers. (Score:3, Funny)
Wrong ... people didn't like the Matrix 3 because (Score:5, Interesting)
People didn't dislike the movie because it ended with "peace" between the machines and a handful of humans.
I'm tired of fanatic movie fans who just can't accept it when others don't like their movies. I didn't like the movie because I felt it didn't live up to the first one, and the 2 sequels added little if anything to what was an amazing story with a lot of potential.
Lots of popular movies end with a peaceful resolution at the end, or even a happy ending.
Re::P (Score:3, Insightful)
It really couldn't have ended any other way, really. The machines couldn't have won, because then the entire thing would have been pointless. The humans couldn't have won, because the machines themselves weren't entirely evil. They couldn't have kept fighting, because it would have been unresolved. Peace was the only answer.
Re:Only one way to end? I think not (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The matrix. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm sorry people, but anyone who starts off an opinion piece with a remark like that for an opening sentence is effectively holding up a big, flashing neon sign saying "I am ignorant and my opinion deserves to be ignored". Several of you go on to make points that show you deserve better than that. Sorry, but you're committing the equivalent of attending a fancy dress party with dog-poop on your high tops and bragging about how you're going to marry your cousin soon as she turns 15, and wondering why people can't get past the first impression. If I hadn't had some extra slack time, I would have never bothered to read past that first sentence, and I guarentee you are being marginalized by it.
Freuddot is doubtless generalizing too broadly in his post. I'm sure different people have different problems with the Matrix series ending. But he held my attention long enough to express his opinion, and I bet 95% or better of people who started his post finished it and a lot of those actually considered his opinion. My post is long, and a lot of people will drop out on the way, but I'll still bet better than half that start read the whole thing. The "It just is" posts are losing half their readers ten words into the post.
Yes, Virginia, art IS SUBJECTIVE (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm sorry people, but anyone who starts off an opinion piece with a remark like that for an opening sentence is effectively holding up a big, flashing neon sign saying "I am ignorant and my opinion deserves to be ignored"
When people simply say that the movie "sucked", it means just that, that they didn't like it. I have noticed that with a lot of Matrix fans in particular, expressing dislike for these movies is anathema, and that they treat it like a religion.
If you want people to explained to you why the movie "sucked" to them, you can politely ask. But to say that they are ignorant or sound ignorant is idiotic. Art is subjective, and sometimes, there are no clear ways to express why one dislikes a piece of art. In this case, the reasons are numerous, but why repeat them over and over. Saying "it sucks" it's enough, it communicates to you, that the writer didn't like the movie.
The defenses for this movie are just beyound ridiculous, the typical one is the "ignorant" and you "didn't get it" elitist charges, which are so pathetic, because you get the feeling that fans of these movies feel intellectually superior for a piece of work that pretends to be intellectual. It's amazing, what's so intellectual about leather clad people wacking each other like they're in a comic book, and pretending to regurgitate phylosophy 101 that doesn't advance the plot?
The original poster here has an even more amazing defense, people don't like the movie, because today they're INTO WAR!. Amazing, the insult is that if you don't like the movie, you must be some blood thristy war monger that can't appreaciate this sophisticated work.
Get a grip folks, and learn to respect other people's opinions. So you liked the movie, CLAP CLAP, good for you. But don't insult other people's intelligence because they don't share your same taste (or lack of it).
Enough.
Re:Yes, Virginia, art IS SUBJECTIVE (Score:5, Insightful)
the matrix movies in a nutshell (Score:3, Interesting)
the second and third matrix movies, everyone was expecting a quasi-religious experience, and got a kung fu flick
those are the matrix movies in a nutshell
none of the 3 matrix movies are especially great or awful, it's just a matter of audience expectations being exceeded or underwhelmed
Re:Typical (Score:5, Funny)
This dude is the Newsweek reviewer, and he said incredibly positive things about ROTK. OF course, don't let that get in the way of your point
Re:Typical (Score:4, Interesting)
I thought it sucked. Not because it was cool to say so, but, in point of fact, because it sucked.
I recommended to many people that they not pay full price and go see a matinee instead.
But, hey, at least there weren't any Ewoks in it.
Re:I hope the kids can wait to open their presents (Score:5, Funny)
Where can I get a wife like that?!
Re:Reviews are useless... (Score:4, Insightful)
There are more movies released in a single year than any one person (except a reviewer) should see. You don't have the option of seeing all the movies you could possibly see, so you have to pick and choose. Many of use find reviews a useful tool for making these decisions. What tools do you use to help you decide which movies to see?
Re:Reviews are useless... (Score:5, Funny)
A nickel.
Heads we see Daddy Day Care, tails we go home and pound nails through our hands.
Re:Reviews are useless... (Score:5, Funny)
D'oh, damned dirty nickel!
Re:Reviews are useless... (Score:5, Funny)
So what did you think of Gigli?
Re:Reviews are useless... (Score:3, Insightful)
For a while there, I only saw some really good movies. Too bad every "professional" critic is a shill.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:5 Potatoes in a 4 Potato bag (Score:3, Interesting)
I'll admit right here, I think the films are decent, but I don't think they're a great adaptation of the books. They seem to focus more on the action scenes than the actual story.
Anyways, I think leaving out the Scouring is even more of a disappointment than leaving out Tom Bombadil. But that's just me.
Re:5 Potatoes in a 4 Potato bag (Score:4, Funny)
*best Samwise impression* PO-TA-TOES!
Re: Have to say it... (Score:4, Funny)
> First franchise not to let fans down?
Great movie, but he was talking about franchises. When we see TMWWBK VII we can revisit this issue.
Re: Have to say it... (Score:3, Informative)
This is The Man Who Would Be King [imdb.com] that Gandalf [imdb.com] wrote and directed, yes?
Re:How is Matrix a train wreck? (Score:3, Interesting)
His GF dies in his hands and the guy just says
"bye" and goes on to more ass-kicking... I was
really expecting him to do the Romeo thing and
maybe then have the machines fight Smith and when
they'd both collapse leave humanity be. The scene
where Trinity dies showed clearly that "romance"
was merely a plot device to advance action.
Of course, Keanu couldn't emote love even acting
opposite his real GF, if he got one. The guy can
express emotions (other than surprise) just
Re:So.... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Say what? (Score:3, Interesting)
And in the eyes of many, the original Star Wars trilogy still stands as a frnachise in it's own right. By this I mean that even though the new films are crap, it hasn't caused people to sour from the whole franchise. We still love the original films, and will still play the video games, hell - we even think that Darth Maul is one of the coolest villains ever (even if he only has about 3 lines - he jus
Re:LOTR survival guide (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Big Difference (Score:3, Insightful)
ROTFLMAO! Have you ever written a screenplay? I thought not...
It'd be a little harder to forgive Jackson for messing up the plot of a movie when all he had to do was NOT change the given story.
Where do you guys come from? And why don't you all crawl back to wherever it was? If PJ did not change the given story, the three movies combined would have been at LEAST 48 hours long. You simply
Re:Matrix was not THAT bad (Score:5, Funny)
Ade_
/