Are they good?

Are they good?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=SC3XYRV76nQ
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

No

they're the best

Overrated as fuck, the special effects are fucking laughable nowadays.

Best trilogy of movies in history, my friend. Effects look a little bit outdated, but even then, they look better than moat of the cgi fest of the hobbit trilogy.

back to Sup Forums you go.

was michelangelo a good painter?

fellowship is great although the hobbits and their quirks are introduced a little hamfistedly

two towers has perhaps the best castle siege scene ever made

return of the king has great skirmishes and the overarching theme of temptation

he was a much better sculpter

These movies are Sup Forums tier, retard.

>muh feels

Grow some fucking balls, faggot.

>the special effects are fucking laughable nowadays

>have u guise seen the cgi in justice league? soooo ebic xdddd

So I recorded the AMC showings of the first two movies. Does anyone know if they are the extended editions or not?

Holy cringe

>says the triggered Sup Forumsedditor.
>triggered Sup Forumsedditor

I think they are

Fucking horrible,mate. This shit will be laughed at in the future.

you have no taste, its fucking embarassing

I never liked them. Like a lot of genre movies from that era they were afraid of the source material so they took pains to make everything as drab and unimaginative as possible. They managed to make a fucking 50 ft armoured elephant look boring.

>special effects from early 2000s are laughable compared to special effects currently

You don't fucking say?

Overrated.

Hackson completely failed at making Middle Earth feel like a real inhabited continent and makes it seem that the only people you see in the film are the only people that exist in middle earth.
You watch scenes and scenes of absolutely massive scenescapes that span hundreds of miles yet all you see are one or two very small pockets of """cities""" which look like they hold a few hundred people

Read the books, retard. The movies are absolute shit ib4 B-B-BUT MUH FEELS

Good. I watched the first one, And I felt like there was scenes I hadn't seen, but it's been so long I wasn't sure.

>the special effects are laughable
post an example of this

Yes, but too fucking overrated

yup, I really prefer the hobbit, much better cgi

Have you read the books? In general the LOTR trilogy is pretty fucking faithful to the books.

Read above. I don't know where this narrative comes from all of the sudden.

contrarian nonsense

i read all the books as a boy and then again after uni. provide an example of a better adaptation lmao

Really well done and I don't foresee anything this good being made by big budget studios again anytime soon

>In general the LOTR trilogy is pretty fucking faithful to the books.
It's about as faithful as we'll get. Someday it will be remade far worse but people will defend them because they included random elf character no one remembers #31390, and they'll act like they're a scholar for reading Tolkien cliff notes.

racist as fuck, but are archetypal fantasy films. lol jk about le racism.

>triggered Sup Forumsedditors are these fucking blind
>triggered Sup Forumsedditors
MUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHH FEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEELLLLLLLLSSSSSSSS
How about you actually read the book, retards?

please post an example

quality retort but still didn't post a better adaptation

I watched these last week. They were pretty good, but Jackson really isn't that great of a director. He's very weak in the cinematic style department, relying way too much on panning the camera constantly and zooming in on actors faces when they're portraying any emotion.

>He's very weak in the cinematic style department

I'll agree they are *somewhat* overrated (not "as fuck"), and some of the action scenes aren't as good as you remembered them when you rewatch as an older person (although certainly not "laughable"). But they are still great overall, and really remarkable achievements.

>the son of the writer of the source material considers these retarded flicks as crap but some retarded Sup Forumsedditors consider it superior because of MUHHHHHHHHHHH FEEEEEEEEEEEEELLLLLLLLLLLLLSSSSSSS
Interesting....

Are you just gonna spout triggered over and over again or provide actual evidence to back up your statements?

Well that's the thing. I feel like it was really faithful to the books. About as faithful as you could be, there is so much in those books that just could not fit into a movie.

You sound like a kid.

Are you a manchild? If so then yes, very.

stalin's granddaughter is a dead-end polyamorous monstrosity, lineage doesn't denote taste or talent

No one is really saying anything about feels anymore retard. And I always felt like Christopher (I think that was his name) always said that sort of shit because he is kind of a greedy cunt who just wanted the rights to himself.

