LOTR = Typical Action Films?

[hectorberlioz]

Cheers for Melko Belcha!

[Black Breathalizer]

First off, before going off on a tangent, please reread what I said above:

We can agree to disagree on how well Peter Jackson's team adapted the books to the big screen. But the bottom line is that by any standard of measurement, Jackson's Lord of the Rings is a spectacular accomplishment ...

The FACTS about this statement include:

Exhibit A: The first two films in the franchise garnered over 800 million at the box office apiece.

Exhibit B: Industry analysts predict the ROTK to become only the second film in movie history to break the 1 billion dollar mark at the box office.

Exhibit C: Industry analysts predict the film franchise to gross over 3 billion dollars worldwide.

Exhibit D: The first two films were universally acclaimed. The RottonTomatos.com site has critic approval ratings for both FOTR and TTT of over 90%, levels achieved by only the very best films.

Exhibit E: The franchise has garnered 18 Academy Award nominations including two in a row for Best Picture.

Exhibit F: The ROTK is the front-runner for Best Picture and Best Director.

Exhibit G: The LOTR DVDs have both set industry records in sales.

Exhibit H: The LOTR films have sprung thriving cottage industry in collectables.

Exhibit I: Industry surveys indicate the ROTK is the most anticipated movie in film history, eclipsing The Phantom Menace.

Need I go on??? Damn, I should be a lawyer!

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
Frankly, the criticisms here of the film have nothing to do with the quality of the films--

Obviously you can't read to well - A LOT of my problems are with the quality of the movies.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
Need I go on??? Damn, I should be a lawyer!

Too bad none of those things make a great movie. How mnay people talk about Titatanic as being a great classic movie?

[Earniel]

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
The FACTS about this statement include:

Four of your so called "facts" are about a film that is yet to be released. It tends to make your reasoning a little shaky IMO.

[Black Breathalizer]

Originally posted by Eärniel
Four of your so called "facts" are about a film that is yet to be released. It tends to make your reasoning a little shaky IMO.

You're absolutely right. I'm standing on some awfully shaky ground relying on those insider reports. I guess we'll have to just wait and see how accurate those wild and crazy industry predictions turn out to be.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
You're absolutely right. I'm standing on some awfully shaky ground relying on those insider reports. I guess we'll have to just wait and see how accurate those wild and crazy industry predictions turn out to be.

YOu stil fail to realize or to accept that just because movies make a lot of money - does not mean that they are actually good movies or will last the test of time. YOu bring up "The Phantom Menace" - it's actually a pretty forgettable film - and it made tons of money as you pointed out. Why did it make so much money? Because people couldn't wait for the new Star Wars movie to be released.

[mithrand1r]

In some respects LOTR is similar to Raiders of the lost ark.

Both have ancient "artifacts" that can cause potential harm if they fall into the "wrong" hands.

Both have the hero travel around in their respective worlds.

Enemies await them at almost every corner.

At times the hero is able to find support from unlikely places and is given a moments rest from his various enemies.

The heros have to escape from some very tough situations.

Eventually the "artifact" is put beyond reach from the "wrong" hands.

Both have humor at various parts of the film.
(the monkey and Marion, Indy shooting swordmaster, Indy getting whacked by rotating mirror on ship)
(Dwarf tossing, Bonking head against chandelier (sp?), stealing fireworks and lighting fireworks in enclosed space)
to name some examples

The general pacing of ROLA is similar to PJ&co. LOTR (so far) with an almost nonstop pace of activity.

Granted, I am making some oversimplifications. I am sure if I started looking deeper for similarites, I can find many similarities with PJ&CO LOTR (to be fair, you can find the same similarities with the book, since I am making some oversimplifications here ) and any action film.

In this respect PJ's LOTR is very similar to your typical Action film.

[Ringil]

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
First off, before going off on a tangent, please reread what I said above:

We can agree to disagree on how well Peter Jackson's team adapted the books to the big screen. But the bottom line is that by any standard of measurement, Jackson's Lord of the Rings is a spectacular accomplishment ...

The FACTS about this statement include:

Exhibit A: The first two films in the franchise garnered over 800 million at the box office apiece.

Exhibit B: Industry analysts predict the ROTK to become only the second film in movie history to break the 1 billion dollar mark at the box office.

Exhibit C: Industry analysts predict the film franchise to gross over 3 billion dollars worldwide.

Exhibit D: The first two films were universally acclaimed. The RottonTomatos.com site has critic approval ratings for both FOTR and TTT of over 90%, levels achieved by only the very best films.

Exhibit E: The franchise has garnered 18 Academy Award nominations including two in a row for Best Picture.

Exhibit F: The ROTK is the front-runner for Best Picture and Best Director.

Exhibit G: The LOTR DVDs have both set industry records in sales.

Exhibit H: The LOTR films have sprung thriving cottage industry in collectables.

Exhibit I: Industry surveys indicate the ROTK is the most anticipated movie in film history, eclipsing The Phantom Menace.

Need I go on??? Damn, I should be a lawyer!

BB, You just don't get it.

Let me make this very simple for you to understand by using an old analogy.

Your reasoning (and I use the term very loosely) is similar to saying that a Ford Taurus is superior to a Lincoln because so many more people drive them.

One product appeals to (or in the case of cars, is affordable to) the masses. One is a cut above.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Ringil
BB, You just don't get it.

Let me make this very simple for you to understand by using an old analogy.

Your reasoning (and I use the term very loosely) is similar to saying that a Ford Taurus is superior to a Lincoln because so many more people drive them.

One product appeals to (or in the case of cars, is affordable to) the masses. One is a cut above.

You could take it one step further and replace the Lincoln with a handmade Rolls Royce.

[Nurvingiel]

With JRR Tolkien's books as a handbuilt Aston Martin DB4.

Thanks for clearing the Flight to the Ford scene up for me JD, my point was Arwen didn't cause the flood in the books, but that seems irrelevant now.

A finer detail:
Many pointed out already that making a lot of money doesn't necessarily make a great film. One dimension that hasn't been mentioned is nominal (current) prices are being used to come with a movie's earnings. However, you can only compare costs over time by using real prices, which take inflation and other factors into account. Dredging up some of last year's Econ 102.

BB, you may very well make a good lawyer some day, but I believe your point has been soundly refuted.


edit: I meant handbuilt Aston Martin DB4

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Nurvingiel
With JRR Tolkien's books as a handbuild Aston Martin DB4.

Thanks for clearing the Flight to the Ford scene up for me JD, my point was Arwen didn't cause the flood in the books, but that seems irrelevant now.

I was just going into detail mostly to educate BB.

A finer detail:
Many pointed out already that making a lot of money doesn't necessarily make a great film. One dimension that hasn't been mentioned is nominal (current) prices are being used to come with a movie's earnings. However, you can only compare costs over time by using real prices, which take inflation and other factors into account. Dredging up some of last year's Econ 102.

Yeah - I've brought this up - BB just ignores this though. Going by todays prices - the block busters of today don't even come close to the money that was brought in by Gone with the Wind and the other classics from the early days of film making.

[Black Breathalizer]

Jackson's films are making mega-bucks AND receiving critical acclaim. I don't recall Phantom Menace, Indiana Jones, the Matrix, or jerseydevil's great Excalibur flick getting Academy Award nominations. But I keep forgetting. You guys know more than all the film critics and the general public

[hectorberlioz]

oh i remeber Indiana Jones getting academy award noms!
Raiders of the lost Ark was one of the best pic nominees!

[Black Breathalizer]

Originally posted by hectorberlioz
oh i remeber Indiana Jones getting academy award noms!
Raiders of the lost Ark was one of the best pic nominees!

Hey, it must have been pretty good then, huh?

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Black Breathalizer
Jackson's films are making mega-bucks AND receiving critical acclaim. I don't recall Phantom Menace, Indiana Jones, the Matrix, or jerseydevil's great Excalibur flick getting Academy Award nominations. But I keep forgetting. You guys know more than all the film critics and the general public

Have you ever SEEN Excalibur?

And as for Indiana Jones - it was an action flick.

[Nurvingiel]

I love Excalibur, it's such an amazing movie! BB, if you haven't seen it, I definately recommend it. It's beautifully filmed, features some very talented actors, it's suspensful, interesting, and the sad parts make me cry. It has a great soundtrack (featuring part of Carmina Burana by Carl Orff) and has amazingly choreographed battle scenes. It is very much worth watching numberous times, so at least watch it once!

Anyway, back to LotR... the trouble with the Academy Awards, they're given to people who are 'due' to win, not necessarily to those who've earned it. (The two can coincide, but this is not required.) Sadly winners of Academy Awards and other such honours (Emmy's, People's Choice, Grammy's etc.) are given to people when it's 'their time to win'.

[hectorberlioz]

Jackson has proved himself unworthy of adapting a masterpiece for the screen.
so what will happen with "THE HOBBIT"?.
if Jackson cant adapt this wonderful easy-read to the screen properly without ONE blemish, I myself will

MURDER

him with my bare hands.
seriously now, the hobbit cant be a 3 year project at all. he wont have to make changes to the story, since the book isnt long at all...., but i do expect major changes in it...
but its a scary thought that he'll make it at all.

[Nurvingiel]

So basically, if Jackson makes a movie of The Hobbit, he's doomed. I don't think he will though. Why would he?

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Nurvingiel
So basically, if Jackson makes a movie of The Hobbit, he's doomed. I don't think he will though. Why would he?

Because him and the studio are under the impression that the LotR fans love the movies. They're looking at they can make another huge box office success.