|
New Two Towers Trailer...Sa-weeeeet! Aw, yeah! What else need be said...check out the streaming action, over yonder! ------------------ Kevin, the erstwhile "Hi-Fi" www.videowrestling.com |
Yes, a most excellent trailer. The ending music was a little wonky (generic trailer music as opposed to the normal LotR stuff). However, it shows some cool stuff (Gandalf falling with the balrog and a brief glimpse of Treebeard). Not to mention tons of Saruman stuff. Damn, Christopher Lee is cool. TheMad ------------------ The light at the end of the tunnel has been shut down due to budget cuts. |
This, Chamber of Secrets, and (although we have awhile yet) the Matrix sequels. Hoo boy. As a side note, Jason X comes home next week. For the love of god rent it just so you can see the last death scene. One of the funniest scenes EVER filmed. |
|
Don't dare bag on Harry Potter dude, until you've read the books. There's a reason so many people around the world have read J.K. Rowling's books, just like so many people have read Tolkien's. |
A lot of people also watch the Anna Nicole Show. Doesn't mean that they're the same people who read Tolkien's works, though. http://forums.ve3d.com/wink.gif TheMad ------------------ The light at the end of the tunnel has been shut down due to budget cuts. |
And that meant...????? |
I wasn't a big fan of the first "Harry Potter" movie, either. Thought the pacing was off, the rushed effects were distracting, and the story just didn't blow my hair back. But, it was essentially an origin story, so perhaps the second movie will be better. I'm sure Min will drag me to it. However, while I've never read the books, I'm always grateful for anything that gets kids (and people, in general) reading. [This message has been edited by lbuchanan (edited October 02, 2002).] |
I enjoyed The Hobbit immensely and I regret not reading the trilogy. But the movie seems to be better than the read. Harry Potter on the other hand, the movies do not seem to capture the magic of the books which is interesting. All it does is fill in some visual holes for you. (Which I suppose LOTR does too.) But the Potter books were like literary crack. I could not stop reading them one after the other with no breaks in between. It was weird. It's great how they both are huge successes and keep kids and adults entertained. Is one series better than the other? Couldn't tell you. Haven't read LOTR and Potter still has 3 more books to go in the series. Does anyone else besides me think Die Another Die is overhyped because it will suck like the previous Pierce Bond movies? I still like Timothy Dalton's take on Bond. He was an @sshole in the films which is what Bond was in the books. A straight out assassin prick. |
I am so down with you. I, at first, dismissed the harry potter books. Once I picked them up I was hooked. I do not know what about the books makes them so good, but they are awesome. Can't a brother like Harry Potter and Slayer? I think License to Kill was the best Bond movie ever. He just flat out killed people for revenge. Pretty sweet. I like PB okay, but he needs to be more hard ass. In this world of political correctness, I do not think we will see the hardcore Bond that we want. Here's hoping. |
This tralier has been out for ages, must be around 2 months now. |
What trailer are you talking about??? |
The first HP book is arguably the worst because it's the origin. So much has to be explained that it kind of gets in the way. I have high hopes for Chamber...and Prison should be bonkers. I can't wait for Book 5. I started LOTR, I think I'm just under 200 pages, and I gotta tell you, I skipped over a lot of stuff. All of those songs *flip*flip*flip. I thank Jackson and co. for taking that Tom Bamadamdingdong out of the movie. That would have brought the movie to a screaching halt. I can't wait for Die Another Day. It looks kick ass. I love Pierce as Bond (World is Not Enough was his worst one though) and think this should be his best one. Although the news of something like 200 CG shots worries me. I'm pretty sure the new (3rd and final) trailer just hit the net. ------------------ --Life is full of tasks to be completed, but right now I am so far behind I will never die "What the **** is the internet?" |
Pick your poison. http://www.apple.com/trailers/mgm/die_another_day/ Aside from one of Halle's lines (you'll catch it...) it looks ****ing great. Am I the only one who doesn't really like Halle Berrie? |
Yes. Yes you are. |
Quote:
I like Brosnan as Bond, but a stone-cold kiler Bond sounds entertaining, too. Maybe I'll rent License to Kill. |
It means I need more sleep. Well, what I think I was thinking at the time I posted it goes something along the lines of just because lots of people read it doesn't make it great. Anyway, Timothy Dalton is one of my favorite Bonds. I like Sean Connery the most (he had the most onscreen charisma of any of them), but Dalton does a pretty good job making Bond seem like a badass. Bond shouldn't be politically correct. One of the things that always made him interesting was his non-PCness. He just had more personality that way. TheMad ------------------ The light at the end of the tunnel has been shut down due to budget cuts. |
James Bond is definitely not PC...he's a womanizing smart-alec British agent! I still think Connery was the best Bond yet, but I like Pierce Brosnan in the role after Connery. As for the new guy piping up to call this LOTR: TT trailer two months old...lay off the crack pipe, my friend. This is the new trailer that debuted exclusively on AOL earlier this week. I know the old one well, because I know the guy who edited it...it was done by Jay Segimoto, the Editbox guy at Keep Me Posted. This was an extended version with a lot more dialogue and action, it uses some "canned" music that isn't part of the movie soundtrack (to its shame, if you asked me) and runs about a minute longer. It's all about the CONTENT, baby...and this trailer shows some truly killer stuff, even if they are just glimpses. Like Gandalf fighting the Balrog, Treebeard scooping up Samwise on the run, etc... As for Harry Potter, the first movie was "Fantasy Lite." I didn't really like any of the characters and I'm always challenged to enjoy any movie where the focal characters are played by children. I thought the kid who played Harry Potter was kind of a cypher...he just has this permanent "deer in headlights" look through the whole thing. Like George said the other day, though: "I think every child in every movie should be played by Haley Joel Osment." Lord of the Rings and Tolkien basically INVENTED the fantasy genre and I still don't know that anybody has done it better. In seven books, Robert Jordan hasn't been able to accomplish the depth and detail that Tokien packed into LOTR...and I love the Wheel of Time books. So I say again..."Harry Potter? *Scoff*" ------------------ Kevin, the erstwhile "Hi-Fi" www.videowrestling.com |
Oh, yeah? Well... "Buffy?" *Scoff!* http://forums.ve3d.com/wink.gif Speakin' of Buffy, picked up the Buffy in the buff issue yet, Kevo? |
Ya. Keanu never has that 'deer in the headlights' thing going on, does he? And he's been acting for years. Tolkien's a good writer. The other 2 movies will be good. But you scoff at HP. Stories you have not read or seen yet just because they star children?? Don't have kids Kev, because you won't want to hang around their childish ways for too long. http://forums.ve3d.com/wink.gif And I have watched enough Buffy to say *scoff!*. Farscape looks like a science fiction dork's wet dream, but I cannot scoff it since I've never watched it! And Brosnan looks the part of Bond, but the movies they've stuck him in don't let him be Bond. Though in the last one when he capped that chick, THEN he was Bond! |
If you are scoffing at Buffy, then there is no way you could have possibly watched enough yet. In the future try listening to the dialogue while still enjoying the nice perky breasts. |
Buffy has gotten REALLY weird. |
I watched season 1 and half of season 2 before it got too boring and went nowhere. Watched a bit of last week's episode where the Gap looking vampire guy lost his mind or something. Whatever. I'm sure it's a great show. But it got old. That's probably why it'll be cancelled after this season. Nowhere to go with it. |
Yeah that's cool to each his own, and I can see where Buffy is not for everyone. As for Kevin's view of fantasy fiction, even Tolkien is derivitive. I agree he did it better than most. I'm somewhat surprised that Kevin likes LoTR so much considering his almost homophobic fear of video games with pastel colors and dislike of movies with kids as leads...liking a book where the main character prances and sings on a table and Tom Bombadil dances through the woods seems inconsistent. And let's not forget Frodo and Sam's somewhat ambiguous relationship. http://forums.ve3d.com/smile.gif |
I don't fear games with fruity themes and pastel colors any more than I fear homosexuals. There's a very large difference between disliking something and fearing it. Samwise and Frodo are best friends who have grown up in an extremely isolated world free of adventure...they rely on each other because they've been thrust into a world full of dark, powerful magic and horrific creatures they could never have imagined. Nothing ambiguous about their relationship from where I sit. Tolkien was derivative? Of what? ------------------ Kevin, the erstwhile "Hi-Fi" www.videowrestling.com |
Just found this...www.jefflew.com go to the downloads section and get Killer Bean 2. One guy did the whole thing, freaking amazing. |
