Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King

This is topic Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000696

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 12-16-2003, 04:30 AM:

I just built 2 copies of this film. That's 10 reels, and roughly 400 minutes. Then, I sat and watched it. No, I did not watch it, I lived it. I was there in Mordor, Gondor, and Rohan. I was there when Men fought the dark forces of Sauron. I was bearing the ring of power. I've never been held captivated by a film for so long as I was this one. This movie has to be the perfect movie, as it has everything anyone would ever want in a movie. Drama, action, suspense, comedy, romance, cinematography, sound, music, visual effects, acting, writing, and etc. etc. etc. Some scenes brought tears to my eyes. I watched the EE of both films yesterday, and watched Return of the King today. At the end of it all, I must say, this is the finest trilogy of films ever created. I love Star Wars, but things have changed. Peter Jackson has really created something special here and it will be remembered for all time.

AJG

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-16-2003, 06:04 AM:

Positive comments
Ditto to the above comments, this is a very good movie (and trilogy) indeed.

This film inparticularly had an awful damn good sound mix! I ended up running it at 8.5 and almost went back to the booth to turn it up a little more. Anyone know who was responsible for the sound mix on this?

Negative comments
There were 2 distracting "problems" with this movie.

#1 That fucking Deluxe Labs CRAP code on reel 5!!! [Mad]

#2 Someone was "edge enhancement" happy in the post production room. Some of this had so much digital sharpening applied that it made the film look like video in many scenes. This was a major distraction.

Regardless of these negative comments, this is a movie that needs to be experienced in a theater. Go out and see it.

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 12-16-2003, 07:16 AM:

Well, looks like Brad was probably screening as late as I was, till 6am.

Great movie, I think for theatrical purpses the ending probably could have been cut a little short. I have to agree, sound was superb, screened in SDDS at 6.0 sounded great.

Posted by John Scott (Member # 520) on 12-16-2003, 11:28 AM:

Did anyone else who watched it in Dolby Digital have a problem with the digital dropping out every few seconds in parts of reels 8, 9, and 10?

I loved this film, by far the best of the trilogy, and I think this trilogy will go down as the best of all time.

Posted by Michael Gonzalez (Member # 593) on 12-16-2003, 01:24 PM:

Two things from someone who didn't read the books (SPOILER?):

I was expecting Sauron to take physical form at the end of the movie to join the battle (similar to the beginning of Fellowship) and was disappointed when he didn't. A one on one battle with Aragorn just as the ring was being destroyed would have been cool. The way it did happen seemed a bit anti-climatic.

I actually had Gollum's demise spoiled for me by watching the Lord of the Rings episode of South Park last year.

So who thinks that this has a shot to sink Titanic?

Posted by Jacob Huber (Member # 1138) on 12-16-2003, 01:52 PM:

We had the problems with the sound dropping out in 8-10 also. One of the dropouts lasted about a minute. Really distracting.

That being said, this movie was everything that I expected it to be, and more. I absolutely loved the battle of Minas Tirith.

Posted by Aaron Garman (Member # 1653) on 12-16-2003, 02:38 PM:

No sound problems here. We watched it in DTS and it was amazing. We have one copy going into a Dolby house, so I'll to check it out once it is built. And yes Brad, the CAP code stunk in reel 5. I only saw it a couple times thankfully, but when I saw it, it was QUITE annoying. I was gonna mention, on one of our prints, one of the last frames of the trailer for Butterfly Effect had no soundtracks printed on it. It was only one frame, so I can't imagine it making a big difference. I didn't watch that print, so I didn't know what happened with it. Weirdness.

AJG

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 12-17-2003, 05:00 AM:

Did a test-run of my print tonight. I did not like "FELLOWSHIP/RING" and so I didn't bother to watch "TTT".

I only built and tested "RETURN/KING" because the owner of the theatre wanted me to personally ensure that we opened with this particular movie with the very best image and sound we can offer (so I was evaluating the equipment, too).

Anyway...I was essentially forced into having to watch "RETURN."

And I *loved* it.

Amazing to look at -- cinematography, effects and casting. The wonderful audio mix features a wide dynamic range with tons of interesting effects and some of the best use of surround channels I've heard in a long time. While I would consider this to have an aggressive soundtrack, I should note that I also ran at about 8 on the fader.

Nice score, too.

