61
Well by all accounts the Polanski film is very old fashioned. It only won Cannes as a gesture to the Jewish lobby (as if we haven't heard enough about the holocaust already...) And SPIDER is just out-and-out shit. I don't care what anyone says. The cod-Freudian psychology is so contrived and obvious - I predicted the ending 10 minutes into the film. Meanwhile, Finnes performance is horrible and the photography looks like an irritating British film school film (Cronenberg never was a visual genius anyway, but at least the content used to be interesting).

As for LOTR being reactionary - well like I say, the film it most reminded me of if BIRTH OF A NATION. The white aristocratic forces of good wiping out unthinking dreadlocked evil...

> Why must Jackson cut his action scenes as though they were for a Michael Bay movie

Indeed. And not just his action scenes. However, the second one is much better than the first in this regard - have you seen it yet?

MOTION is 2001, btw. Why would it feature on my 2002 list?

62
klimov wrote:Well by all accounts the Polanski film is very old fashioned. It only won Cannes as a gesture to the Jewish lobby (as if we haven't heard enough about the holocaust already...) And SPIDER is just out-and-out shit. I don't care what anyone says. The cod-Freudian psychology is so contrived and obvious - I predicted the ending 10 minutes into the film. Meanwhile, Finnes performance is horrible and the photography looks like an irritating British film school film (Cronenberg never was a visual genius anyway, but at least the content used to be interesting).
Bait taken! It's so easy to get klimov to launch into a spiel sometimes :mrgreen:
klimov wrote:As for LOTR being reactionary - well like I say, the film it most reminded me of if BIRTH OF A NATION. The white aristocratic forces of good wiping out unthinking dreadlocked evil...
this sounds suspiciously like Mr. Cranky's review of the movie. Take a look, everyone:

http://www.mrcranky.com/movies/lordofth ... owers.html
Indeed. And not just his action scenes.


No, the rest of the movies are fine. I just can't understand why anyone would foul up what's set up as a classically rendered epic with some action sequences that look like outtakes from some god-awful rap video. Maybe I'm getting old, I can't keep up with 200 edits a minute.
klimov wrote:However, the second one is much better than the first in this regard - have you seen it yet?
yes.
klimov wrote:MOTION is 2001, btw. Why would it feature on my 2002 list?
Because each viewing is like watching a whole new movie.
This is a snakeskin jacket. And for me it's a symbol of my individuality and my belief in personal freedom.

63
Jackson edits like a mad-man all the way through the film, but anyway...

Hey O-dot, TC and Alexhead - an NTSC DVD of MOTION is currently on its way to harmo. If you ask nicely he might dub you a copy! :)

64
Klim--looking forward to seeing it.

O-dot--in your top message, you mention Bowling For Columbine, Auto Focus, and Attack of the Clones as possible Top 5 material, that's where I got it. Unless I misread it or you're engaging in that 'sarcasm' I hear so much about these days...

65
klimov wrote:Hey O-dot, TC and Alexhead - an NTSC DVD of MOTION is currently on its way to harmo. If you ask nicely he might dub you a copy! :)
yeah yeah, "the dvd's in the mail," heard that one before, haven't we... :mrgreen:
This is a snakeskin jacket. And for me it's a symbol of my individuality and my belief in personal freedom.

66
Alexhead wrote:O-dot--in your top message, you mention Bowling For Columbine, Auto Focus, and Attack of the Clones as possible Top 5 material, that's where I got it.
wow, people were actually listening? yes, you may consider that list accurate. TTT is probably ranking right below Clones at the moment. May rise after a second viewing.
Alexhead wrote:Unless I misread it or you're engaging in that 'sarcasm' I hear so much about these days...
what, i'm never less than perfectly frank and serious on these boards :killer:
This is a snakeskin jacket. And for me it's a symbol of my individuality and my belief in personal freedom.

67
People hold the books in too high a regard anyway; I really like what Jackson's doing with them so far--more emphasis on action and, quite frankly, character, and less 5-page descriptions of enchanted blades of grass.

68
klimov wrote:The goddamn 'nobility' of the characters is the absolute worst thing about the film as it is.
going from one extreme to the other does not make things better; afterall, we're talking about a fantasy film based on a series of fantasy books. allow us poor mortals the fantasy that some of us are capable of nobility/chilvalry, especially in these times.
Alexhead wrote:People hold the books in too high a regard anyway; I really like what Jackson's doing with them so far--more emphasis on action and, quite frankly, character, and less 5-page descriptions of enchanted blades of grass.
heh, touché. this is my exact complaint of stephen king novels, though for some reason The Stand, and ironically the extended edition, was fucking great to me.

69
klimov wrote:Hey O-dot, TC and Alexhead - an NTSC DVD of MOTION is currently on its way to harmo. If you ask nicely he might dub you a copy! :)
what, you're exporting one?? is it just not possible for me to get one? damn, that's cold...

70
Hmm, you seem to misunderstand TC.

'nobility' is not something you are capable of or not. It simply means that you are born with aristocratic blood! Tolkein is tripe because he tries to suggest that those of noble blood are somehow more 'heroic' and more important the everyone else. And you can't tell me that a philosophy like that doesn't have any connection to the real world.

72
klimov wrote:Hmm, you seem to misunderstand TC.

