Unbelievable!

[BluesTraveler 0]

The only movies that will trully rule all time "Buckaroo Banzai across the 8th Dimension"

Remember where ever you go, there you are!

Cant have the finish before the start and you have to sync up that groovy 70's funk.

I thought that was Quentin Tarantino's MO. Show us the finish first and have a bunch of 70's music.

[slim 1,514]

Um no magic, then what is the force? The only cool trilogy was the first one that they didnt gay up too hard with the love story unlike the latest 3 movies.

Like I said, the trilogy, not the pre-quel or whatever the hell that attempt to revisit the money was. And the force is real, by the way.

I haven't seen Buckaroo Bonzai but one of these days I'll check it out.

[mox 298]

Seriously, I'm pretty sure I could make a more watchable movie than Michael Bay. If there's any evidence that our society is in decay, it's the fact that Transformers and Transformers 2 were tops at the box office.

I can't believe this is coming from the man that just said Harry Potter is cool. Seriously?

Slow-motion robot fights, watch all day long I could. And for those who didn't see this one coming, there's only one cool trilogy, and it didn't feature any rings or magic or whatever - just Jedis kicking lots of ####.

I don't believe I ever said Harry Potter was cool. I did like the first couple books, and the first couple movies were even watchable. But if I never had to see or hear about HP or JK Rowling again, I'd be pretty ok with that.

Nothing wrong with robots kicking a lot of butt. Would have been nice if that's what we'd seen in either Transformers movies, instead of just a lot of cuts, incoherent close-ups of metal bits hitting other metal bits, and oh lets not forget explosions and more cuts just for good measure. I'm not even asking for a good storyline, just some coherence and cohesiveness. Is that too much to ask?

Um no magic, then what is the force? The only cool trilogy was the first one that they didnt gay up too hard with the love story unlike the latest 3 movies.

Like I said, the trilogy, not the pre-quel or whatever the hell that attempt to revisit the money was. And the force is real, by the way.

I haven't seen Buckaroo Bonzai but one of these days I'll check it out.

Oh thank god, for a minute I thought you were talking about the prequels, in which case we just couldn't be friends anymore. The original SW trilogy is awesome, although ROTJ was pretty weak sauce if you ask me. "So, how can we top them blowing up the Death Star? Oh hey, I know, let's have them blow up ANOTHER Death Star!!!! But this time they'll be helped by midgets in teddy bear costumes. Yeah, that's golden is what that is." Gah. TESB was concentrated win though. One of my favorite movies ever.

I'd stack Lord of the Rings up against the original Star Wars trilogy any day of the week though. I don't think either trilogy is better, but they're both worthy of adoration. Especially if you grew up on the books like I did. Jackson wasn't 100% faithful to the books, but he got as close as anybody could have ever gotten to doing the books right. I can only hope that del Toro does the upcoming The Hobbit justice.

Everybody needs to see Buckaroo Bonzai at least once.

Edited July 30, 2009 by mox

[Thomas-n-Elena 0]

I'd stack Lord of the Rings up against the original Star Wars trilogy any day of the week though. I don't think either trilogy is better, but they're both worthy of adoration. Especially if you grew up on the books like I did. Jackson wasn't 100% faithful to the books, but he got as close as anybody could have ever gotten to doing the books right. I can only hope that del Toro does the upcoming The Hobbit justice.

Everybody needs to see Buckaroo Bonzai at least once.

I enjoyed the Lord of the Rings movies just from the pure cinematography and I never read the books so the story was interesting as well. Which part is Del Toro doing in the Hobbit? I just cant imagine the guy who was in "Snatch" pulling off a middle earth character.

Totally agreed but I have several hundred people covered if they havent seen it. I even own the comic books that came out after it as the "merchandising" as mel brooks would say.

[mox 298]

I enjoyed the Lord of the Rings movies just from the pure cinematography and I never read the books so the story was interesting as well. Which part is Del Toro doing in the Hobbit? I just cant imagine the guy who was in "Snatch" pulling off a middle earth character.

del Toro is directing. He also did Pan's Labrynth, Hellboy, and The Orphanage. I expect he'll do a pretty good job on The Hobbit.