Minor complaints about the movie:

1. It seemed to end about five times (but I'm not terribly upset by that).
2. Some of Sir Ian McKellan's dialogue was delivered in a stage whisper and evidently they boosted it...and some noise came along, too. For the record, I was listening to the DTS track. The noise went away after each of his lines in that segment. I guess I should have made a note of the reel.

Comments/Observations about the movie:

1. Androgyny galore! This film is a gender bender.
2. Homoerotic underpinnings -- gays in the military.

That's really all I got out of it. [Wink]

Posted by Jim Leko (Member # 1287) on 12-17-2003, 07:37 AM:

Being a big LOTR fan (love the movies, still working on the books), I was really looking forward to this movie, but I didn't know what to expect. I knew RoTK would contain the biggest battles of the Trilogy, but I thought there would be more story involved. The Frodo/Sam part of the movie was great (Oscar for Sean Astin please).

I felt there was just too much fighting. One of the other projectionists screened it with me, and he told me the movie was much like the book, in that the war is virtually the whole book, but he did say there were many things left out, all of which were story enhancing. I am hoping the Extended Edition puts most of these back in, as I felt the movie I watched was one big battle. TTT kept the battle at Helms Deep long, but not so long as you begin to lose interest. I felt that if they wanted all those battle scenes, they needed to give us a break in there, with some slower story points. I will have to watch it a few more times, to really see how I like it.

Ok, it's 5:35am, and I am sleeping at the keyboard. Maybe I can make more sense when I wake up.

BTW, FoTR is my favorite of the three.

{edit: Print was decent. Better focus than TTT I thought. Reel 5 went really out of focus for about 30 seconds. My boss called, and the reply he got was, they have no back-up reels, so they have to make a new one.}

Posted by Mike Olpin (Member # 1115) on 12-17-2003, 01:35 PM:

When it tailed out at 3:30 AM, I was ready to watch it all over again.

The Prints:
THESE SUCK! All four of our prints have a lot of negative dirt (white specks). Two prints have "black splotches" all through several reels. The final two reels produce very high Dolby error rates, and although the digital doesn't drop out, it "hiccups" every few seconds in the reel. Finally, one of our prints has a reel with faint whispy white fogging.

(edited to correct spelling)

[ 12-17-2003, 03:58 PM: Message edited by: Mike Olpin ]

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 12-17-2003, 03:17 PM:

Yeah I noticed negative dust specks too but I see that on every movie. I can't wait for dCinema to rescue the industry from lackluster presentations. [thumbsup]

Posted by Kelly Skaggs (Member # 1780) on 12-17-2003, 04:13 PM:

WOW!!! Great stories done right on the big screen. Jar Jar Lucas you Toys r us slut take notes from this one. This finalized in my opinion the greatest trilogy ever put on screen.

I did not notice any crap code, I watched for it in reel 5 but did not see any. We show in DTS and it sounded great.

If this does not rewrite the Oscar books, there is a major problem with the academy, it should sweep the tech side. I to think Sean Austin deserves a nomination for supporting actor.

If you are not a fan of the other 2 see this one anyway. [thumbsup]

Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 12-17-2003, 04:39 PM:

I'll begin by stating that I'm not a big Sci-Fi fan anyway...

That said, I also did not see the first two installments of this film, so one can imagine the difficulty I had grasping what I was seeing on screen.

My asst, OTOH, had seen the other two and enjoyed them both. We agreed that ROTK seemed to drag in parts, but the battle scenes were pretty good. That big eyed bald thing agrravated me thru the whole film, although the SE given it were pretty sweet.

All in all, in didn't care for the film. It seemed to drag too much and it was, IMO, an hour too long.

I won't recommend it, but I'll let everyone know why, given the fact that I didn't see the other two and I'm not really a sci-fi guy.

[thumbsdown]

Posted by Michael Coate (Member # 757) on 12-17-2003, 06:27 PM:

quote:
I'll begin by stating that I'm not a big Sci-Fi fan anyway...

I didn't realize The Lord Of The Rings was science-fiction. [Smile]

Posted by Jason Black (Member # 684) on 12-17-2003, 07:53 PM:

OK, allow me to clarify:

I'm not a big Sci-Fi / FANTASY fan.

Surely you can see how this film fits this category now, huh? [Smile]

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 12-17-2003, 09:46 PM:

Maybe New Line will try using Kodak print film next time. [Smile]

Posted by Dennis Benjamin (Member # 1137) on 12-17-2003, 09:57 PM:

I liked the film.

