• 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 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
meat puppet said:
The book too. Dull christian eschatological mambo dressed in robes and pixie ears.
Have to agree, and over-written. Plus it became the stuff of black-shirts (fascist) revival in the 60's-70's in Europe. They just love a simplified world, absolute good vs. ultimate evil. Puerile and not nuanced.
 
Mar 18, 2009
13,318
0
0
MarkvW said:
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.
American Grafitti was released in 1973. Star Wars in 1977.

Got anything in the last 35 years?

The person who deserves credit for Lucas' early work is his first wife, who edited Star Wars and won an Academy Award for it. She is the one who kept the stupidity in check.
 
Mar 13, 2009
5,068
0
0
Harry Potter ... the books changed so much throughout the series that it's difficult to compare them but overall I liked them all.

As for the movies I hated the first ones and gave up halfway through, then started watching them again from the 5th one on. My favourites would be 6 and both 7's, even though they changed a lot and added random stuff that was never in the movies. In 6 I thought the opening scene in the subway was pretty cool but I can see how that may p*ss off the purists. Same with that chase in the field around the Weasley's house (I think it was also in 6 or 7a), wasn't in the books but nice touch. Same with the dancing scene between Harry and Hermione in the tent in 7b. The ending of 7b could have maybe been more like the ending in the books but I didn't mind so much either.

Plus that was the first movie in 3D where I thought it was really well made and added to the experience. I remember when they are in Gringotts and you get the view from under the Invisibility Cloak, that was pretty cool!

Parrulo said:
killing off voldemort with an expeliarmus is the weakest end to a saga i have ever seen.
Yes that was a bit odd but everything preceding that was pretty brilliant IMO (going out to die, parents coming back from the dead, being in "heaven"...) BTW do you have a theory on what the repulsing creature under the bench (in "heaven") was supposed to represent? I could never figure it out!
 
Christian said:
Yes that was a bit odd but everything preceding that was pretty brilliant IMO (going out to die, parents coming back from the dead, being in "heaven"...) BTW do you have a theory on what the repulsing creature under the bench (in "heaven") was supposed to represent? I could never figure it out!
it wasn't heaven, it was the lymbo. J.K. Rownling said that horcruxe users while they still had active horcruxes around wouldn't go to hell/heaven but would just get stuck in lymbo until the horcruxe worked and got him back to life, so that creature was voldmort( or rather a piece of his soul) waiting to return to life.
 
Mar 13, 2009
5,068
0
0
Parrulo said:
it wasn't heaven, it was the lymbo. J.K. Rownling said that horcruxe users while they still had active horcruxes around wouldn't go to hell/heaven but would just get stuck in lymbo until the horcruxe worked and got him back to life, so that creature was voldmort( or rather a piece of his soul) waiting to return to life.
Yeah I figured it wasn't heaven, I just called it that for lack of a better term! But this makes sense, thx for clearing that up for me
 
“A refurbished Star Wars is on somewhere or everywhere. I have no intention of revisiting any galaxy. I shrivel inside each time it is mentioned. Twenty years ago, when the film was first shown, it had a freshness, also a sense of moral good and fun. Then I began to be uneasy at the influence it might be having. The first bad penny dropped in San Francisco when a sweet-faced boy of twelve told me proudly that he had seen Star Wars over a hundred times. His elegant mother nodded with approval. Looking into the boy's eyes I thought I detected little star-shells of madness beginning to form and I guessed that one day they would explode.

'I would love you to do something for me,' I said.

'Anything! Anything!' the boy said rapturously.

'You won't like what I'm going to ask you to do,' I said.

'Anything, sir, anything!'

'Well,' I said, 'do you think you could promise never to see Star Wars again?'

He burst into tears. His mother drew herself up to an immense height. 'What a dreadful thing to say to a child!' she barked, and dragged the poor kid away. Maybe she was right but I just hope the lad, now in his thirties, is not living in a fantasy world of secondhand, childish banalities.”
Sir Alec Guinness, in 1997.
 
May 18, 2009
3,492
0
0
Ah, consensus. :cool:

My sister bought me the trilogy DVD set several years ago. I finally got around watching the first a couple of months ago. I thought it was terrible but I went ahead and started watching the second one because all I heard about was how good the movies were. I made it halfway through the second one and shut if off.

I thought they were the most boring and stupid movies vs their hype I have ever seen. The Godfather IMO is not far behind in terms of me not buying the hype. I haven't seen the other ones but I hear they are better.
 
Parrulo said:
it wasn't heaven, it was the lymbo. J.K. Rownling said that horcruxe users while they still had active horcruxes around wouldn't go to hell/heaven but would just get stuck in lymbo until the horcruxe worked and got him back to life, so that creature was voldmort( or rather a piece of his soul) waiting to return to life.
So was there a god in that universe? As a child i read the first few books and don't remember one, but then, he had a godfather so
 
As to Star Wars, like others I loved the 1st as a youth, and Empire Strikes Back was a very powerful film (thank you Leigh Brackett, Lawerence Kasdan and Irvin Kirshner), parts of Jedi as well (thanks again Kasdan, and Richard Marquand). But Lucas best films are American Graffiti and THX1138. The prequels were God awful bad. The last one most of all. Just cringe worthy bad. Lucas long ago went over to the dark side.