The books are trash m8, at least I can wipe my ass with them.

You retarded Sup Forumsedditors sound worse when talking about MUUUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHHH FEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEELLLLLLLLLLLLLLSSSS
>Jackson
>talent
This is literally a joke in bad taste.
>No one is really saying anything about feels anymore retard.
>I always felt like
Are you legit retarded, Sup Forumsedditor?

Almost perfect films. Each film has only one or two things that fuck it up.

i should like these movies since i enjoy fantasy stuff but they are so god damn boring i had to force myself to watch the first one. can't bring myself to bother with the others.

Yeah you are clearly trying to push "muh feels" in the film. I was simply stating my opinion as to why Christopher Tolkien bashed on the film's.

Look user. I know critical thinking can be hard for people like you, but at least put in a little more effort so you dont look like a complete fucking mongoloid.

I think the effects are totally fine overall.

The only scene I feel where they aren't great is when Sam is underwater in Fellowship. The bubbles they throw in are a little goofy.

You sound like a kid.

..wow user.... I mean your tastes come into question if you get bored so easily. But at the very least the last two films have a little bit more action to them, So maybe you will enjoy them more.

>I enjoy fantasy stuff
>i dislike lotr
Pick one and only one you massive pleb

>someone tries to make a completely faithful adaptation
>have to explain why Frodo sat in the shire for 10 years before he decided to leave with the ring

>"They eviscerated the book by making it an action movie for young people aged 15 to 25," Christopher says regretfully.

That seems melodramatic. Can bookfags weigh in on how much "more action" is in the movies vs. the books? Never read them.

Yeah, you absolutely are a kid, or you have some sort of mental problem. Why are you so mad? You don't talk like someone that reads. I just noticed that you use Sup Forums lol, what does Sup Forums have to do with this? Do you have asperger?

Are you legit retarded? Most of these threads are always about MUH FEELS, retard.
>says the buttmad Sup Forumsedditor

So is that a no on the example of shitty effects?

>dumbass Sup Forumsedditors will defend this
youtube.com/watch?v=SC3XYRV76nQ

How about you actually read them instead, retard?

>short incomplete phrases
>typing like in retard in anger
>terrible broken English
This post is full of irony...

It's not that they added action where there shouldn't be any (for the most part), it's simply that there's a lot less of all the other stuff. Tolkien was first and foremost a linguist, not a writer. He wrote these books and made this huge, detailed world so he could populate it with all the people that spoke these languages that he made, and after that, he made a story about a magic ring and a dark lord and this battle between good and evil.

If you read the books you'll find that it's filled with TONS of stuff that really has nothing to do with the overall plot of the Fellowship and the ring and all that, but instead is simply about building up the world that the books take place in. And that's the stuff that never really made it into the films. So as an adaptation of the books, I guess you could say it was in fact "eviscerated". But as a retelling of the story of the One Ring, it really did a great job.

>How about you actually read them instead, retard?
Wow reddit is emotional today. I have something called a job, and when do have time to read, I wouldn't read fantasy like some sort of manchild with Star Wars posters.

Wow, me too, retard, and I'm not a dumbass retard that has no time to read.

You're most likely a spic or some retarded shitskin that has to work 20 hours per day though...

>most of these threads

Okay autist. Well this is this thread and I am waiting on you to back up your claims.

This post sums it up really well:Likewise as I said earlier, there is alot of shit in the books that wouldn't translate well into a film (the whole bombadil parts for example). I assume most people who say shit like "It murders the source material" haven't actually read the book and are just spouting memes or shit they read other people say.

lol. You need to work on your emotional maturity, reddit. With the amount of bile spewed in each of your posts, it's pretty clear you don't have a "real" job and are less white than I am.

For reference of a non-idiot who isn't completely reddit, seeYou should work on your reading comprehension as well. You haven't seemed to fully grasp the posts you've been responding to. I hope you have a good day.

How about you read them retard. Maybe then you will realize that the movies actually did do a pretty great job of adapting the books.

