What the fuck was wrong with the first film?
It stayed pretty close to the book as I recall it. No Tom Bombadil, for which Peter Jackson deserves a fucking knighthood, a lot of tedious shit cut out from the beginning, Frodo a bit younger. Can't think of anything else. The second film veered crazily off and the third film cut off the ending to replace it with about five or six other endings, but the first seemed pretty close to me. Oh, also a troll.
( ,
Thu 22 Sep 2011, 18:53,
archived)
not just any troll
a cave troll. love the way boromir says that!
( ,
Thu 22 Sep 2011, 19:00,
archived)
pfff!
fuck it, nothing on telly tonight, i'm watchin fellowship of the ring
( ,
Thu 22 Sep 2011, 19:07,
archived)
It's the grave robbing I miss the most...
And the bit where the hobbits steal a load of swords was cut out.
That would have been good, but zombie types tend to get cut from films. There's at least one missing from the Shining.
( ,
Thu 22 Sep 2011, 19:47,
archived)
That would have been good, but zombie types tend to get cut from films. There's at least one missing from the Shining.
True, true, the grave-robbing was OK
except it involved Tom Bombadil so I'm opposed to it on principle. It didn't entirely make sense the way they got their swords in the film.
"HERE HOBBITS HAVE SOME HOBBIT-SIZE SWORDS I HAPPEN TO ALWAYS CARRY AROUND WITH ME"
fuck it, i'm gonna read the book again. it's been a long time.
( ,
Thu 22 Sep 2011, 19:59,
archived)
"HERE HOBBITS HAVE SOME HOBBIT-SIZE SWORDS I HAPPEN TO ALWAYS CARRY AROUND WITH ME"
fuck it, i'm gonna read the book again. it's been a long time.