• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

Anyone else thinks "The Lord of the Rings" movie trilogy is awful?

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Even if the premise is stolen from Wagner, i love the dialogue, the way they speak and also the setting. it doesn't have the best twists and the plot is simple, but when mixed with the setting, the political situation and the dialogue it is very good.

it also doesn't really have larger than life charcters which is good. No character has the ability to control the plot on their own apart from the smallest ones, which is very nicely done and very impressive as it is a lot more difficult to write a book where various actors are dependent on eachother.

Lotr is cool and will forever be the king of its genre.

I think haters and fans should unite against the legitimate target of poor overrated fantasy books.

Im talking about that series of early learners books aimed at 5 year olds, that has sadly become the opiate of the masses over the last decade.

I preferred religion.
 
Jan 14, 2011
482
0
0
silly me

boomcie said:
The whole story is super boring and makes no sense whatsoever most of the time. Absolute stinker.
Here I thought all the TROLLS were killed off by the end of movie #3, which came out in 2003 Fergodsake! Been lurking under a bridge for 9 years? Weak, very very weak.

Its easy to understand how a pubescent girl couldn't see the life and death struggle between good and evil and the eminent destruction of the world order in the original books. Couldn't get past the cute hobbitsies, and elves and wizards. The death of children, friends and comrads; children desperate to earn a father's love. These are dark things, and the battle of good and evil is violent. Not children's literature. More of a blood and guts Norse Saga.
 
Feb 15, 2011
2,810
0
0
rickshaw said:
Here I thought all the TROLLS were killed off by the end of movie #3, which came out in 2003 Fergodsake! Been lurking under a bridge for 9 years? Weak, very very weak.
Something tells me you are addressing me here. What's the prob?
 
Sep 1, 2010
854
0
0
The Hitch said:
Im talking about that series of early learners books aimed at 5 year olds, that has sadly become the opiate of the masses over the last decade.

I preferred religion.
oh dear that was pathetic :eek:
 
Jun 22, 2009
10,475
0
0
The Hitch said:
Even if the premise is stolen from Wagner, i love the dialogue, the way they speak and also the setting. it doesn't have the best twists and the plot is simple, but when mixed with the setting, the political situation and the dialogue it is very good.

it also doesn't really have larger than life charcters which is good. No character has the ability to control the plot on their own apart from the smallest ones, which is very nicely done and very impressive as it is a lot more difficult to write a book where various actors are dependent on eachother.

Lotr is cool and will forever be the king of its genre.

I think haters and fans should unite against the legitimate target of poor overrated fantasy books.

.
Pretty much agree with all of this. Setting and context in the movies were excellent IMO.
 
For the record, I also hated Titanic. Beautiful love story? The only thing I remember is sitting there at the end: oh look, someone is dying. And another. Oops, another one is drowning. And there goes somebody else........

All the rest of the movie bored me to pieces.

Susan
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Susan Westemeyer said:
For the record, I also hated Titanic. Beautiful love story? The only thing I remember is sitting there at the end: oh look, someone is dying. And another. Oops, another one is drowning. And there goes somebody else........

All the rest of the movie bored me to pieces.

Susan
I actually laughed out loud when the lead actress was laying, freezing on make-shift raft barely able to yell "Jack.... Jack...... Jack....":)

All in all, it was awful.
 
Mar 18, 2009
13,318
0
0
I like the books. Initially I liked the movies, but over time I have become more and more disappointed with the films to the point that I do not care to watch them anymore. Visually they look great. Aside from the visuals, I think the films are at best a workman-like effort. Great scenes or great dialog make a good film, and it is amazing that throughout the zillion hour running time of the trilogy there is barely anything memorable. There are several cringeworthy moments, places where the dialog, even though it is sometimes taken directly from the books, does not work in film for a modern audience.

Peter Jackson is not a good director. He was not very experienced either. I get the feeling that he was overwhelmed with the size of the project. The best that he could do was move the story from point A to point B. His two writers are terrible. There are scenese that are handled hamhandedly. Others are overdone. Even little things have come to annoy me, like the overly loud sound of Denethor chewing while Faramir is riding out. There is no subtlety. The audience is treated as though it needs a point hammered home again and again.

All the flaws in LotR can be seen in King Kong, which was directed and written by the same people. While visually interesting, it was subpar story telling. There are scenes like the dinosaur chase that are overdone to the point of ridiculousness. Making it worse was the story is shopworn. Even if you have never seen the original King Kong or the remakes, you still know the story. It is ingrained in popular culture and pops up in parodies on shows like The Simpsons. The film trudges on to its predictable conclusion, and overall the film is not satisfying. It is interesting that after LotR, Jackson could have done any project. He could have created something new out of his imaginataion. Instead he chose an effects laden retelling of a tired tale. He might as well have remade It's a Wonderful Life.
 
Feb 15, 2011
2,810
0
0
Susan Westemeyer said:
For the record, I also hated Titanic. Beautiful love story? The only thing I remember is sitting there at the end: oh look, someone is dying. And another. Oops, another one is drowning. And there goes somebody else........

All the rest of the movie bored me to pieces.

Susan
Absolutely terrible movie indeed. No genuine emotion whatsoever and sub par straight-to-dvd scenario.

Still regret seeing it.
 