[Thomas-n-Elena 0]

I enjoyed the Lord of the Rings movies just from the pure cinematography and I never read the books so the story was interesting as well. Which part is Del Toro doing in the Hobbit? I just cant imagine the guy who was in "Snatch" pulling off a middle earth character.

del Toro is directing. He also did Pan's Labrynth, Hellboy, and The Orphanage. I expect he'll do a pretty good job on The Hobbit.

Whew I thought for a minute he was going to star as Bilbo Baggins, although his ability to mushmouth dialogue would make him an interesting Golum

[mox 298]

I enjoyed the Lord of the Rings movies just from the pure cinematography and I never read the books so the story was interesting as well. Which part is Del Toro doing in the Hobbit? I just cant imagine the guy who was in "Snatch" pulling off a middle earth character.

del Toro is directing. He also did Pan's Labrynth, Hellboy, and The Orphanage. I expect he'll do a pretty good job on The Hobbit.

Whew I thought for a minute he was going to star as Bilbo Baggins, although his ability to mushmouth dialogue would make him an interesting Golum

I didn't realize he'd done any acting, I thought he was just a director. I've liked everything I've seen him do, although Hellboy II wasn't quite as good as I had hoped. I have high hopes for The Hobbit. Each of the Lord of the Rings films cost around $90 million. The two Hobbit films will each cost about $150 million, so it's gonna be pretty big. Not that ginormous budgets guarantee a good movie, but at least it's gonna have some serious backing. Rumor has it that Daniel Radcliffe is in the running to play Bilbo (no joke). I might just have to kill myself if that happens.

[Thomas-n-Elena 0]

I enjoyed the Lord of the Rings movies just from the pure cinematography and I never read the books so the story was interesting as well. Which part is Del Toro doing in the Hobbit? I just cant imagine the guy who was in "Snatch" pulling off a middle earth character.

del Toro is directing. He also did Pan's Labrynth, Hellboy, and The Orphanage. I expect he'll do a pretty good job on The Hobbit.

Whew I thought for a minute he was going to star as Bilbo Baggins, although his ability to mushmouth dialogue would make him an interesting Golum

I didn't realize he'd done any acting, I thought he was just a director. I've liked everything I've seen him do, although Hellboy II wasn't quite as good as I had hoped. I have high hopes for The Hobbit. Each of the Lord of the Rings films cost around $90 million. The two Hobbit films will each cost about $150 million, so it's gonna be pretty big. Not that ginormous budgets guarantee a good movie, but at least it's gonna have some serious backing. Rumor has it that Daniel Radcliffe is in the running to play Bilbo (no joke). I might just have to kill myself if that happens.

Hmmm Harry Potter and the his adventures in Middle Earth, will they get the blond evil kid to play Golum?

[BluesTraveler 0]

I didn't realize he'd done any acting, I thought he was just a director.

2 different Del Toro's

Actor.......Benicio Del Toro..............http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001125/

Director...Guillermo del Toro...........http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0868219/

[mox 298]

I didn't realize he'd done any acting, I thought he was just a director.

2 different Del Toro's

Actor.......Benicio Del Toro..............http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001125/

Director...Guillermo del Toro...........http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0868219/

Ahhhhhh! Heh.

[Nasturtium 500]

I'd stack Lord of the Rings up against the original Star Wars trilogy any day of the week though. I don't think either trilogy is better, but they're both worthy of adoration. Especially if you grew up on the books like I did. Jackson wasn't 100% faithful to the books, but he got as close as anybody could have ever gotten to doing the books right. I can only hope that del Toro does the upcoming The Hobbit justice.

<meganerd>

OK, first, let me state that I love LOTR: books and movies... but... I think Jackson could have done a better, more cohesive job, if he had framed the story with Aragorn's story instead of Frodo's. The reason i say this is his story could have begun and ended with the two stories in the apendices, and that would have made for a unified and linear story that didn't need weird editing at the end of the 3rd one... and no need to lie about Arwen becoming mortal or anything, but nicely could have ended with her death. Basically, it could have begun with the stories of Beren and Luthien, then moved into books 1-3, then ended with the story of Aragorn and Arwen in the Appendix, Aragorn's death, then Arwen's death. Most things in the middle could have been kept the same, and it would have eliminated the need to cinegraphically alter things for Frodo's story line to make more universal sense.

</meganerd>

[Thomas-n-Elena 0]

I'd stack Lord of the Rings up against the original Star Wars trilogy any day of the week though. I don't think either trilogy is better, but they're both worthy of adoration. Especially if you grew up on the books like I did. Jackson wasn't 100% faithful to the books, but he got as close as anybody could have ever gotten to doing the books right. I can only hope that del Toro does the upcoming The Hobbit justice.

<meganerd>

OK, first, let me state that I love LOTR: books and movies... but... I think Jackson could have done a better, more cohesive job, if he had framed the story with Aragorn's story instead of Frodo's. The reason i say this is his story could have begun and ended with the two stories in the apendices, and that would have made for a unified and linear story that didn't need weird editing at the end of the 3rd one... and no need to lie about Arwen becoming mortal or anything, but nicely could have ended with her death. Basically, it could have begun with the stories of Beren and Luthien, then moved into books 1-3, then ended with the story of Aragorn and Arwen in the Appendix, Aragorn's death, then Arwen's death. Most things in the middle could have been kept the same, and it would have eliminated the need to cinegraphically alter things for Frodo's story line to make more universal sense.

</meganerd>

Wow I guess I should have read the books, none of that makes sense to me. Mox do you agree with the above statements. I watched the movies first because I was curious and second because I like a good epic movie, movies with scale are just awesome in the theater. Since I didnt read the books, I found the stories to have a cohesive timeline it didnt seem to jump around any more than any other movie. Its always difficult to adapt a book into a movie, authors can paint such a vivid picture with words where screenwriters are thinking scenes and transitions.

[mox 298]

<meganerd>

OK, first, let me state that I love LOTR: books and movies... but... I think Jackson could have done a better, more cohesive job, if he had framed the story with Aragorn's story instead of Frodo's. The reason i say this is his story could have begun and ended with the two stories in the apendices, and that would have made for a unified and linear story that didn't need weird editing at the end of the 3rd one... and no need to lie about Arwen becoming mortal or anything, but nicely could have ended with her death. Basically, it could have begun with the stories of Beren and Luthien, then moved into books 1-3, then ended with the story of Aragorn and Arwen in the Appendix, Aragorn's death, then Arwen's death. Most things in the middle could have been kept the same, and it would have eliminated the need to cinegraphically alter things for Frodo's story line to make more universal sense.

</meganerd>

Wow...I think I'm in love.

I understand what you're saying, but I don't think it would have worked cinematically, especially for a mainstream audience. I think Jackson did the best he could, given the difficulty of the subject matter. I mean, if he really wanted to do the books justice then he'd have made 6 movies and included the scouring of the shire and Tom Bobadil. Also, I think framing the story around Aragorn would have alienated the fan base. The books were always about Frodo, and such a radical shift might have been interesting, but I don't think it would have been true to the story Tolkien was trying to tell. Remember how much flak Jackson caught just for making Arwen a major character when, besides the appendices, she had barely a mention in the books? I have a friend that almost ran out of the theater when Arwen brought Frodo to Rivendell instead of Glorfindel, but for the big screen I think the change was acceptable and the love story between Aragorn and Arwen was strengthened.

A Beren and Luthien movie would EFFING ROCK by the way. The problem is that Christopher Tolkien is an аss, and refuses to license anything beyond what J.R.R. licensed. So sadly, I think we're just going to have to wait until Christopher dies before we can see anything other than The Hobbit and LoTR on the big screen.

Have you read Children of Hurin? I'd love love love to see that on the big screen.

Wow I guess I should have read the books, none of that makes sense to me. Mox do you agree with the above statements. I watched the movies first because I was curious and second because I like a good epic movie, movies with scale are just awesome in the theater. Since I didnt read the books, I found the stories to have a cohesive timeline it didnt seem to jump around any more than any other movie. Its always difficult to adapt a book into a movie, authors can paint such a vivid picture with words where screenwriters are thinking scenes and transitions.

Definitely read the books. Jackson adhered closely enough to the movie that it'll be pretty familiar to you, but there's a lot of richness in the books that could only be hinted at in the movies.

[Thomas-n-Elena 0]

Definitely read the books. Jackson adhered closely enough to the movie that it'll be pretty familiar to you, but there's a lot of richness in the books that could only be hinted at in the movies.

I will have to consider it after I get done reading the other 5 books I have on my list. I did read the Hobbit many years ago.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

Yo! I brought this one for brother Brad