LOTR - Return of The King

Loved it? Hated it? Neutral?

  • I loved it!!

    Votes: 29 96.7%
  • No real opinion

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I hated it

    Votes: 1 3.3%

  • Total voters
    30
  • Poll closed .

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

Polls never allow the definitive answer. The Return of the King is a tremendous film, and I loved it - it deviated significantly from the book, and I hated that.
But I certainly appreciate that a movie that truly followed the script of the book would be six and not three hours long.
I've already watched it twice, and am awaiting the arrival of the DVD with 'bated breath.
I do hope that Jackson will remake the Hobbit - in New Zealand with the same general "view" of Middle Earth's characters.
When all three films are combined, The Lord of the Rings is, in my opinion, the greatest film ever made.
Rick
 
One o the greatest movies I have seen.......
 
I loved it. It certainly didnt' seem long. The time flew by. I've never seen a battle scene that could hold a candle to the ones in this movie. Absolutely spectatular.
 
It was AMAZING!
I heard an interesting perspective from a buddy of mine who hasn't read the book and he didn't like it as much as 2. The reason was because he thought the 3rd one could have ended a half dozen times before it actually did end.
This is NOT my view - but a view of someone who hasn't read the book... anyone out there think the same and have not read the books????
I too wish they put in the razing of the Shire at the end but then again, they missed a bunch of parts in all 3 movies...
 
boney:
It was AMAZING!
I heard an interesting perspective from a buddy of mine who hasn't read the book and he didn't like it as much as 2. The reason was because he thought the 3rd one could have ended a half dozen times before it actually did end.
This is NOT my view - but a view of someone who hasn't read the book... anyone out there think the same and have not read the books????
I too wish they put in the razing of the Shire at the end but then again, they missed a bunch of parts in all 3 movies...

I haven't seen it yet (I will), but have discussed at length with a "junior" Tolkienophile about all of the movies, in particular the screenplay's ending of v3.

IMO, Jackson should have read the books 5 or 6 more times. His poor dealing with Sarumon and the Razing of the Shire is an unforgivable abomination because Jackson ignores a major underlying point of the book that he himself touched on: no one can afford to try to ignore the world's problems no matter how much of an irrelevant backwater you may think you're in.

FYI, there have also been complaints from non-Tolkienophiles about the ending being too long and drawn out. They're legit too.

If I wrote the screenplay, I would have dealt with the entire problem by ending v3 much earlier - - pretty much when the 8 of 9 reunite and discovers that everyone else did okay (Rivendell, perhaps?). This would have eliminated the "too drawn out" complaints.

And the plan for the final chapters - - because the confrontation with Sarumon in the Shire really is critical to the book - - would be planned as a special 4th installment, released directly to Video/DVD. This approach better satisfies the Tolkien Faithful's legit complaints of the current ending.

Most importantly, since v3 won't be on DVD/Video for awhile, its not too late to do just this, with v3 being fixed in a "Special Director's Cut", and a quick filming of some Shire scenes and some CGI work to put together "v3.5"

There's also some very nice tasteful things that could be done that would be shown as the final credits to 3.5 roll, such as showing some elements that Tolkien only wrote about in the Appendix, such as Sam's (& others) final destiny.


-hh
 
But I started with the first one and saw "Kings" Saturday night. I really enjoyed it. Very long movie but I was never bored. It kept moving along nicely. Great story, incredible effects and a Wizard of Oz type ending.

Hurrumph!

Beck
 
-hh:
IMO, Jackson should have read the books 5 or 6 more times. His poor dealing with Sarumon and the Razing of the Shire is an unforgivable abomination because Jackson ignores a major underlying point of the book that he himself touched on: no one can afford to try to ignore the world's problems no matter how much of an irrelevant backwater you may think you're in.
-hh

It is rumoured Peter Jackson said the following at the Copenhagen premiere. Basically he commented that the first cut of Return of the King had a running time of four hours and fifty minutes. .... and I can assure you that the DVD version of Return of the King will be longer than 4 hours and 50 min."

Also note that Sir Ian McKellen (Gandalf) appeared on Jonathan Ross... and he said that the Extended Edition would be over five hours long.

Anyone care to speculate that we haven't seen the end? I would like to start a rumor that the DVD extended version will include the razing of the Shire.
 
landlocked:
Anyone care to speculate that we haven't seen the end? I would like to start a rumor that the DVD extended version will include the razing of the Shire.


Don't hold your breath. I don't think it's going to happen.
 
The rumor I heard was that Peter didn't like that part in the book, so he left it out of the movie.
 

Back
Top Bottom