9 books in the WoT series. If you've only read up to book 7, then don't bother reading 8 or 9 until 10 comes out (assuming its good) as they're as good as the rest of the series. Also, Treebeard is scooping up Pippen. Sam and Frodo never meet the ents. Well, actually, they might meet the ents towards the very end of the series on the way back to the Shire when they drop by Isengard, I don't really remember. "I'm somewhat surprised that Kevin likes LoTR so much considering his almost homophobic fear of video games with pastel colors and dislike of movies with kids as leads...liking a book where the main character prances and sings on a table and Tom Bombadil dances through the woods seems inconsistent. And let's not forget Frodo and Sam's somewhat ambiguous relationship." You can skip over the cheesy songs and Tom Bombadil without missing anything major in the plot, but you can't skip over all the stuff involving kids in Harry Potter without missing most, if not all of the plot (unless Harry grows up somewhere along the way). TheMad ------------------ The light at the end of the tunnel has been shut down due to budget cuts. |
Oh yeah, that was Pippen. D'oh! Memory's a little hazy...it was junior high when I last read the LOTR books. The thing is, people are trying to justify having liked the Harry Potter movie by saying "Hey, you obviously didn't read the books!" Meanwhile, you don't have to read the Lord of the Rings to love the movies and appreciate them for the great works they are, in and of themselves. The first Potter movie was bad on many levels and peoples' enjoyment of the books have colored their opinions of the film, I think...in the same way hard-core Tolkien fans have had THEIR opinions of the LOTR films colored. As for the WOT series, I think I got halfway through the sixth book before I quit...just haven't had time to sit down and read something that big. I started the series during a trip to Hawaii and had a lot of time to read, but in the years since my life's gotten a lot more hectic! ------------------ Kevin, the erstwhile "Hi-Fi" www.videowrestling.com |
The ending to the sixth book is one of the best in the series, IMO. Thats something I liked about the WoT series, the books have really great endings (discounting books 8&9). There always ends up being some huge battle involving every main character in some way or another where, in the end, some major bad guy dies or is defeated. TheMad ------------------ The light at the end of the tunnel has been shut down due to budget cuts. |
The Harry Potter movie wasn't a bad movie. You could have easily watched it without having read the book. The second one will be even better. More of a darker tone than the first one. Plus as each year goes by, these kids get older and better with their magic. By the 4th book, there are major magic battles and deaths involved and it turns towards a more adult oriented story arc. I think that's what people like Kevin, who are turned off by HP don't realize, is that this story ends up getting more and more 'adult' with each book. More magic, more gruesome, more plot twists, and more scares. I'm sure by the 7th and last book Harry will have banged half the chicks in the school with his magic wand, ripped out enemies skulls and drank their blood. All while keeping an extremely diversified stock portfolio. |
Tolkien invented the fantasy genre? Uh, Homer and the "Odyssey" and the "Iliad?" The bards that invented the Arthurian mythos? The storytellers behind "Gilgamesh?" The fantasy genre has been around for centuries--millenia, even--Tolkien just happens to be one of the better storytellers of our time. |
Those aren't genre books, Levi...I'm talking about Fantasy genre: Elves, Orcs, Goblins, Trolls, etc... All of these became Fantasy genre staples when Tolkien INVENTED them and they've been re-written according to his definitions countless times, since. As such, he "invented" the genre and all the conventions you find within it, to this day. ------------------ Kevin, the erstwhile "Hi-Fi" www.videowrestling.com |
Tolkien didn't invent orcs and trolls. God did. |
I don't know if Tolkien made up Elves and such...the editors kept changing "Elves" to "Elfs" in the first draft. Took them awhile to get it fixed. That sounds to me like the editors knew what Elfs were. When did the Chronicals of Narnia books get written? |
I believe C.S Lewis wrote the Narnia books in the 1950s. BTW, Elves is the plural for Elf. Elrond is an elf, not an elve. Tolken did not invent elves, trolls, goblins, dwarves, or practically any of the races in the books. Orcs may be an original word, but it refers to dark elves which is what orcs are; and dark elves appear elsewhere in mythology. Even Hobbets are not exactly original, but refering to a race of midgets by that name probably is. I guess you could consider Tolken to be the father of the modern fantasy genre, but only one segment of it. For example I don't really see Tolken's influence in the Conan series of books and those books are considered to be fantasies. -Mike |
Whatever. Tolkien is the king, don't cloud the issue with your facts and logic! http://forums.ve3d.com/wink.gif ------------------ Kevin, the erstwhile "Hi-Fi" www.videowrestling.com |