The only explanation I have heard that makes sense is that the real George Lucas was kidnapped sometime after Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (3rd film) and an importer has taken his place, producing the prequels and Indiana Jones Crystal Skull.

This short film explains the theory very well.

;)
 
Since i am so young and would not have read the first books before the movies came out i completely disagree that the LOTR movies are bad ( though most older people probably read the books before the movies ). I also like playing the LOTR PC games.
 
Mar 13, 2009
5,068
0
0
The Hitch said:
So was there a god in that universe? As a child i read the first few books and don't remember one, but then, he had a godfather so
No not necessarily a God but an afterlife. It might be that Harry was cristened because of his muggle heritage and therefore has a godfather but it is never mentioned and seems unlikely, since his mother was estranged with her family. I think it must just be a tradition that also exists in the wizarding world but is not related to any religiousness. Also when there were wizard weddings and funerals I believe there was never any mention of a pastor or anything like that.

/edit: Book 5 deals a lot with the subject of death, which is percieved as a great mystery but there is never any mention of a God or heaven
 
Oct 16, 2009
3,646
0
0
Just saw the thread title, I'm surprised and glad I'm not not the only person in the world who thought they were dreadful. I haven't even read the books, maybe they're better, but the movies were just interminable.

The Hobbit looks like more of the same rubbish. Again they managed to drag it out into two whole movies. Ka-ching!

Peter Jackson is (or has become) a hack.
 
Did anyone here see the film Heavenly Creatures? An earlier Peter Jackson film that's quite good. That film has drama and emotion LOTR lacks.

As to The Hobbit, from what I have seen in the clips, it looks like it will be leftovers, much less compelling than the LOTR trilogy. I really fear it will be a lot of money spent on 3D trickery.
 
Jul 23, 2009
2,842
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.
Agree with that. I would be happy to watch Star Wars sequels if Lucas would bow out, sit back, and collect royalty cheques. He lost his way when he learned that he could triple his profits by adding cutesy creatures to the film, then package it up with a Happy Meal and a figurine. Jedi sucked. The prequels sucked. Some good plot ideas mixed with bad plot ideas, and ruined by gags and God-awful acting. Whoever wrote the dialogue should be barred from Hollywood.

LOTR - books were good, films were good. Didn't want the films to be the same as the books, Jackson's interpretations made for better theatre.
 
I would argue that half of Jedi is excellent. The scenes with the Emperor are good, the chase through the Redwoods, the battle with Lando. Basically the dramatic scenes (call them, the "Richard Marquand scenes"). But the opening scene with Jabba the Hut and Boba Fett, and the Ewoks all sucked (basically the merchandising, or "Lucas scenes".)
 
Jul 23, 2009
2,842
0
0
You are right, there was some good material there. But after Empire, it just seemed so disappointing, even for a kid. They accomplished the impossible when they defeated the most powerful villain in the galaxy, and then celebrated by dancing around a fire with teddy bears. Didn't they have beer a long long time ago? Besides, I liked Vader better than his pansy son so that movie could never work for me.
 
Jul 8, 2009
447
0
0
Surprised no-one has mentioned Jar Jar Binks in relation to the Star Wars movies... if ever there was a moment when the bell rings to signal the end.. his entry to the screen was it. A little bit of sick formed in my throat when I watched.
 
Jul 20, 2011
577
0
0
Late to this discussion.

but as Boomcie already knows, i too hated LOTR
i also hated Titanic
and the last 3 star wars films

I am glad i have now found a safe haven in which to admit my dislike

i also think the Tourist was the worst film i have seen in years.
even thinking about it now makes me angry
 
Mar 10, 2009
1,165
0
0
Just an answer to the original question. I did not read the books. I liked the movies and I thought they were visually wonderful and full of imagination. The story was dark and sometimes depressing. I enjoyed it enough to see all of them.
My Sister read the books and raved about the story. It never interested me enough to read the story so the movie portrayal is all I know.
 
Mar 18, 2009
13,318
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
Did anyone here see the film Heavenly Creatures? An earlier Peter Jackson film that's quite good. That film has drama and emotion LOTR lacks.
Jackson's Braindead/Dead Alive is a good B-movie. Bad Taste had low rent production values but it was also decent. The Frightners suffers the same problem as LotR in that it is sort of emotionally sterile.
 
Dec 7, 2011
70
0
0
daveinzambia said:
I also think the Tourist was the worst film I have seen in years.
even thinking about it now makes me angry
Oh yeah - it was dreadful wasn't it. Thank god it didn't last a minute longer - we had free tickets but what a pity to waste them on that. I always suspected that Angelina Jolie couldn't act her way out of a paper bag but she proved it conclusively in that steaming pile of @#$%.

And Johnny Depp should have known better

Sorry, straying OT
 
Jun 22, 2009
10,475
0
0
hrotha said:
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.
Yes this peeved me a lot. Frodo is a lot cooler in the books, in the movies he is a damn fool. This was also my biggest problem. Also while the movies make it seem like a couple weeks passed between bilbo leaving the shire and gandalf returning with the knowedlede of the ring threat, in the books decades had passed :/ but this was changed for the simplicity of the transfer to the film medium and a lot of these little details had to be changed for the neutral crowd. Books of this epic scope simply can't be translated accurately IMO, but I agree the Frodo/Sam thing was way off tone.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts