Christopher Lee boycotts Rings premiere

[Stout]

Hmm, good question.

Just saw the longer trailer last night, and I'm left with two real concerns that appear to be problems.

One, is the Saruman situation. As another friend of mine said, this makes him physically angry as well Lol.

The other was something I saw a bit in the Two Towers and more in the trailer for ROTK. That is, Frodo jumping all over Sam's case, and Gollum laughing at Sam behind Frodo's back. It seems they're adding an element of this story that simply wasn't there. Gollum kept his intrigues to himself, except for the time he 'hovered' over a sleeping Frodo.

Ah, well. I guess, after the rape of story that was the Two Towers, I should be happy if this is all they change in ROTK.

 

[Mike Olbinski]

Originally posted by Stout
Hmm, good question.

Just saw the longer trailer last night, and I'm left with two real concerns that appear to be problems.

One, is the Saruman situation. As another friend of mine said, this makes him physically angry as well Lol.

The other was something I saw a bit in the Two Towers and more in the trailer for ROTK. That is, Frodo jumping all over Sam's case, and Gollum laughing at Sam behind Frodo's back. It seems they're adding an element of this story that simply wasn't there. Gollum kept his intrigues to himself, except for the time he 'hovered' over a sleeping Frodo.

Ah, well. I guess, after the rape of story that was the Two Towers, I should be happy if this is all they change in ROTK.

I dunno, I always got the feeling when reading it that Sam knew that Gollum was up to something, but Frodo wouldn't listen to him.

Makes sense to me.

Mike

 

[Chaplin]

Of course, in the book you don't actually "see" what Gollum is doing. In a movie, you have to do something. He can't just stand there--that's not his character.

 

[Mike Olbinski]

Originally posted by Chaplin
Of course, in the book you don't actually "see" what Gollum is doing. In a movie, you have to do something. He can't just stand there--that's not his character.

Right, this is a movie...in the book, we know what he's thinking...in order to convey that to viewers of the film, Jackson is going to have to add moments like that.

Stout, I know you're loyal to the book, and so am I, but these movies are great, if not superb...and if you look at them as a whole right now, they've told the story, with some changes...but overall, they have done as best as anyone ever could, made AWESOME movies and I love them.

Mike

 

[Chaplin]

What's funny is that as adaptation's, these films are absolutely great. They pretty much follow the book, but they have to add a few things, predicated simply on movie conventions (visual storytelling is different than anything else).

 

[Mike Olbinski]

Originally posted by Chaplin
What's funny is that as adaptation's, these films are absolutely great. They pretty much follow the book, but they have to add a few things, predicated simply on movie conventions (visual storytelling is different than anything else).

Yeah, that's what I think too. And it took me until the second viewing of the first one to get that.

It's an excellent adaptation, heck, they even use lines right out of the book. All the characters are even named the same.

The one change they made, having Arwen save Frodo at the beginning, was I think, a great one looking back. I have friends who have seen the movie, asking if Arwen and Aragorn get together at the end, they WANT to know. I think that storyline is working.

I can't wait until ROTK.

Mike