Never watched any of the LOTR movies. Never watched Titanic either. Or Braveheart. Can’t stand those “epic” movies. Prefer 80’s comedies with Chevy Chase in them :)
 
Feb 23, 2012
237
0
0
LOTR, the film trilogy, is OK. The production seems to overshadow everything. When the production epic does not dominate, the films seem like an endless soap opera. The Gollum always whispering is so annoying and hard to understand. It is all best summed up as "The Days of Our Lives As the World Turns in Middle Earth." I do like some of the battle scenes and the acrobatics and sword play. But, the films ultimately are dragging.
 
Dec 7, 2011
70
0
0
Saw the first one and thought "there's 3 hours of my life that I'm never going to get back". Didn't bother with the others.

Never saw Titanic but thought I was the only person in the world who hadn't - I'm pleased to know that I'm not.

Harry Potter films - not quite as bad as LOTR, but not far behind. I could only get through the first one of those as well.
 
I forgot the LotR movie trilogy also has:
- Aragorn decapitating a diplomat during parley
- The diplomat himself being ridiculous

The hell was that.

But what can you expect when you know Jackson initially intended Aragorn to duel Sauron.
 
Mar 10, 2009
284
0
0
3 of the greatest movies ever made, along with 3 of the best books ever written. The fact the Jackson tried to take on the franchise and did it great was impressive. Millions of people were waiting to dissect every line of the movies. My only little complaint of the movies were, they never let the viewer see how powerful Gandolf really was, even in his limited form he arrived in Middle Earth in, during the books. The books spawned an industry, D&D, WoW, Ultima series...the list goes on.

I had waited for the movies for years, and finally the CGI was up to par with extreme detail that Tolkein wrote his books with.
 
Mar 13, 2009
5,068
0
0
Read the books a long time ago and don't remember much but I do remember that often there were long passages where absolutely nothing was happening or going off into specific details that had little or nothing to do with the general plot. Also there were 5 pages long poems sometimes that I usually skipped. I didn't see all the movies because they were way too long.

What I liked most was the PlayStation2 game "The return of the King", I was never much into gaming but that is one of my favourites. You could choose between the main characters I believe and play through several different stages. You could learn all kinds of cool moves to kill orks which would get you extra points, you had to kill those giant elephants and those evil flying black things. I always chose Aragorn, he was the coolest.

The funniest things about Lord of the Rings were the parodies. There was a german one called "Lord of the Weed", where they constructed a whole plot about Bilbo being a drug dealer and so on and cut to all the scenes where they were smoking pipes (which was a lot apparently). Me and my friends were really into that, I could recite most of the dialogues by heart (it was only 20 minutes long). They were going to do a second one but I think it was never made ;(

Then of course the South Park episode where the kids find a p0rn video and go on a quest to return it to the store and B*tters turns into Gollum :D
 
Susan Westemeyer said:
One of my major complaints was the differences from the books. Don't care for that sort of thing at all.

Susan
I don't mind making sensible changes to adapt the story to what after all is a very different medium. But changes that betray the spirit of the original are a no no, and in that regard the worst one is when Frodo tells Sam to leave and Sam complies.
 
I didn't read the books, and am sort of in the middle on the films. They sure looked gorgeous, and the battle scenes were epic. But I found the stories uneven, straining at times, with convenient plot shifts at others. Liked the first one the most (though not the ending) and liked third one the least, yet it's the one that somehow won all the Oscars.

Not interested in the Hobbit, which my cousin read to me as a boy. I am really tired of 3D. And hearing about all the other technology they are pouring into it I fear will just be more of the worst parts of the trilogy.

As to Titanic, I kind of liked it. Again, it looked gorgeous and had a grand beauty to it, and I like that Cameron tried to be historically accurate. But the story was straight forward and didn't captivate me that much. Cameron's best film to me is The Abyss. Now that film was inventive, and very dramatic.

Harry Potter. I liked the 1st one okay, and 3rd one (Prisoner of Azerbaijan) a lot. Didn't like the 4th or 5th very much, and gave up after that.
 
I have read the bookes a few years ago(LOTR), and i still loved the films. yes there are plenty of plot holes and silly mistakes but i have learned to live with them.

I am also a big star wars fan( which i have also seen being criticized here)

both worlds are the creation of brilliant minds, George lucas even created an entire story that goes from thousands of years before the story of the movies to thousands of years after.

Llewellyn said:
Saw the first one and thought "there's 3 hours of my life that I'm never going to get back". Didn't bother with the others.

Never saw Titanic but thought I was the only person in the world who hadn't - I'm pleased to know that I'm not.

Harry Potter films - not quite as bad as LOTR, but not far behind. I could only get through the first one of those as well.
i used to be and still sort of am a gigantic fan of the harry potter books, the movies are just god awful, but somethings on the book really annoyed me over time. After 7 books of harry being an underdog becomes boring, teach the kid some proper magic, and killing off voldemort with an expeliarmus is the weakest end to a saga i have ever seen.
 
Mar 18, 2009
13,318
0
0
Parrulo said:
I am also a big star wars fan( which i have also seen being criticized here)

both worlds are the creation of brilliant minds, George lucas even created an entire story that goes from thousands of years before the story of the movies to thousands of years after.
Brilliant? Are you kidding me. Lucas is a hack who got lucky...once. If you want to see the true level of Lucas' "brilliance" then watch the steaming piles that are the prequels.
 
Aug 10, 2010
5,235
0
0
BroDeal said:
Brilliant? Are you kidding me. Lucas is a hack who got lucky...once. If you want to see the true level of Lucas' "brilliance" then watch the steaming piles that are the prequels.
What? American Graffiti is a masterpiece. He didn't just get lucky. He's good.

But I agree with you about the steaming piles of prequels.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS