A Night at the Movies
Friday, December 20th, 2002 10:43 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
tamaranthDamn, but 17th December 2003 is a long way away.
I loved it.
There were bits I didn't like, scenes that were clichéd, liberties taken, nuances overemphasised.
And it's very distinctly a film based on Tolkien's book: it is not a film of the book.
Peter Jackson still in my good books, though. I am so
I loved it.
There were bits I didn't like, scenes that were clichéd, liberties taken, nuances overemphasised.
And it's very distinctly a film based on Tolkien's book: it is not a film of the book.
Peter Jackson still in my good books, though. I am so
[Error: Irreparable invalid markup ('<u<grateful</u>') in entry. Owner must fix manually. Raw contents below.]
Damn, but 17th December 2003 is a long way away.
<lj-cut text="The Two Towers (spoiler-free)">
I loved it.
There were bits I didn't like, scenes that were clichéd, liberties taken, nuances overemphasised.
And it's very distinctly a film <u>based on</u> Tolkien's book: it is <u>not</u> a film of the book.
Peter Jackson still in my good books, though. I am so <u<grateful</u> for the way he adds depth to every character. (Orcs excluded). I'm not saying that his insights are in any way original or unique: simply that he is showing aspects of character that I hadn't noticed when I read <i>The Lord of the Rings</i>. (Is it worth noting that I never really read it as an adult until after I'd seen <i>Fellowship of the Ring</i>?) I saw different sides of familiar characters: context for scenes from the trailers and various photos: Helm's Deep and the utterly unglamorous depiction of what is essentially medieval warfare. (Hmm, wonder if Peter Jackson could be persuaded to film <i>Ash</i>? Would be more than happy to have Miranda Otto in title role ...)
</lj-cut>
Strange to see a film for the first time, everything new and strange, <u>knowing</u> how familiar I will become with it.
Conversation on the way home:
- how <u>does</u> Gollum's loincloth stay in place?
- state of the art, CGI-wise, and possible advances by the next film
- American audiences: worse than British? (Not really: screaming babies seldom encountered in my local cinema, but mobile phones are answered and mindless chatter continues the world over. <i>Heretics</i>)
- No, that was <u>not</u> Joaquim Phoenix. That was Orlando Bloom.
<lj-cut text="The Two Towers (spoiler-free)">
I loved it.
There were bits I didn't like, scenes that were clichéd, liberties taken, nuances overemphasised.
And it's very distinctly a film <u>based on</u> Tolkien's book: it is <u>not</u> a film of the book.
Peter Jackson still in my good books, though. I am so <u<grateful</u> for the way he adds depth to every character. (Orcs excluded). I'm not saying that his insights are in any way original or unique: simply that he is showing aspects of character that I hadn't noticed when I read <i>The Lord of the Rings</i>. (Is it worth noting that I never really read it as an adult until after I'd seen <i>Fellowship of the Ring</i>?) I saw different sides of familiar characters: context for scenes from the trailers and various photos: Helm's Deep and the utterly unglamorous depiction of what is essentially medieval warfare. (Hmm, wonder if Peter Jackson could be persuaded to film <i>Ash</i>? Would be more than happy to have Miranda Otto in title role ...)
</lj-cut>
Strange to see a film for the first time, everything new and strange, <u>knowing</u> how familiar I will become with it.
Conversation on the way home:
- how <u>does</u> Gollum's loincloth stay in place?
- state of the art, CGI-wise, and possible advances by the next film
- American audiences: worse than British? (Not really: screaming babies seldom encountered in my local cinema, but mobile phones are answered and mindless chatter continues the world over. <i>Heretics</i>)
- No, that was <u>not</u> Joaquim Phoenix. That was Orlando Bloom.
