|
|
Post by The Rogue on Dec 15, 2006 23:26:46 GMT -5
I would be willing to bet that there are more than 3.
|
|
|
|
Post by Raistlin Majere on Dec 16, 2006 2:18:04 GMT -5
I read the books many years ago, but there are some large omitted details that I recall. The battle between Gandalf and Saruman that should have happened in the third movie was the most noticeable, there was supposed to be a scene in which Gandalf breaks Saruman's staff and casts him out of the order, leaving him to do as he will in Orthanc, if I recall correctly. The Wormtongue invasion force into the Shire is another large one that was mentioned. I notice even in the first movie details were omitted. Something about Tom. . . Bombadil? It was a very odd name, and the sequence was quite. . . comparable to the name--odd. It wasn't a great loss to the movie. However, I recall the sequence when Frodo and his companions travel to Bree and discover Gandalf is not there is much longer in the book.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jarlaxle on Dec 16, 2006 2:48:59 GMT -5
They left out details like that? Why would they do that? Including them would have only been benificial.
|
|
|
|
Post by buttonpresser4815 on Dec 16, 2006 9:58:39 GMT -5
There was the part with Tom Bombadil, but the producers of the LOTR movies said they left it out because it did not forward the plot at all. They transfused some of his lines to Treebeard.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Rogue on Dec 16, 2006 15:08:07 GMT -5
And it's Hollywood. They suck and most of their movies suck.
|
|
|
|
Post by buttonpresser4815 on Dec 16, 2006 21:40:16 GMT -5
I think that the LOTR has set us up. It was produced practically perfectly for the average viewer, and every fantasy epic after must be compared to it, and fails miserably.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Rogue on Dec 16, 2006 21:53:40 GMT -5
Hollywood would be famous for that.
|
|
|
|
Post by glatu1caraba1nikto on Dec 17, 2006 1:22:25 GMT -5
i saw the movie today........it wasn't that good. And even though some of the ideas in the book were a little the same as other books, it was still a very good!
|
|
|
|
Post by The Rogue on Dec 17, 2006 12:23:38 GMT -5
Wow. New member. Welcome.
I'm sure the way they made it was good, but if you take everything into account, you'll not think it as that great.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jarlaxle on Dec 18, 2006 9:56:12 GMT -5
There was one fantasy movie that turned out quite well though: Pirates of The Carribean. The second one in particular reminds very much of some of the fantasy stories i read.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Rogue on Dec 18, 2006 13:05:49 GMT -5
Pirates of the Caribbean was very good. Well made. That reminds me, the last one is scheduled to be released to theaters on May 25, 2007.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jarlaxle on Dec 18, 2006 13:18:58 GMT -5
I can't wait to see it! The second one left me craving for the next one! The ending was for #2 could not have been much better! It was just as good as a Lost cliffhanger.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Rogue on Dec 18, 2006 16:25:48 GMT -5
Unfortunately, the end of #1 (at the very end of the credits) reveals almost too much.
|
|
|
|
Post by Raistlin Majere on Dec 18, 2006 22:14:55 GMT -5
In a way, but it doesn't give anything solid away until you see the second film.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Rogue on Dec 18, 2006 22:19:27 GMT -5
That's very true. You really wouldn't think anything would happen with Barbossa if you saw the end of the first movie until you actually saw the cliffhanger. Granted, you would know that something would happen, but you wouldn't know exactly what.
There's a lready a Wikipedia article about the third movie.
|
|