About at the 3 hour mark I found myself glancing at my watch, wondering what the next half-hour would be like.

Hearing that he (the director)cut an hour out of this one - I am wondering how long the damn DVD will be.....

Posted by Jim Leko (Member # 1287) on 12-17-2003, 10:00 PM:

I read (I forget where) that Peter Jackson hinted at an Extended Edition DVD of just over 4 hours.

Posted by Nate Lehrke (Member # 1460) on 12-18-2003, 12:25 AM:

quote:
Did anyone else who watched it in Dolby Digital have a problem with the digital dropping out every few seconds in parts of reels 8, 9, and 10?

Yeah, we have three prints in the chain with that problem also. Quite annoying. Maybe a MN thing.

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-18-2003, 01:15 AM:

Here's my comments on "LOTR: The Return of the King":
KICK ASS!

I witnessed the 8:15pm opening day show at the Carmike 8 here in Lawton (screen #4 THX, DTS audio). In this age where so many self-absorbed filmmakers choose to butcher book-to-screen adaptations, it is wonderful to have a trilogy of films go the extra mile to be faithful to the books and have the translation work when it hits the screen. The action was thrilling and there were even scenes I found to be particularly scary. Overall, I was more entertained by this show than any other I've seen in at least the last couple years or so.

This final installment easily had the best, most jaw dropping visuals out of all the installments in the trilogy. There were a few shots I really marveled at for all the work that must have gone into them. There were minor quibbles as Brad mentioned. Some of the sharpening techniques used, I felt, harmed some details. I can recall one expansive shot looking across a large army below and some detail items like torches were sort of jittery looking in a bad way (kind of like an aliasing effect). Those minor problems were easily forgave by other things, like the marvelous effects applied on that "undead" army of dishonored warriors. In previous films, ghosts typically looked flat with only one layer of translucence. Here, you had many layers, which really paid off with a very creepy effect. Not only do you see the ghoul's ethereal decomposing lips move as he talks, but you also see the long roots of his teeth going into his green skull behind those lips! Ewwww!

Oh yeah, the sound mix. Damn! There was a lot of stuff going on in those surrounds. And the bass was packing a good whallop too. The Nazgul were flying and screeching all around the room on those battle scenes. Along with the "serious Oscars" this film could win, it easily has to be a strong favorite in the Best Sound and Best Sound Effects Editing categories.

I'm definitely looking forward to getting the DVD of this installment to finish off the collection. Word is Peter Jackson cut 1:05 of material out of the film to bring it down to a 3:21 running time.

That makes me wonder if the "Extended Edition" of "Return of the King" will be a 5 disc set rather than four. A friend of mine joked New Line will probably come up with a release package of all three installments featuring something like 10 discs. And he thought the 10 disc thing was a joking exaggeration. Then I told him if New Line wanted to be "completist" and include both theatrical and extended edition cuts along with all the extras used in all the releases, their single release SE package would probably eclipse the 20 disc mark. Gulp.

My only complaints with the show:
---------------------------------
1.> Nearly 30 minutes of commercials and trailers crammed onto the front. The sold out audience was getting noticeably pissed as the trailers continued on and on and on and on. They were entertained by the THX "Bounty" logo. But then they let out a groan of anger and frustration when seeing yet another MPAA green band for the attached trailer of "The Butterfly Effect".

2.> CRAP CODE!!!!
Jesus F**king Christmas! Did they really need to put that shit code there of all places? I'm looking at the white towers of Minas Tirth rising into the sky during a big battle scene. What do I see? The freaking city's buildings have chicken pox! Damn! Just once, I would like to be over the shoulder of the MORON who choses were to put that shit. When he's about to place a bunch of red dots over a white area on the print, I'm going to jam my elbow into the back of his stupid head! He'll not only be seeing little red dots on the film. But he'll also be seeing little white stars in his eyesight from getting his puny brain rattled.

The MPAA and film print labs really need to bring an end to this crap code. It's the DVD screeners that are getting pirated. There is NO FUCKING NEED to give film prints chicken pox.

Posted by Shane Hoffmann (Member # 1620) on 12-18-2003, 01:43 AM:

The one complaint that seems to keep coming up is the ending(s).
For someone who isn't completely obsessed with Lord of the Rings (I'm told they do exist), I can see how it could drag. But I think the endings were great. That was a great gift from PJ to the fans. I personally wished there was more.
Can't wait for the extended cut!