Are you fucking retarded or something, Sup Forumsedditor?
>literally a spic thinks he's superior to a real man
TOP KEK

>he can literally think of nothing else to say other than call people reddit

Wow this is getting pathetic. It is painfully obvious that you have no idea about what you are talking about. Please leave the thread and kill yourself.

MUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH FEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

I hated these movies.

Watch the first one, then read the books

>finally doesn't use reddit in an insult
>defaults back to "muh feels"

Surely you can put more effort in than that

>inb4 Sup Forumsedditors or "muh feels"

Are they any good? I wish Elrond would have pushed Isildur in the volcano to save us from the dullest trilogy of all time. Seriously each episode following the little hobbit and his pals from Middle Earth as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make fantasy dull, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when Christoper Tolkein vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; he made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for his fathers' books. The LotR series might be anti-Diversity (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the books were good though r-right
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the books are terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character sought the ring, the author wrote instead that the character "desired power"

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Tolkeins's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that he has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of LotR by the same George RR Martin. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading LotR at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read George RR Martin." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "LotR" you are, in fact, trained to read George RR Martin.

MUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH FEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

>governed by cliches and dead metaphors
He MADE them cliches you mong

Ugly films, terribly directed and edited. Action sequences destroy the tone of the story.

Boromir's final scene with Aragorn was good though, one of the few things the films got right.

Nice. What's the original about though? Or is this the original version?

Kill yourself, you dumb fuck. Easily the best trilogy of all time.

So they mostly just left out things that aren't well suited for film. I can see how a film isn't the appropriate medium for exploring a linguistic exhibition, and that inserting more world-building would risk a lot of tedious narration.

It could possibly be interesting to attempt to portray those aspects on film, but I can see it almost surely wouldn't work as well as simply reading the author's original writing.

Seems like Chris Tolkien's criticism is a bit unfair. he wants 100% inclusion, regardless of how watchable it is or how much it makes sense cinematically.

Whitest trilogy in history, no wonder white trash loves it so much. The fact that it happend in early 2000 and no one batted an eye for the lack of diversity blows my mind.

beautiful works of art that will never lose its charm

It's a pasta m8
It's about HP originally.

Yeah basically. It's kind of funny because people bashed on The Hobbit movies for including a bunch of shit not really related to the main story, yet if they tried to completely recreate the LOTR books, you would have ended up with the same situation.

Garbage flicks for manchildren

>It's a pasta m8
Oh fuck

Why not just download the extend editions what the fuck

Honestly? Because I had to move to a new town, And the house I am at has INCREDIBLY slow internet (live outside of city limits so there are no cable lines).

>Seems like Chris Tolkien's criticism is a bit unfair

It always seemed that way to me, but I can kind of understand it, since his family's fortune is built off his dads works. So of course he's going to think it's fucking great because he grew up right alongside all this stuff.

If you listen to the actors commentaries on the DVD's, they actually do mention quite a few times when the films necessarily portray events differently than how they occurred in the books. Such as when Frodo learns that Bilbo's ring is in fact the One Ring - he actually doesn't leave the Shire for another year or so. I'm sure Tolkien had a reason in mind for the delay (maybe the Nazgul were on strike?), but if they did that in the film it would definitely detract from the sense of urgency that arises when you learn Frodo is being hunted.

They're not good. What i can't stand is how plebs loathe the hobbit trilogy and blow lotr, like they aren't on the same level of quality. But don't believe me, read the books and you'll see the difference

i like it because it has cameos from shrek and donkey

These movies are boring as fuck. They're just some dudes running all the time.

t. Woman from class

>being THIS new

fuck thanks for sharing that clip, that was fucking amazing.

I like the movies a lot less than I used to, especially watching those awful Hobbit movies because they served to highlight the "Peter Jacksonisms" in the originals. I notice and get annoyed by things that probably would have escaped my notice.

I haven't seen the movies in a long time and I have no interest in doing so but I'll reread the books every other year.

What? Are you talking about the books? They are way different. Fucking night and day.

Are Gimli and Legolas reddit-quippers in the books too?

Checked

no.

Yes, they are great. Anyone who says otherwise is underage/roastie/shitposting.

Yes