ROTK - Ultimate Best Film winner

[Durelin]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Ummm...the intellectual in me wants to throttle you with Jabba the Hut's chain. Star Wars and its pedestrian progeny are the most overrated films in this galaxy, or even in a galaxy far, far away.

Two smilies wasn't enough to calm the intellectual in you a little bit? The intellectual in me laughs. The rest of me doesn't care how 'overrated' anything is if I happen to like it!

As for the influence on cinema, all I know is that the LotR films kickstarted a streak of medieval and/or fantasy epics of various kinds which has kinda disappeared by now. And it feels like the battle scenes in LotR have created a standard.

Is the influence beyond that? Is it a long standing influence? Well, I think that since the LotR release there have been a lot more 2 and 1/2 - 3 hour movies being released, but that may be my lack of awareness previously. But, the old epics like Lawrence of Arabia and religious epics like Ben Hur ran 3+ hours, and you can certainly see how PJ was influenced by those!

Another thing that came to mind is the difference between a "best picture" and "your favorite movie". They don't have to be the same thing. At least, they aren't for me. I like watching movies for entertainment, not necessarily to tackle philosophical questions or to be moved emotionally or to have my head messed with. I love adorable pixar movies. I love a movie when it entertains me.

I can still appreciate aspects such as aesthetic value, good writing, good acting, engaging plot, etc, etc to a certain extent (I mean, I'm no film critic, but I don't know how qualified all the film critics are either), but...most of the time, actually, I don't want to watch a psychological drama or especially like a politically driven film because I like watching movies, most of the time, purely for entertainment. I like to laugh and find escape in movies, not be dragged into a depressing mess that realistically represents the human condition. Not most of the time.

So...I guess all my point is that, when people vote for a "best picture" they are not always voting for a "best picture" as in an excellent piece of cinema based on all those meaty things critics take to be part of good cinema, but they are voting for their "favorite movie" (at least a favorite movie) which entertained them and they don't mind seeing more than once.

You may still condemn anyone who voted for RotK, but hey, storytelling in all its forms was always about entertainment, regardless of what else was and is attached to it. Part of that now in film has to do with things looking cool. Of course you could go off on a whole discussion of the various artforms film incorporates, and how all artforms can "tell a story" but bleh, who has time for that...

[Morthoron]

“I would suggest that Peter Jackson’s films were better than Tolkien’s books,” (Salman) Rushdie said of the “Lord of the Rings” series. “Jackson directs better than Tolkien writes.”

And I care what Salman Rushdie thinks? I'll take Umberto Eco and raise you a Gabriel Garcia Marquez. Jackson directs better than Rushdie writes, and Tolkien is better than either. I'd post that on a Salman Rushdie forum...if I could find one that was active (one I found had no posts and the other's link was dead). Get back to me in 50 years on Rushdie -- this Tolkien forum will likely still be around, although we may not.

Originally Posted by Durelin

Another thing that came to mind is the difference between a "best picture" and "your favorite movie". They don't have to be the same thing. At least, they aren't for me. I like watching movies for entertainment, not necessarily to tackle philosophical questions or to be moved emotionally or to have my head messed with. I love adorable pixar movies. I love a movie when it entertains me.

I thought Wall-E was the best picture I saw this year. I was rather irritated it didn't get a best picture nomination, and also 'In Bruges', another great film that was ignored.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

And I care what Salman Rushdie thinks? I'll take Umberto Eco and raise you a Gabriel Garcia Marquez. Jackson directs better than Rushdie writes, and Tolkien is better than either. I'd post that on a Salman Rushdie forum...if I could find one that was active (one I found had no posts and the other's link was dead). Get back to me in 50 years on Rushdie -- this Tolkien forum will likely still be around, although we may not.

Heh. Rushdie is just a publicity seeker. I'd even venture to say that he wrote The Satanic Verses knowing full well that it would attract a furore (maybe he didn't expect an actual fatwa though) and boost his sales figures. Literary fiction is not always decent fiction (and Rushdie's most certainly isn't - having sampled two of his works and almost dying of tedium).

And I quote my current favourite columnist:

Originally Posted by Charlie Brooker in yesterday's Guardian

The other irony is that while people lie about having read highbrow novels in order to impress each other, a massive percentage of highbrow novels aren't worth reading anyway because the authors are too busy trying to impress the reader (who, we now know, probably hasn't bothered turning up). That's why so many contemporary novels seem to largely consist of a thinly veiled version of the author discussing politics and art and quantum theory over a carefully selected bottle of wine with the devastatingly beautiful mixed-race wife of an impotent international statesman and/or gangster (delete where applicable) before whisking her off to a swish hotel room to.....*snip*

Heh. He could almost be talking about Rushdie!

I thought Wall-E was the best picture I saw this year. I was rather irritated it didn't get a best picture nomination, and also 'In Bruges', another great film that was ignored.

I've just seen In Bruges, on Sky, and it was superb, and I'd never even heard about it until davem said he wanted to watch it (and he missed it in the end ). Just goes to show that hype counts in what people 'think' is actually decent. This year's best film is already out though - Watchmen. It's about 1,000 billion times better than RotK.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

Heh. Rushdie is just a publicity seeker. I'd even venture to say that he wrote The Satanic Verses knowing full well that it would attract a furore (maybe he didn't expect an actual fatwa though) and boost his sales figures. Literary fiction is not always decent fiction (and Rushdie's most certainly isn't - having sampled two of his works and almost dying of tedium).

And I quote my current favourite columnist...Heh. He could almost be talking about Rushdie!:

I don't like Rushdie's eyebrows -- too sinister.

Originally Posted by Lalwendë

I've just seen In Bruges, on Sky, and it was superb, and I'd never even heard about it until davem said he wanted to watch it (and he missed it in the end ). Just goes to show that hype counts in what people 'think' is actually decent. This year's best film is already out though - Watchmen. It's about 1,000 billion times better than RotK.

The interplay between Gleeson and Farrell, and then Gleeson and Fiennes is excellent. Does anyone play an evil but nuanced character better than Ralph Fiennes? Check him out in 'The Duchess' -- the perfect portrait of a soulless man.

The Watchmen? Perhaps it's just me, but I've grown tired of costumed crime-fighter movies filmed almost entirely in CGI. I'll wait till it comes on cable.

[Lalwendë]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

I don't like Rushdie's eyebrows -- too sinister.

The only people allowed to get away with brows like that are Gandalf and Dennis Healey.

The interplay between Gleeson and Farrell, and then Gleeson and Fiennes is excellent. Does anyone play an evil but nuanced character better than Ralph Fiennes? Check him out in 'The Duchess' -- the perfect portrait of a soulless man.

No, he's got those roles sewn up as far as I'm concerned, to the point where if he plays a good guy I won't believe in that character! He was playing these characters from the get-go too, see him as Amon Gerth (sp?) in Schindler's List, he's utterly vile!

The Watchmen? Perhaps it's just me, but I've grown tired of costumed crime-fighter movies filmed almost entirely in CGI. I'll wait till it comes on cable.

Ah but this is something else, it's like Alan Moore chews up and spits out the rule book about 'heroes' in Watchmen and the film doesn't flinch from his vision, warts and all. If anyone thought The Dark Knight was 'black' just go and see this feast of fun - it makes that look like a U cert fairytale. Plus, if you're sick of superhero films, this is a tasty treat! I don't know how they will ever make another film of the likes of Spider-Man after this.

[Estelyn Telcontar]

Pssst, careful - off-topic skwerlz have been seen patrolling the area. Please do remember to keep your posts Tolkien-related. Thanks!

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by Estelyn Telcontar

Pssst, careful - off-topic skwerlz have been seen patrolling the area. Please do remember to keep your posts Tolkien-related. Thanks!

Bah! There is nothing more injurous to an off-topic discussion than a lore-zealous squirrel. They go right for the nuts! Ummm...or acorns.