Posted by Chris Markiewicz (Member # 1415) on 12-18-2003, 04:08 PM:

I agree with all the positive comments about this film. I guess we lucked out with our one print. We're running in DTS for now, but I kept an eye on the CP500's error display; 2-2. until reel 9, then 3-3. and no dropouts. I saw 3 instances of negative dirt, and this print had only one lab splice.
The dynamic range of the soundtrack is awesome. The beginning is almost too soft, but the battle scenes rock. Excellent use of surrounds and subs as well.
Did Minas Morgul resemble the Emerald City to anyone else? [Big Grin]

Posted by David Stambaugh (Member # 1102) on 12-18-2003, 10:31 PM:

12/18/2003, Regal Cinema World 8, Eugene OR, 2:40PM, House #3.

Attendance about 125. Right before the show started, the manager welcomed the audience, mentioned their new DTS-ES sound system, and asked for cell phones to be turned off. Yay. The show then started, and to my eyes [eyes]

(and my dismay) it was slightly out-of-focus. I saw "Last Samurai" in this same house a week ago and it was razor sharp. This bugs the hell out of me and it affected my enjoyment of the movie. A shame because except for that, the presentation was excellent overall. I only noticed 1 lab splice and although I was watching for it in reel 5, I noticed no CAP or CRAP code.

My only complaint is there's too much in this for 1 movie. But what an epic film. Wow. I will see it again (and hopefully it will be more sharply focused).

Posted by Jim Leko (Member # 1287) on 12-19-2003, 05:14 AM:

After watching a second time, I think I was a bit harsh on the film. Sometimes when I am waiting for a movie to be released, I start thinking what I would like to see in it. Having watched it already, I knew what to expect the second time, and it was much more enjoyable. Also, I wasn't screening it this time, so I didn't have to worry about keeping track of reel changes. That helps too.

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 12-19-2003, 02:05 PM:

It also helps if you just splice the film carefully, than you don`t have to worry about the reel changes.

Posted by Jim Leko (Member # 1287) on 12-19-2003, 08:09 PM:

I didn't build it up, just screened it. Too many of our NEW screeners tell us there was a problem with a reel (lab error usually), but they forgot which reel it was (that does us a lot of good). A movie like RoTK is harder to keep track of reel changes. You are in awe watching the movie. I was happy at the end when I marked down the 9th reel change, and knew I hit them all.

EDIT: I don't have problems tracking reel changes, but I usually screen movies I don't like, which makes it easier.

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 12-20-2003, 09:51 PM:

I don't understand how people can be critical of the "endings" of this film when those same people are probably champing at the bit waiting for the extended version. Make up your mind: Do you want more or less?

With this many characters, you need multiple endings. Fair enough I think.

However...having said that...I think that some of the transitions between the endings could have been tweaked so they didn't feel like "false endings." There were some rather final-looking shots (slow pull-backs and fades) and I felt like those were practical jokes. I think cuts and dissolves would have worked better here.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-20-2003, 10:21 PM:

Loved it! This is definitely the movie of the year. Anyone who liked FOTR and TT will enjoy this (obviously). It's the best of the series. Sure, there are some "issues" with the CGI (was this a digital intermediate?), but even that was better than TT (where the CGI was terribly uneven in quality).

The "false endings" didn't bother me at all and I was actually pleased that so many "loose ends" were addressed.

I didn't notice any CAP code or crap-code on this print (the one that is playing in cinema #2 at the Loews Boston Common theatre). It looked pretty good and sounded great. This film is crying out for the 70mm or Imax DMR treatment, however, and it's sad that it probably won't get it.

Posted by Mathew Molloy (Member # 666) on 12-20-2003, 11:24 PM:

I agree with Scott on this one. Being a fan of the other two films I was quite happy with the numerous endings. I do have one problem with the series and that's the idea that what we're seeing in the theatre isn't the complete film. There's some particularly jarring jumps in storytelling and I don't really like the excuse of, "Oh, that will all be explained in the extended dvd."

Don't get me wrong, I love the films, the extended versions, etc. but it doesn't quite sit right with me that what I'm watching is only the 'good enough' version.

