Sijun Forums :: View topic

Ragnarok · Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2003 9:39 am

jussi... kelvin comes back to earth??

Man...

About two tower, it disappointed me. It was bad directed and the rythm was awful.
However first one was good in these aspects...
_________________
"Ever forward, my darling wind." -Master Yuppa
Seigetsu

Max · Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2003 9:59 am

I LOVE both parts. and I will love the third part also.

faustgfx · Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2003 10:34 am

hooray for repeating scenes..
_________________
"hey, wanna dance?"
"do i look like kevin costner to you?
"..no you don't"
"i don't dance with wolves either."

Bare Bonez · Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2003 4:14 pm

Man!!!

How come Jackass didn't win any Oscar's.. That was entertaining in a mind-numbing sort of way. So was Dude, where's my car.

How about Agent Cody Banks - yeah, that's entertaining.. Put my brain on Hibernate and let the movie spoon feed me this "entertainment".

Yeah and Michael Jackson! Woot he was an Entertainer in those days.. Should've won something.. I'm not making any sense either 'cause my brain has turned to mush from all this spoon fed entertainment..

Michael Moore rocks.. Question

_________________
- b�
my webpage is fixed!

Drunken Monkey · Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2003 9:14 am

strata · Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2003 11:39 pm

I have to agree that the two tower was a bit... meh...

the pacing and editing in the final sequence (where they for some goddamned reason keeps switching between helm's deep and the ents) was absolutely bloody terrible. It might work in the books, but on film it just doesn't... every time it got a little bit exciting and nicely paced they would cut to the ents and just slow it the hell down again... ick!

and it's called the Eurovision Song Contest.
_________________
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?

faustgfx · Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2003 1:21 am

shoo, i got the eurovision 2000 and 2001 compilations, they're hardcore D:
_________________
"hey, wanna dance?"
"do i look like kevin costner to you?
"..no you don't"
"i don't dance with wolves either."

Matthew · Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2003 1:29 am

Maan, I saw Hero yesterday and I was kind of disappointed, Sure they flew around and everything but I would choose Crouching Tiger anytime before Hero.
I think the movie with Jet Li Red Dragon was ten times better than Hero, maybe did wrong thou, I had very high expectations before I saw Hero and that may have caused the way that I thought of it.
hmmm, have anyone of you seen it?

Ahh yeah - Eurovision Song Contest, Still sucks in my opinion. The way they are thinking, -"hey let�s make a song that sucks, and throw in something sucky standard Eurovision tempo ...uhhh.
More of Drowning Pool would be great - "The man without fear", maan that is a cool song. Praise The lord for the sucky entertainment Sweden provides ..huuu ...uhhh ...ugg ...errrr. What about Fame Factory? ...argghh

Matthew

Max · Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2003 4:38 am

Drunken Monkey: hehe, alright. I see we have the same taste. At least with Matrix and stuff.
But I DO like Lord of the Rings over ALL and EVERYTHING.
Okay, read the book then you will get the story. I can understand that someone who didn't read the story don't understand the content of this movie at all.
But to describe it as junk and crap is a bit TOO extreme. Don't you think so???
It has much more quality then most of the othere movies out there.
Well it's your taste but I can't understand it anyway. Crap???
I could add much more but I think I can't get my real point of view across because of my bad english.

Drunken Monkey · Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2003 5:09 pm

Max: screw my opinion, least important thing in the world.

but the movie was just too forced with needlessly long scenes, old and reused cliches, terrible editing (nothing made any sense), and if there was some kind of message or idea... i missed it. thats why i call it crap. i dont think its better than the rest (the 95%) of the movies.

The first one was so much better...

p.s.
your english is no problem
_________________
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity" - Sigmund Freud

Ragnarok · Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2003 9:46 pm

I agree with Drunken Monkey, and I've read the books.
The pacing was terrible.
_________________
"Ever forward, my darling wind." -Master Yuppa
Seigetsu

Max · Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2003 6:40 am

D. Monkey: Well, if this is your opinion it's absolutely okay
Taste is just different. I think the book is better then the movies. As always.
But I can't imagine a better interpretation of the book.
It's a very complex story with thousands of elements.
It's hard, nearly imposible, to make a movie with a story like this one Tolkien wrote.
So, my english is okay? thanks!