Well, if you want to get into a hardcore discussion about elves in Middle Earth, then orcs are not dark elves. Allow me to explain (read the Silmarillion if you want to verify all the crap I'm about to spew). There were two major races created by the Ainur at the beginning of time (the Valar and Maiar, Valar being the major gods and Maiar being demigods. Sauron, Saruman, Gandalf, and the balrog are all Maiars). These races are the elves and the humans (dwarves were a pet project carried out in secret by one of the Valar, Aule, I believe, and then given life by Eru Iluvatar, the supreme head honcho god who created the Ainur). Anyway, when the elves first appeared it was in Middle Earth which, at the time, was in a state of eternal twilight as the sun and moon had not been created (all the light came from two trees in Valinor which bore fruit which blazed like the sun and the moon, which is the light that Feanor captured in the Silmarillions, which made them the most beautiful jewels ever, which is what the whole book is about). Now, all the Valar and Maiar lived east in the land of Valindor except Morgoth (Melkor) and Morgoth is the most powerful of the Ainur and is also the evil one. He was hanging out in Middle Earth at the time and when he saw that the Elves were there he decided to feed them lies. The other Valar then sent their messenger and told the elves to go to Valinor, and some left, but some stayed. The ones who stayed are called Moriquendi, or, in Tolkienspeak, dark elves, because they never saw the light of the trees in Valinor. Orcs, on the other hand, are sort of like dark elves. Morgoth kidnapped a bunch of elves and did a ton of experiments on them and tortured and twisted them until he eventually got orcs. TheMad ------------------ The light at the end of the tunnel has been shut down due to budget cuts. |
That sounds way too complicated to turn into Cliff's Notes. I'm actually looking for a new book to start in on. I've seen "Silmarillion" at my local B&N. Worth the time to plow through that behemoth? Or should I finally pick up that book on brothels I've had my eye on? Kevo, Tolkien didn't invent all those things. Goblins, trolls, etc. have been around for a while. A long while. He just took various elements of fantasy writing that have been around for a long time, combined some of them with a heaping spoonful of his own imgination, and wrote some great books. |
Quote:
And by the brain power comment, I mean that anyone with any semblance of an ability to SEE in their minds what Tolkien wrote, will tell you that the movies can never touch what the books can give you. Please, quit spouting desperately uninformed garbage and go read the ****ing books. And by read, I don't mean skim through it going 'Oh yes, here he describes that part in the movie, and here's the part where they do this in the movie'. I mean READ it. SEE it. A book this good is just as thrilling an experience as ANY movie, if you let it. Don't read it 15 minutes at a time for 3 months. Put aside a couple of weekends, and just read. If you do this, and come back here and say the movie is better... Well you'd still be wrong as ****. As for all the negative comments about Tom Bombadil.. speak for yourself, and please stop telling people what parts of great literature they should ****ing 'skip because they won't miss any major plot points'. In case you're too daft to notice it, the books are NOT ABOUT MAJOR PLOT POINTS. That's what the movies do, and that's why they'll never be as good as the books. Tom Bombadil is as intresting and entertaining a part of the trilogy as any other. He was one of my favorite parts in fact, and I'm not alone. Don't like prancing and singing? Get over it you homophobic closet fag. Hell kevin admitted he's a biggot and he's not running around telling people to skip the fruity songs. Since you all pretend to be so god damned informed on your entertainment, you should know that the books were written for Tolkien's kids. They were intended as CHILDRENS BOOKS. You don't like the Tom Bombadil section of the book? Go read it to your kids. Oh wait, the first and last time you saw female genitalia was at your birth. Go read it to your friends kids, and when you see the smile Tolkien's rhymes bring to their faces, you'll understand it. And if their smiles don't bring a smile to YOUR face, you're a sad little man. To sum up, lay off Tom. Just because you're too thick to apreciate it, not to mention Tolkien's incredible talent with rhymes and lymerics, doesn't mean anyone else gives a ****. Keep your ignorance of things to yourself. I've been lurking on VW for well over a year, and I hate having my first post be one like this... But what can I say, you ****ed me off bad enough that I had to post. |
Blah blah blah...that took way too long to read. I've never read a Tolkien book in my life and i don't intend to, but the films kick some serious butt. The guy invented three whole languages, ow brilliant is that?! C.S Lewis's Narnia books are the best, happiest books i've read. I absolutely adore them. The Harry Potter books were really good too. My favourite one is the third one, Lupin kicks ass, so they'd better not mess up the film! Anyhoo, Gimli was definitely the highlight of the two towers and the best line would have to be "toss me." Moi xXx |
| All times are GMT -7. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.