Google| Subject | Re: I've seen LOTR |
| From | C'Pi |
| Date | 01/21/2002 15:32 (01/21/2002 22:32) |
| Message-ID | <a2h8p3$10s32q$1@ID-111793.news.dfncis.de> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.arts.sf.starwars.misc |
| Follows | Rimrunner |
| Followups | Rimrunner (3h & 51m) |
"Rimrunner" <rimrun@NOSPAMdrizzle.com>wrote in message news:slrna4nbp8.h3g.rimrun@drizzle.com...
RimrunnerMaybe
On Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:56:18 +0800, C'Pi <jas221@yahoo.com>wrote:
[snip]C'Pi
I liked the film and would like to see what the five-hour cut is like. Although I was ready for the film to be over at 3 hours 20 minutes.
The movie started at 2:00 and got out at 5:30. Maybe they showed an extended version in Taiwan. The US version included the Quidditch match didn't it?we could see more character development in the longer version.Rimrunner
3:20? Dude, the running time's 2 hours 58 minutes.
anC'Pi
My only problem with the movie is that I was expecting to see something more than
It was an FX movie all the way. Take away the FXs, would you still have a story that stood on its own? Would you have a movie at all? As I've said, the only characters that weren't little more than window dressing were Gandalf and Bilbo. And the only time the story went beyond the FXs were in the scenes of those two.FX movie and it wasn't.Rimrunner
Couldn't disagree with you more. FX movie, to me, means some mediocrity like "The Mummy Returns" or "The One"--the sort of film where the story seems largely there to provide opportunities for the graphics guys to go nuts. The result is that the FX generally overwhelm the actors. I never had that impression here, even when the actors had to fight FX beasties.
-g, oh, and those nazgul? creeped me out, man. *brrr*Another visual. That is what everybody talks about. What in the movie made you think? I mean other than, wow that looks cool.
C'Pi
01/20/2002-
-
-
-
-