Seeing the film at the Arclight in Hollywood was absolutely breathtaking. A top-notch presentation apart from one minor complaint... As with every print of every film in the trilogy that I've seen - the Rl. 1 leader (& attached trailer?) has been cut too close to the New Line logo so the sound just cuts in. Can't some projectionists take a look at the soundtrack before cutting? Grrr! [Mad]

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-20-2003, 11:29 PM:

Does the CRAP code get applied to different areas from print to print? Or does it get placed in the same spot on every print? I really have to wonder because someone would have to be legally blind to not notice the chicken pox red dots where I saw them. They looked kind of like domino patterns burned right into the center area on the print, conspicuously over very light or white backgrounds (the bright sky, the white bricks of Minas Tirth, etc.)

Posted by Darren Briggs (Member # 1071) on 12-21-2003, 06:34 AM:

I screened the film before we screened it to the public last wednesday morning, Dolby Digital, Fader 7 in a THX auditorium.
Amazing sound, pretty damn good image to say its all been through a computer, just think if they spent a little of the budget filming in 65mm and then having 70mm DTS prints along with 35mm.
It wil only take a big budget film like this to be shot in 65mm to get 70mm up and running again.
Ive had calls from a few of our cinemas saying the SRD track is failing in reels 4 and 10 at one site, 5,6 and 10 at another.
The one I have is fine. Maybe they rushed so many prints through the quality has gone down, ots of Neg dirt at reel ends especially reel 8 i believe. Shoddy for such a huge epic film.

Darren
65mm photography and 70mm projection is the way to go!

Posted by Manny Knowles (Member # 1171) on 12-21-2003, 12:40 PM:

I think the 70mm thing is a pipe dream. A nice one, mind you. But a pipe dream all the same.

1. Printing costs -- not worth it. Showing this movie in 70mm won't sell any more tickets. Sold out is sold out.

2. Shipping costs. As we've discussed numerous times, the studios are hoping that dCinema will eliminate certain distribution costs. Going back to 70mm would be counterproductive as far as this is concerned.

3. dCinema. As far as something looking/sounding better than 35mm, the studio execs think that dCinema is the answer.

Fact is that 70mm has been relegated to being an art-house gimmick. Sad but true. Nobody wants to see "Hello Dolly" in 35mm. I seriously doubt if many people have a need to see it in a theatre.

I patronized some 70mm screenings in Los Angeles out of a morbid curiosity about the format itself. Even with "Lawrence" or "2001" I was really there to see a 70mm show "one last time" before it goes away.

Terrific presentations! But do I think 70mm is better than today's 35mm with SRD? No.

More than likely the difference is that 70mm shows get a better class of projectionist -- No theatre wants to go down in history as being the place that damaged the last surviving 70mm print of "Willow." Also, with any kind of specialty screening, you can't afford to screw up or your name will be mud!

And I'll tell you something else: I believe that every time a PROJECTIONIST complains about the so-called shortcomings of 35mm, it creates a more stable platform for a dCinema rollout. Do you really want that?

Who was it that said -- right here on Film-Tech -- that "better projection pays" ? I think that is the answer. Good 35mm showmanship -- even with analog SR -- can be quite impressive.

As for an IMAX Experience -- I think they'd have to cut a lot out of this movie or else introduce another platter upgrade for this one title.

70mm fans are snobs! [Razz]

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-21-2003, 02:15 PM:

This is the movie review forum guys. Please open up a new thread in FHF.

Posted by John Anastasio (Member # 607) on 12-22-2003, 06:45 AM:

Okay, this time I'm in the right string.
Saw it at AMC Hamilton 24, house #12.
Loved it.
My ears are in heaven.
Looked for the CAP code and couldn't find it on their print.
This trilogy has raised the production bar for complexity. It's not just film, it's a monument to filmmaking and storytelling.

Posted by Ron Lacheur (Member # 1126) on 12-22-2003, 09:16 AM:

12/21/2003, Famous Players Capitol 6, Cinema #1, Dolby Digital EX.

I'm not too big of a fan of LOTR series but I really enjoyed this. The 3hrs, 20mins flew by pretty fast which is a good sign. The ending dragged on a bit, but otherwise a very well done show.

Presentation wise: Despite the dirt on the ads and trailers. The presentation would have BEEN perfect. Until Reel 8, where we were greeted with a base side scratch on the right side of the picture. The sound was absolutely awesome. I think someone has been reading the comments we have been making on this theater and has done something about it.

Besides the scratch, an awesome 4 hours at the movies.

Posted by Richard Greco (Member # 2032) on 12-22-2003, 12:20 PM:

I saw this at a screening on the day before opening day.
Having never seen any of the films before, I wasn't looking forward to this screening. My boss however, said for me to get on the clock for it. I WAS interested then [Smile]

Overall, I actually enjoyed this film and it made me want to see the other 2 on DVD. The battle scenes were superb, the hobbits played really well, and the graphics were great.

I liked the sound mix in DTS

This screening was an open employee screening and it turned out to be similar to an episode of MST3k.
I also thought that it was amazing that a whole film went without cursing once. (Yes I do realize that it was medievil times and those words didn't exist)

I give it a 3.5 out of 4 stars because of the slow ending.

Oh BTW, This is my 100th Post!! Woo-Hoo!!!

Posted by Kamakshipalya Dhananjay (Member # 1391) on 12-23-2003, 06:08 AM:

Really waiting to see it in theatres here in INDIA. Was at Amsterdam last week and now wish I was there for another week to catch this marvel.

I have seen the previous films in the series and have great expectations about this one.

Saw the reviews at Rottentomatoes.com and was amazed to see such agreement between critics over the likeability for ROTK. This particular review stood out for me, from the SEATTLE POST INTELLIGENCER
Review from the Seattle Post Intelligencer

Also pleased to note this film breached the 250 million mark internationally in just 5 days since release.

Unfortunately, all of this means nothing back here in INDIA. It is somewhat expected that this too will pass unnoticed like the previous two films. Somehow, the previous two films made losses for the distributor and I hope this one will, if not help it recoup the earlier losses, at least make some money for its distributor, Warner Bros.

Poor distribution skills and strategy on the part of Warner Bros deprive movie lovers in India to catch this film while it is still talked about overseas. Pirated copies of digital masters of ROTK have flooded the streets across India and few, if at all, will wait to catch this film, after a long wait, at the theatres.

I cant cease to wonder on how the Pirates have been so successful in throwing out really pristine dvds of digital masters of most big films in less than two days from the US release.

With presentations in movie theatres in most theatres in the country rated as being anywhere from 'below average to poor' and in most cases, 'repulsive', the Pirates seem to know just what the people want and have been getting better and better and giving just that.

Anyway, wish ROTK will come soon to theatres in India. I will wait to watch this film at theatres. And in dts.

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 12-24-2003, 12:54 AM:

Loved the movie. Watched in a remodeled Regal Perimeter Pointe in Atlanta. Very good sound and properly framed bright picture.The series seems to have gotten better for the non readers of the book as it went along as we get to realize that it is not the annoying Frodo and Ring show as we feared after watching FOTR. Best thing about the movie was that when I went home and watched FOTR EE on Starz, I wasnt bored at all. That's the hallmark of a good final chapter, it makes the preceding chapters more interesting. Example: Baromir. He was OK when I first saw FOTR. However, now that I know about his family in ROTK, his death in FOTR resonates more. Also, whenever Frodo goes through his lil Ring spell, I don't sit impatiently thinking how many times do I have to see Frodo struggle with this inthe next 12 hours. Now, I know the other hobbits have a purpose.

Serkis technically qualifies as supporting actor. So whatever techncalities hollywood had for not nominating previously are gone. His screen time as Smeagol is more than the screen time previous winner Judi dench had as Queen Elizabeth in Shakespeare in Love. Sean Astin and Ian McKellan are worthy too. Sean is the star in this movie.

My only problem is that they could have taken out the earlier scene with the boring Liv Tyler and give us the deleted Saruman scene. Arwyn is one character who sucked in this series. Eowyn would have been a preferable choice to marry the king.

The multiple endings didn't bother me because all the characters grew on me. However, i agree the fadeouts were like fakeouts. They should have done a brisker transition.

KD from India: I am not sure how popular the LOTR movies are in India. Howeger, I wouldn't be surprised at the lack of buzz since Indian mythology is full of great stories which are complex and fun. Just like a Western audience may not watch a Mahabharata movie in droves despite it being a great piece of writing, I guess there is no big scandal if Indians dont watch this series in huge numbers.

Posted by Shane Hoffmann (Member # 1620) on 12-24-2003, 01:15 AM:

Pravin:

I think Professor Tolkien would have had a bone to pick with you if you think Eowyn should have married the king.

I'm not horribly disappointed about the Saruman scene being on DVD. It means I still have something to look forward to. If anything, they could have saved a few of the multiple endings for the DVD to keep the Saruman sequence in the theatrical (even though I liked the endings).

Posted by Jim Leko (Member # 1287) on 12-27-2003, 07:43 AM:

You will have a LOT to look forward to.

http://www.dvdtown.com/announcement/DVD_version_of_Return_of_the_K/249/

Peter Jackson recently attended his last premiere for the last chapter in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Last stop was Copenhagen the capitol of Denmark. There he gave a very interesting interview to a Danish newspaper. He told that the first cut of Return of the King had a running time of four hours and fifty minutes. When asked why this was too long for the theaters but fit for DVD he answered.

"It is different with the DVD version. People watch it at home. They can lay on the couch or spread the experience over two-three nights. That is the amazing thing with DVD. It gives a whole new dynamic and I can assure you that the DVD version of Return of the King will be longer than 4 hours and 50 min." -- Note that this was translated into Danish by the newspaper and then back to English by us.

I don't know what to believe. We will just have to wait until it gets official. One thing is sure, I'm looking forward to see the three hour and twenty minute version at midnight today in the local theater =)

Posted by Bobby Henderson (Member # 840) on 12-27-2003, 01:40 PM:

With the "extended version" length of "Return of the King" easily eclipsing 4 hours (and perhaps even closing in on the 5 hour mark) I would not be surprised to see a 5 or 6 disc version with the movie spread across 3 discs (gotta fit that high bitrate video quality, all those commentary tracks and DD 5.1 EX and DTS-ES 6.1 audio).

Posted by Greg Mueller (Member # 17) on 01-10-2004, 08:09 PM:

The wife and I finally got in to see this film. We really liked it. But we both agreed that they could have ended it about 20 minutes before the credits rolled. They just kept having these grandiose endings, one after the other. One would fade and you'd expect the credits to roll and then another grandiose ending. When it finally said "The End" I said hooray!
Maybe they couldn't decide which ending they liked so they used them all?

Excellent film

Posted by David Favel (Member # 1125) on 01-10-2004, 09:08 PM:

Maybe they couldn't decide which ending they liked so they used them all?

But then they deleted the Saruman ending.

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 01-10-2004, 09:50 PM:

Well, the story has many different characters with different backgrounds from different places, so it`s only natural there have to be multiple endings, just like in the book. I think it`s a shame they cut the whole section when the Hobbits come home and the Shire is getting industrialized by Saruman.

Posted by Evans A Criswell (Member # 381) on 01-15-2004, 10:42 AM:

Attendance: 2004/01/12 19:30, Regal River Oaks Cinema 8, Decatur, AL, Auditorium 6, DTS

I waited a while before seeing this movie.

The movie was very impressive and I enjoyed it tremendously. Most of the comments I have match comments already posted in this thread that don't need to be duplicated. [Smile]

There were lots of long-haired guys in this movie, and one thing I found humorous was that even though these guys were out in battle and outside all the time, their hair was always perfect and not messed up in the slightest. Being a long-haired guy, I know better.

Another scene I wondered about was the one where Frough-Dough and Sam were on the rock next to the volcano. They were just a few feet above the ground which was covered with flowing lava. Would six feet above the ground be enough to shield you from being cooked or burned alive by the heat from a solid flowing lava ground cover?

The film presentation was excellent, with no noted defects.

Posted by Greg Mueller (Member # 17) on 01-16-2004, 09:37 AM:

Evans
They would have been crispy critters, I'm guessing.

The wife wondered where the bad guys attacking that castle got those big assed rocks from, for their catapults. Did they bring them with?
I know the guys in the castle were flinging huge castle parts back at them. I was wondering how they were able to move them around into the flingers, so quickly.
I guess they got help from the spfx dept.

Posted by Matt Frankish (Member # 2131) on 01-16-2004, 03:23 PM:

From one who's read the books (a number of times):

I thought the film was, as you all say, magnificent. The two problems I had with it:

1: I thought the handling of Shelob (the big spider) was not what I expected. in the first two films I thought Peter Jackson's visualisation of what was in the book was fantastic, but I didn't like the way that Shelob was depicted as a mindless, giant spider and nothing more. In the book she's a considerably more intelligent and complex character.

2: The ending could have been much snappier in the editing. Particularly the "Frodo waking up" scene, which was almost a duplicate of the scene in Fellowship.

Overall, though, a beautiful piece of film making.