The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Let me make one thing clear. I am not suggesting that every film should be three hours long and feature Orcs and Wizards. What I am suggesting is film makers/producers should follow Peter Jackson and New Line Cinema’s lead and treat the movie-viewing public with respect.
This is the best movie I have ever seen (maybe the Matrix is as good) and I haven’t met anyone who didn’t think it was brilliant. However this isn’t an invitation to discuss whether you liked the movie or not. It’s about WHY the film was so good and what other film makers can learn from it.
First we must be thankful that Jackson was given the director’s seat. You need a director who is prepared to go to the ends of the Earth to make a good film (Well to his native New Zealand and it is an inspired choice). You also need a director who is able to make the film in anyway he/she deems necessary and desirable (budgetary constraints apart). So Jackson gets his money from the producers New Line Cinema and crucially from his own company ThreeFootSix. He knows that his other company WETA will do the special effects, so why not disappear in NZ for a year and a half? That way one can make a film (s) without the distractions of the financial backer and their insistence on the director producing what they perceive as a commercially viable film. Jackson has thus made a commercially successful “Independent film”.
Imagine how the film could have turned out with Sylvester Stallone as Gandalf and Halle Berry as Pippa (Pippin is now a female Hobbit in this version). Instead the casting (which is absolutely crucial) is perfect. (Why do so many films have so many English actors playing Americans and Vice Versa?) Having respected actors like McKellan and Hugo Weaving alongside “unknowns” works well. Sir Ian is a familiar face and this works well in his portrayal of Gandalf; everyone has a proconcieved idea of how Gandalf is/looks. “Unknowns” however play the hobbits which supplies a certain freshness to proceedings.
The attention to detail is also a key feature of the film, and the film goes a long way to appease fans of the book. Even the prononciation of certain words, like Mordor, are pronounced exactly the same by every character. This continuity only enhances the overall atmosphere of the film.
So we have a choice. We can support films that try desperately to be good films (LOTR, Matrix et al) or we can get sucked into the hype and support the films that have no respect for the audience (Start Wars I & II, Planet of the Apes, Tomb Raider and on and on and on).
Like I said at the start LOTR may not be everyone’s cup of tea, but people must be able to realise the difference in quality between an Earl Gray and a Super Sava cuppa...
This is the best movie I have ever seen (maybe the Matrix is as good) and I haven’t met anyone who didn’t think it was brilliant. However this isn’t an invitation to discuss whether you liked the movie or not. It’s about WHY the film was so good and what other film makers can learn from it.
First we must be thankful that Jackson was given the director’s seat. You need a director who is prepared to go to the ends of the Earth to make a good film (Well to his native New Zealand and it is an inspired choice). You also need a director who is able to make the film in anyway he/she deems necessary and desirable (budgetary constraints apart). So Jackson gets his money from the producers New Line Cinema and crucially from his own company ThreeFootSix. He knows that his other company WETA will do the special effects, so why not disappear in NZ for a year and a half? That way one can make a film (s) without the distractions of the financial backer and their insistence on the director producing what they perceive as a commercially viable film. Jackson has thus made a commercially successful “Independent film”.
Imagine how the film could have turned out with Sylvester Stallone as Gandalf and Halle Berry as Pippa (Pippin is now a female Hobbit in this version). Instead the casting (which is absolutely crucial) is perfect. (Why do so many films have so many English actors playing Americans and Vice Versa?) Having respected actors like McKellan and Hugo Weaving alongside “unknowns” works well. Sir Ian is a familiar face and this works well in his portrayal of Gandalf; everyone has a proconcieved idea of how Gandalf is/looks. “Unknowns” however play the hobbits which supplies a certain freshness to proceedings.
The attention to detail is also a key feature of the film, and the film goes a long way to appease fans of the book. Even the prononciation of certain words, like Mordor, are pronounced exactly the same by every character. This continuity only enhances the overall atmosphere of the film.
So we have a choice. We can support films that try desperately to be good films (LOTR, Matrix et al) or we can get sucked into the hype and support the films that have no respect for the audience (Start Wars I & II, Planet of the Apes, Tomb Raider and on and on and on).
Like I said at the start LOTR may not be everyone’s cup of tea, but people must be able to realise the difference in quality between an Earl Gray and a Super Sava cuppa...
I loved that film, it inspired me to read the trilogy...Twice.
Mr. Happy wrote:
> Earl Grey is also synonymous with effeminacy, don't ask me why, it
> just is.
--
Camp English guys drink it in the movies, right? Case solved.
> Earl Grey is also synonymous with effeminacy, don't ask me why, it
> just is.
--
Camp English guys drink it in the movies, right? Case solved.
