I rewatched the films (theatrical) recently and while a lot does work, Wood and Mortensen were fairly underwhelming, Wood especially being limited and choppy in his range, and Pippin was particularly underdeveloped until TRotK. The middle of the first film felt pretty rushed and dependent on the effects while there wasn't much plot in the second. Gollum was pretty good but at times too cheaply comical and I didn't like how literal the division and interaction between his Good and Evil sides were (although I realize it's hard to do something subtler on film).
Do you think LotR holds up?
- Thread starter suarezguy
- Start date
The Frodo & Sam stuff started to annoy me pretty soon.
And while I could watch Fellowship daily, the other two films somehow do nothing for me anymore.
And while I could watch Fellowship daily, the other two films somehow do nothing for me anymore.
These were "problems" that always existed. What would make them not "hold up" now as opposed to then?
No. I do not think that the Lord of the Rings Trilogy holds up. The strongest entry is Frellowship of the Rings, in my opinion. But a reboot? Another movie, or series of films? I'm not sure what that could accomplish that Peter Jackson hasn't, already. There could be a more literally faithful version of LOTR, certainly. But ... that would be the only difference and it would be so minor that it would hardly make the effort of making it worthwhile. What should happen is a condensed, combined version of the LOTR trilogy that's already out there. Make it a single, 3 hour-long movie, or so. Otherwise, I fail to find the point of revisiting this classic, in movie form.
I don't watch them nearly as often as i used to anymore, but yes, they still hold up and rank among my favorite films of all times.
Re-watched them again about a month ago and will do again when I have DoS to do a 5 film runthrough.
The CGI is looking rough these days, the acting? please, read the book and tell me the actors are actually more cheesey or silly at times, the narrative holds up just fine.
The CGI is looking rough these days, the acting? please, read the book and tell me the actors are actually more cheesey or silly at times, the narrative holds up just fine.
Matrix trilogy it is then. But we're going to re-use Keanu Reeves just out of spite.
They're technical marvels and the acting is top notch. They were filmed in 1999 but they could easily have been made the other day.
Naah, Keanu can play Neo — but only if they use a digital version of him, not a live Keanu. He'll be more convincing as an actor.
No, just riding roughshod over the first joke. Bad form, sorry.