Ragnarok: Do you mean the scenes of pacing were too short? Or too long? Or just wrong interpreted in the movie?
I think they were too short......

Ragnarok · Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2003 12:25 pm

Max, the book could've been adapted much better. The first movie was good, the second was not.

The rythm of the film was awful. Deep's battle was really bad directed, the action was too slow and the continous changes of place between the battle and the ents' story really destroyed any possible rythm the battle had.
Also, I'd expected to see more about the ents, their attack over the tower was much more interesting than the battle to me.
_________________
"Ever forward, my darling wind." -Master Yuppa
Seigetsu

aColdOldKodiak · Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2003 5:41 pm

I liked the new Solaris Sad

_________________
http://jcaart.cjb.net

Max · Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2003 7:05 am

You may be right about the attack of the tower, but the main scene was Deep's battle in the book and so in the movie...
Well, we have a quite different opinion on this but it wouldn't be interesting if anyone would have the same point of view.

As said - i can't imagine a better movie Very Happy

klaivu · Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2003 7:47 am

The first one was okay, the second was not.
As ragnarok put it, bad pacing and no rhythm. Great visuals and lots of hype does not a good movie make.

Oscars are poop.
_________________
Why bother burning books ? Nobody reads them anyway...

radical travis · Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2003 12:05 am

TTT was superb. I don't know how much you expect out of cinema which is such a limited medium but they really captured a hell of a lot of the book in three hours. The guy who played gollum at least deserved an oscar, and maybe some more technical ones. Just because it's big budget it gets snubbed, but they built everything from scratch, and put a phenomenal amount of effort into it.

And Chicago didn't deserve any oscars, it's a pure piece of shit. It's just the exact stage musical slapped on the screen and just as nauseating. Hollywood was in the mood to kiss broadway's ass I guess, at the expense of the poor people who go see that movie now that it won an oscar. Really guys, you should hand over your balls right now if found yourself enjoying Chicago. Mad

Giant Hamster · member Member # Joined: 22 Oct 1999 Posts: 1782

All blubbery and poppycock.

On a scale of 1 to 10, where a 7 means it's great - Twin Towers rates about 7. Don't take it as an insult...because 7 is great.

The scene jumping was horrible. The worst were the excessive and seemingly random slow-motion close-ups of frodo zoning out. I'm trying to find them in the book desperately searching for the multiple texts, "Frodo Freezes for one whole minute as Sam shakes him a helluva lot saying 'Frodo, Frodo, Frodo, what's wrong?!'" but alas I never find them.

I feel it would have been better if they WEREN'T trying to capture everything out of the book...like the random dialogue. Such as the "hahaha, I just got two!", "Yeah!? I've got sixteen already!" crap they were doing durring the helm's deep. Subtlety is a good thing. hearing the words as the camera pans by would have done just fine. Seeing a gesture of, "I just got one!" would have been great rather than having to stop the whole scene - and have them stare at eachother, start talking, do close ups, switch back and forth at them laughing, and then return to the scene.

Too much scene cutting away at the "point of impact". The book didn't do that. it didn't have, "...so and so fell to the ground. just as he was about to be crushed by a horse, the hooves coming down....AND Oh, elf boy and the king of faries on the other side of the continent are having a fun time playing tag with the wenches." or anything like it written anywhere in it. You cut the scene BEFORE it builds up if you feel like showing a, "Meanwhile" scene. then you do a fade out or some kind of transition - and return to the normal scene. it's the same flow as a dream sequence. [first Scene getting slowed in pace] [cut away to meanwhile] [meanwhile ends completely] [transition of some sort] [return to main scene]. Why? Because.

Max · Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2003 12:32 pm

Giant Hamster: