Author: Albert Silver
Date: 20:19:26 12/19/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 19, 2002 at 16:35:18, Matt Taylor wrote:
>On December 19, 2002 at 16:03:26, Roy Eassa wrote:
>
>>On December 19, 2002 at 15:52:37, Albert Silver wrote:
>>
>>>On December 19, 2002 at 13:58:26, Roy Eassa wrote:
>>>
>>>>On December 19, 2002 at 12:55:40, Colin Frayn wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On December 19, 2002 at 10:11:17, Roy Eassa wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Thanks for the advice. We have a large pile of DVDs we bought on sale but
>>>>>>haven't watched yet. I'll move that one to the top of the pile (sorry
>>>>>>Goldmember, you'll have to wait!).
>>>>>
>>>>>Definitely watch that asap too. Especially if you are a Bond fan or an
>>>>>Anglophile. There are some fantastic scenes. However, only watch it after the
>>>>>first two Austin Powers films.
>>>>>
>>>>>Cheers,
>>>>>Col
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>OK, this will be a Christmas priority. We must watch Goldmember (we have indeed
>>>>seen the first 2 in the series) and Lord of the Rings #1,
>>>
>>>See the extended version, and not the theatrical release.
>>>
>>
>>
>>Well, we bought the "normal" version long before the extended came out, and
>>we're not about to buy another version. How much difference is there?
>
>30 minutes of film, a bunch of "special features," and some $$.
>
>I'll get flamed for saying it, but I found the extended version more annoying
>than the original. Little of the additional film develops the characters, and
>they're what Lord of the Rings is really about. It does explain a few things,
>and it raises even more questions for the person who hasn't read the book. Not
>even anything on my theatrical release "wishlist" -- a list of what I deemed as
>crucial plot/character development scenes in the books that were excluded from
>the movies -- was in the extended version.
>
>Just my opinion. I might actually be the only person on the face of the planet
>who dislikes the extended version.
Nah, I'm sure all those who thought the theatrical version boring will think the
extended version is 30 minutes more boring.
As an aside, I disagree. I think the extra 30 minutes do *exactly* that: develop
the relationships and characters further. They also slow the action down, which
is probably why Jackson chose those moments: the discussions between Gandalf and
Frodo, Aragorn in Rivendell, etc. I'm trying to be deliberately vague for those
who wish to see it, but haven't yet.
Albert
>
>-Matt
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.