'nobility' is not something you are capable of or not. It simply means that you are born with aristocratic blood! Tolkein is tripe because he tries to suggest that those of noble blood are somehow more 'heroic' and more important the everyone else. And you can't tell me that a philosophy like that doesn't have any connection to the real world.
I misunderstood where you were going with that too. Since you've explained it, I kind of have to agree with you. With the exception of the hobbits, almost every character is a lord of whatever, or descended from kings, etc.

73
klimov wrote:'nobility' is not something you are capable of or not. It simply means that you are born with aristocratic blood! Tolkein is tripe because he tries to suggest that those of noble blood are somehow more 'heroic' and more important the everyone else. And you can't tell me that a philosophy like that doesn't have any connection to the real world.
ah, i see what you're saying now; this i tend to agree with also. but, for the purposes of this story, isn't that the beauty of a character like frodo, who is just a commoner? he is the only one who can complete this mission, he is the only one to be trusted with such power, etc.....

i think jackson accents the "nobility" you speak of to underscore the role of the commoner, not to insult him.

74
TC wrote:...i think jackson accents the "nobility" you speak of to underscore the role of the commoner, not to insult him.
Exactly! You gota remember Hollywood in all these movies, Star Wars and this series both aimed for the angle that these "commoners" are the heroes thats what the hook is and why we delve into the fantasy so much. You remeber the days in the yard playing Star Wars and knowing you could do the same, or the Indy movies....I don't recall to many stories groing up where I wished I was nobility! It was always the hero that was what we wanted to be, these movies just emphasize that the nobility is given but the heroism is earned thats the story we want to hear.

Thought the movie was pretty damn good though, Mandy wouldn't leave when it was over. The only shortcoming I can think of is the lack of impact the "heroes" seem to have in the battles. It's been years since reading the books but I just recall them rallying the troups and changing the battle, and in the movie it sometimes seemed silly, ie. the Dwarf launching himself of the ramports into the charging army!!! I was surprised he wasn't impaled! :twak: bad dwarf! After some thought though I'm not sure you could ever make a scene believable with those odds. If ya havent' seen it GO... you'll like it!
"Your just jealous the voices are only talking to ME!!"

Two Towers

75
The movie plays much better on a second viewing... On the first, your eyes are all over the screen, trying to take in everything that you see at once, which just isn't possible with such a densely packed movie. (Not that Jackson's Michael Bay Editing Syndrome exactly helps matters, of course).

Speaking of which, klimov's right that the editing does seem less hectic in this movie than in Fellowship. In fact, more than a few sequences almost seem poetic now, with weapons clanging and beasts falling on top of poor Gimli, or taking Aragorn off the edge off a cliff during the ambush on the convoy.

What else, Boromir's brother looks like Dave Mustaine to me....

the final battle is quite similar to the battle in Army of Darkness, to my eyes. Anyone else think so?

My professional movie critiquing days are long past, so my apologies if this is kinda scattershot and meaningless. Any questions from the group?
This is a snakeskin jacket. And for me it's a symbol of my individuality and my belief in personal freedom.

Re: Two Towers

76
O-dot wrote:What else, Boromir's brother looks like Dave Mustaine to me....
Heh...Precious is my business, and business is GOOD!

I think you can definitely see where he went back and learned a few lessons from the first one, the first of which was to calm the editing down. Much more smoothly assembled than the first from that standpoint, but "Fellowship" does still benefit from the newness/surprise factor visually; there's not much in the new one that boggles the mind in images, unless of course you count Golum, which I suppose you should. A truly breakthrough performance for a CGI. I liked the swamp quite a bit too. It definitely has the feeling of a middle passage in that it kind of starts and ends abruptly, but I thought it was very good. I hope the sci-fi fantasy geeks who've been waiting their whole lives for this (and of course the Star Wars prequels! It's truly a golden age for the basement-dwelling comic collectors of the world :mrgreen: ) appreciate the job Jackson's done, because all things considered he's done very well so far.

Re: Two Towers

77
Alexhead wrote:Heh...Precious is my business, and business is GOOD!
!!!!SWEATING HOBBITS!!!!
Alexhead wrote:I think you can definitely see where he went back and learned a few lessons from the first one, the first of which was to calm the editing down. Much more smoothly assembled than the first from that standpoint, but "Fellowship" does still benefit from the newness/surprise factor visually;
there were a couple of new touches that I liked: the orcs drooling for "manflesh"; Aragorn channeling Hawk from Twin Peaks and tracking Merry and Pippen.
Alexhead wrote:there's not much in the new one that boggles the mind in images, unless of course you count Golum, which I suppose you should. A truly breakthrough performance for a CGI.
Most CGI characters are too obviously CGI. Yoda in Clones doesn't really count because Lucas was intending to make the effect seem more like a puppet than a realistic character. With Gollum, there was no doubt he was real. He's there, interacting with the other characters flawlessly. They better be engraving the Visual Effects oscar for TTT right now.
Alexhead wrote:and of course the Star Wars prequels! It's truly a golden age for the basement-dwelling comic collectors of the world
Geek heaven to be sure.

and I just saw a commercial for Narc. Goddamn this movie looks fucking sweet.

:killer:
This is a snakeskin jacket. And for me it's a symbol of my individuality and my belief in personal freedom.

78
i moved this into the reviews section, since it looks suspiciously like a review now... :)

and i split the Isis discussion into the audio immersion here.

79
TC wrote:i moved this into the reviews section, since it looks suspiciously like a review now... :)
*whistles innocently*

:oops:
This is a snakeskin jacket. And for me it's a symbol of my individuality and my belief in personal freedom.