Earl Grey is also synonymous with effeminacy, don't ask me why, it just is.
If all films were like Lord of the Rings, there'd be no point in going to the cinema. The reason LotR is amazing is that it's unqiue. And it's got a fat Kiwi with shorts directing. You can never underestimate that.
Personally, I can't stand Earl Gray, I think it tastes repulsive. And if every director had the same method of putting a film together, woul't cinema-going become somewhat tedious?
Let me make one thing clear. I am not suggesting that every film should be three hours long and feature Orcs and Wizards. What I am suggesting is film makers/producers should follow Peter Jackson and New Line Cinema’s lead and treat the movie-viewing public with respect.
This is the best movie I have ever seen (maybe the Matrix is as good) and I haven’t met anyone who didn’t think it was brilliant. However this isn’t an invitation to discuss whether you liked the movie or not. It’s about WHY the film was so good and what other film makers can learn from it.
First we must be thankful that Jackson was given the director’s seat. You need a director who is prepared to go to the ends of the Earth to make a good film (Well to his native New Zealand and it is an inspired choice). You also need a director who is able to make the film in anyway he/she deems necessary and desirable (budgetary constraints apart). So Jackson gets his money from the producers New Line Cinema and crucially from his own company ThreeFootSix. He knows that his other company WETA will do the special effects, so why not disappear in NZ for a year and a half? That way one can make a film (s) without the distractions of the financial backer and their insistence on the director producing what they perceive as a commercially viable film. Jackson has thus made a commercially successful “Independent film”.
Imagine how the film could have turned out with Sylvester Stallone as Gandalf and Halle Berry as Pippa (Pippin is now a female Hobbit in this version). Instead the casting (which is absolutely crucial) is perfect. (Why do so many films have so many English actors playing Americans and Vice Versa?) Having respected actors like McKellan and Hugo Weaving alongside “unknowns” works well. Sir Ian is a familiar face and this works well in his portrayal of Gandalf; everyone has a proconcieved idea of how Gandalf is/looks. “Unknowns” however play the hobbits which supplies a certain freshness to proceedings.
The attention to detail is also a key feature of the film, and the film goes a long way to appease fans of the book. Even the prononciation of certain words, like Mordor, are pronounced exactly the same by every character. This continuity only enhances the overall atmosphere of the film.
So we have a choice. We can support films that try desperately to be good films (LOTR, Matrix et al) or we can get sucked into the hype and support the films that have no respect for the audience (Start Wars I & II, Planet of the Apes, Tomb Raider and on and on and on).
Like I said at the start LOTR may not be everyone’s cup of tea, but people must be able to realise the difference in quality between an Earl Gray and a Super Sava cuppa...
This is the best movie I have ever seen (maybe the Matrix is as good) and I haven’t met anyone who didn’t think it was brilliant. However this isn’t an invitation to discuss whether you liked the movie or not. It’s about WHY the film was so good and what other film makers can learn from it.
First we must be thankful that Jackson was given the director’s seat. You need a director who is prepared to go to the ends of the Earth to make a good film (Well to his native New Zealand and it is an inspired choice). You also need a director who is able to make the film in anyway he/she deems necessary and desirable (budgetary constraints apart). So Jackson gets his money from the producers New Line Cinema and crucially from his own company ThreeFootSix. He knows that his other company WETA will do the special effects, so why not disappear in NZ for a year and a half? That way one can make a film (s) without the distractions of the financial backer and their insistence on the director producing what they perceive as a commercially viable film. Jackson has thus made a commercially successful “Independent film”.
Imagine how the film could have turned out with Sylvester Stallone as Gandalf and Halle Berry as Pippa (Pippin is now a female Hobbit in this version). Instead the casting (which is absolutely crucial) is perfect. (Why do so many films have so many English actors playing Americans and Vice Versa?) Having respected actors like McKellan and Hugo Weaving alongside “unknowns” works well. Sir Ian is a familiar face and this works well in his portrayal of Gandalf; everyone has a proconcieved idea of how Gandalf is/looks. “Unknowns” however play the hobbits which supplies a certain freshness to proceedings.
The attention to detail is also a key feature of the film, and the film goes a long way to appease fans of the book. Even the prononciation of certain words, like Mordor, are pronounced exactly the same by every character. This continuity only enhances the overall atmosphere of the film.
So we have a choice. We can support films that try desperately to be good films (LOTR, Matrix et al) or we can get sucked into the hype and support the films that have no respect for the audience (Start Wars I & II, Planet of the Apes, Tomb Raider and on and on and on).
Like I said at the start LOTR may not be everyone’s cup of tea, but people must be able to realise the difference in quality between an Earl Gray and a Super Sava cuppa...