I was disappointed with the Extended Edition of Return of the King.
I might post something more complete later on, behind an LJ cut because of spoilers -- but the bottom line is that most of the material that was added did not, in my opinion, enhance the effectiveness of the movie.
I felt this way about the EE of Fellowship. When I watch that movie now, I watch the theatrical release to the point where they arrive at Rivendell, and the EE for the rest of the movie. I prefer the entirety of the Two Towers EE. When I watch ROTK in the future, I will probably watch the EE for the first half, and the original version for the second half. Or I might just watch only the original version.
The decision to make Gimli a comic character was one of PJ's few missteps, I believe -- and I have thought so from the beginning. A bit of humor here and there is good, but I think John Rhys-Davies takes it too far. The actor has said that because Gimli is taller than hobbits but smaller than men and elves, he forms a bridge between the two groups, and Rhys-Davies uses humor to make that bridge. Sorry, John, it doesn't work. And Gimli's comedic moments detract even more in the EE of ROTK.
But the behind-the-scenes material is wonderful. I have always been fascinated by movie-making, and the "making-of" materials from LOTR fascinate and move me. I still feel a physical ache of jealousy when I watch. To have been there, and been part of that. . . to have worked beside those people, to create such a magnificent film. . .
*sigh*
I might post something more complete later on, behind an LJ cut because of spoilers -- but the bottom line is that most of the material that was added did not, in my opinion, enhance the effectiveness of the movie.
I felt this way about the EE of Fellowship. When I watch that movie now, I watch the theatrical release to the point where they arrive at Rivendell, and the EE for the rest of the movie. I prefer the entirety of the Two Towers EE. When I watch ROTK in the future, I will probably watch the EE for the first half, and the original version for the second half. Or I might just watch only the original version.
The decision to make Gimli a comic character was one of PJ's few missteps, I believe -- and I have thought so from the beginning. A bit of humor here and there is good, but I think John Rhys-Davies takes it too far. The actor has said that because Gimli is taller than hobbits but smaller than men and elves, he forms a bridge between the two groups, and Rhys-Davies uses humor to make that bridge. Sorry, John, it doesn't work. And Gimli's comedic moments detract even more in the EE of ROTK.
But the behind-the-scenes material is wonderful. I have always been fascinated by movie-making, and the "making-of" materials from LOTR fascinate and move me. I still feel a physical ache of jealousy when I watch. To have been there, and been part of that. . . to have worked beside those people, to create such a magnificent film. . .
*sigh*
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-15 07:28 am (UTC)I might have warmed more to the comedy if it had actually been funny. As it is, Rhys-Davies is so stiff-necked with prosthetics that his character scarcely has a chance to register.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-15 08:18 am (UTC)That said, I think the trilogy is splendid just as I saw it in the cinema, and the book is still splendid, too.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-15 09:34 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-15 10:24 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-15 05:56 pm (UTC)I might have warmed more to the comedy if it had actually been funny.
Yes, indeed. . .
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-15 05:59 pm (UTC)This is something
Lovely icon -- but I can't read what's written on it.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-15 06:01 pm (UTC)The Matrix never grabbed me. Funny how some movies move some people powerfully and leave others relatively untouched.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-15 06:01 pm (UTC):-)
(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-15 06:50 pm (UTC)personalityface for my character Martin Tolkien, architect and artist and Founder of Nouveau Montmartre. *g*(no subject)
Date: 2004-12-15 06:53 pm (UTC)I'm watching the extended editions.
Date: 2004-12-16 04:40 am (UTC)the humor thing
Date: 2004-12-16 07:21 am (UTC)I think that this, like a lot of the changes Jackson made, was an effort to remedy a defect in the original novels -- at least, a defect from the perspective of what makes a watchable 21st century movie.
LOTRTB ("Lord of the Rings: The Books") has very little humor. The emotional tone of the novels is almost unrelievedly serious, usually beset by peril and exhaustion. Jackson's choices to make Pippin and Merry into cute little scamps, and to make Gimli into the comic relief, may just have been an effort to save the audience from twelve hours of pure, leaden ponderousness.
Not that I'm disagreeing! I think these were both poor choices. But to make a modern film out of the novels, Jackson did have to do something, and I'm not certain that the alternatives would have been better.
Re: the humor thing
Date: 2004-12-16 07:52 pm (UTC)One of my very favorite scenes in the film trilogy is the pause just before Caradhas, when Boromir is giving Pippin and Merry fighting lessons and it degenerates into a laughing wrestling match. It took me a while to realize that it is one of the very few scenes in which the characters are simply relaxing and having fun with each other.