The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
It's just a simple "Which is better?" argument between me & a equally beardy mate, but help settle it none the less.
Which is better, Fellowship or Towers?
I say Fellowship, he says Towers.
Which is better, Fellowship or Towers?
I say Fellowship, he says Towers.
Page:
Whitestripes DX wrote:
> My biggest worry is that there is just so much left to fit into the
> final film.
>
>
> Sadly, I expect the part of Saruman taking over the Shire after the
> alliance victory will be completely left out.
Yes, PJ mentioned in the FOTR commentry and numerous interviews that this would be the case - but I mean come on - a hobbit battle to round off the film would look pretty pathetic after the extrodinary battles at Pelennor and the Morannon.
> My biggest worry is that there is just so much left to fit into the
> final film.
>
>
> Sadly, I expect the part of Saruman taking over the Shire after the
> alliance victory will be completely left out.
Yes, PJ mentioned in the FOTR commentry and numerous interviews that this would be the case - but I mean come on - a hobbit battle to round off the film would look pretty pathetic after the extrodinary battles at Pelennor and the Morannon.
Whitestripes DX wrote:
> Well he wouldn't have said pukka, no.
Yes he would. Don't spoil it.
And he'd have done a little rap.
> Well he wouldn't have said pukka, no.
Yes he would. Don't spoil it.
And he'd have done a little rap.
My biggest worry is that there is just so much left to fit into the final film.
Sadly, I expect the part of Saruman taking over the Shire after the alliance victory will be completely left out.
Sadly, I expect the part of Saruman taking over the Shire after the alliance victory will be completely left out.
Most of the changes PJ has made has been neccessary, with only the odd exception being perhaps the exemption of Glorfindel in FOTR and the added scene in TTT involving Aragorn falling off the cliff - his reawakening after the fall took away some of the impact of Gandalf the Grey's rebirth(or resurrection)as Gandalf the White.
I take issue with many of the criticsms already made in this thead. It is true that the problems with the Ring are psychological as well as physical, but as PJ has handled this well in the previous films, there is no reason to think that he won't for ROTK.
Someone has already mentioned that a 'huge chunk of the book' was missing from TTT. This is true, but as I have said many of PJ's changes have been, in my opinion, neccessary. The Voice of Saruman part would have led to unessicary slowdown towards the end of the film which would be best saved for the beginning of ROTK. The absence of Shelob at the end of TTT did surprise me on my first viewing, but I've accepted that this will give the start of ROTK a huge boost to get things going.
The criticisms of the Golden Hall scene involving Gandalf, Thoeden and Saruman have been answered by the point that this was done to give a more cinematic feel. Indeed, many changes have been made to suit the cinema audience and this has to be done. The films have to stand alone by themselves. It is all well exploring the reasons why Faramir does not try to take the Ring from Frodo in the book, but in the film this is much harder to achieve and so changes have to be made. Including this part of the book would show to an audience who has not read the books that all men are tempted by the ring, er, apart from this guy because he doesn't want it. Tom Bombadil was left out for much the same reason.
I take issue with many of the criticsms already made in this thead. It is true that the problems with the Ring are psychological as well as physical, but as PJ has handled this well in the previous films, there is no reason to think that he won't for ROTK.
Someone has already mentioned that a 'huge chunk of the book' was missing from TTT. This is true, but as I have said many of PJ's changes have been, in my opinion, neccessary. The Voice of Saruman part would have led to unessicary slowdown towards the end of the film which would be best saved for the beginning of ROTK. The absence of Shelob at the end of TTT did surprise me on my first viewing, but I've accepted that this will give the start of ROTK a huge boost to get things going.
The criticisms of the Golden Hall scene involving Gandalf, Thoeden and Saruman have been answered by the point that this was done to give a more cinematic feel. Indeed, many changes have been made to suit the cinema audience and this has to be done. The films have to stand alone by themselves. It is all well exploring the reasons why Faramir does not try to take the Ring from Frodo in the book, but in the film this is much harder to achieve and so changes have to be made. Including this part of the book would show to an audience who has not read the books that all men are tempted by the ring, er, apart from this guy because he doesn't want it. Tom Bombadil was left out for much the same reason.
Well he wouldn't have said pukka, no.
He had to make it cinematic. You couldn't have Gandalf stand there for a bit, say "You're free" and then Theoden says "Pukka, let's go."
I hate the way he did the Theoden/Gandalf/Saruman bit.
That was rubbish.
That was rubbish.
FinalFantasyFanatic wrote:
> And the Balrog was such a rip-off of Ifrit.
> Such an obvious rip-off.
--
A rip-off? The Balrog was accurately described in the book. Wings of shadow, flame from within. Jackson was amazingly loyal to the book, with only a few mishaps (I miss Glorfindel).
--
> The one bit a frowned at was when it showed Gandalf fighting the
> Balrog after they'd fallen down the hole. You shouldn't have seen that
> - you're supposed to think he died.
> Ruined the whole surprise.
--
Heh, I think everyone already knew from (a) the book and (b) The trailer.
And he did die.
> And the Balrog was such a rip-off of Ifrit.
> Such an obvious rip-off.
--
A rip-off? The Balrog was accurately described in the book. Wings of shadow, flame from within. Jackson was amazingly loyal to the book, with only a few mishaps (I miss Glorfindel).
--
> The one bit a frowned at was when it showed Gandalf fighting the
> Balrog after they'd fallen down the hole. You shouldn't have seen that
> - you're supposed to think he died.
> Ruined the whole surprise.
--
Heh, I think everyone already knew from (a) the book and (b) The trailer.
And he did die.
Whitestripes DX wrote:
> I can think of two scenes in the Fellowship right now. One of Aragorn,
> and the Hobbits singing in the pub.
--
Both in the extended version, I'm afraid.
MoJo dude, didn't mean to anger you. I just love this film.
> I can think of two scenes in the Fellowship right now. One of Aragorn,
> and the Hobbits singing in the pub.
--
Both in the extended version, I'm afraid.
MoJo dude, didn't mean to anger you. I just love this film.
And the Balrog was such a rip-off of Ifrit.
Such an obvious rip-off.
The one bit a frowned at was when it showed Gandalf fighting the Balrog after they'd fallen down the hole. You shouldn't have seen that - you're supposed to think he died.
Ruined the whole surprise.
Such an obvious rip-off.
The one bit a frowned at was when it showed Gandalf fighting the Balrog after they'd fallen down the hole. You shouldn't have seen that - you're supposed to think he died.
Ruined the whole surprise.
Page: