View Poll Results: which film is better?
Fellowship of the Ring
74
61.16%
The Two Towers
33
27.27%
Im holding out for Return of the King
14
11.57%
Voters: 121. You may not vote on this poll
Which is better Fellowship or Towers?
12-23-02, 03:07 AM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which is better Fellowship or Towers?
I know that PJ wants these movies to be perceived as one film, but, which did you enjoy more?
I loved fellowship more than Towers, but I will admit that Towers had a much faster pace and was more exciting. Gollum was phenomenal and for me, The Ents attack on Isengaard was pure joy.
My only real complaint with the movie is that there was too much humour, I guess to keep the average movie goer entertained.
I loved fellowship more than Towers, but I will admit that Towers had a much faster pace and was more exciting. Gollum was phenomenal and for me, The Ents attack on Isengaard was pure joy.
My only real complaint with the movie is that there was too much humour, I guess to keep the average movie goer entertained.
12-23-02, 03:25 AM
#2
DVD Talk Godfather
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: City of the lakers.. riots.. and drug dealing cops.. los(t) Angel(e)s. ca.
Posts: 54,199
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Tower had more action, but I enjoyed Fellowship just a little more. it seemed like more visuals relating to the setting opposed to visuals with massive armies.
Both great, I just liked the whole journey of Fellowship a little more.
Both great, I just liked the whole journey of Fellowship a little more.
12-23-02, 04:48 AM
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess its a bit unfair since I've seen FOTR Extended Edition and its very strong in my mind. PJ made a great movie even better.
But say I only compare the two theatrical editions the FOTR still wins out. Not taking into account its thematic elements (FOTR is more "magical"/intimate while TTT is "more grounded in the real world of men"/broader in scope) the FOTR was simply a better adaptation of that book. TTT is difficult for sure because we still want to focus on the members of the fellowship while introducing more characters (and taking as much care with them as the others) and the fact the fellowship are now on 3 seperate stories must have made for some tough editorial decisions. And it shows.
TTT the movie seems hurried towards the end. At the end of the Battle at Helm's Deep and the Ents deciding to attack Mordor. And simply a huge chunk of what made TTT the book great was left out (Palantir, Voice of Saruman, Shelob, and the Choices of Samwise). In FOTR PJ could focus on one linear story and focus on fewer characters. Much of the book FOTR was there but not so with TTT. And though its 3 hrs it still feels like it ended half way for someone who's read the book.
Perhaps PJ made the movie clock in at just 1 min. shy of 3 hrs (2 hrs 59 mins) as an inside joke to himself. Until I see TTT Extended Edition the movie is (to me) a rough cut due to outside constraints.
But say I only compare the two theatrical editions the FOTR still wins out. Not taking into account its thematic elements (FOTR is more "magical"/intimate while TTT is "more grounded in the real world of men"/broader in scope) the FOTR was simply a better adaptation of that book. TTT is difficult for sure because we still want to focus on the members of the fellowship while introducing more characters (and taking as much care with them as the others) and the fact the fellowship are now on 3 seperate stories must have made for some tough editorial decisions. And it shows.
TTT the movie seems hurried towards the end. At the end of the Battle at Helm's Deep and the Ents deciding to attack Mordor. And simply a huge chunk of what made TTT the book great was left out (Palantir, Voice of Saruman, Shelob, and the Choices of Samwise). In FOTR PJ could focus on one linear story and focus on fewer characters. Much of the book FOTR was there but not so with TTT. And though its 3 hrs it still feels like it ended half way for someone who's read the book.
Perhaps PJ made the movie clock in at just 1 min. shy of 3 hrs (2 hrs 59 mins) as an inside joke to himself. Until I see TTT Extended Edition the movie is (to me) a rough cut due to outside constraints.
Last edited by Ian11; 12-23-02 at 05:13 AM.
12-23-02, 10:15 AM
#4
Moderator
I feel that FOTR was a better story - like was said before, had a greater magical element to it. TTT was a simply a different story to be told. However, my true opinion won't be until PJ releases his vision of TTT on DVD (assuming it is not the theatrical cut).
12-23-02, 11:26 AM
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TTT is just the middle of the movie, so it's not surprising it doesn't really stand on its own. Things like the interludes with Arwen don't make sense until they're viewed in the context of the whole story. So if I had to choose between FOTR and TTT, I guess I'd choose FOTR.
Yet if Jackson follows through on what's in the book, The Return of the King will dwarf the other two movies in impact. There won't be a dry eye in the house when the credits roll.
Yet if Jackson follows through on what's in the book, The Return of the King will dwarf the other two movies in impact. There won't be a dry eye in the house when the credits roll.
12-23-02, 05:52 PM
#7
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 4,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe I like FOTR better just because, as mentioned earlier, it can focus on just a few stories instead of a bunch. Also, FOTR is a little lighter fare, as TTT is a much darker story.
12-23-02, 06:12 PM
#8
DVD Talk Limited Edition
This poll needs a "The director of the movies says he considers them one film so it's hogwash to grade one differently than the rest" option. More so than any other sequel I can think of, you can't see TTT without seeing FOTR and really appreciate it.
12-23-02, 06:20 PM
#9
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Burlington, ON, Canada
Posts: 1,470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Ian11
TTT the movie seems hurried towards the end. At the end of the Battle at Helm's Deep and the Ents deciding to attack Mordor. And simply a huge chunk of what made TTT the book great was left out (Palantir, Voice of Saruman, Shelob, and the Choices of Samwise). In FOTR PJ could focus on one linear story and focus on fewer characters. Much of the book FOTR was there but not so with TTT. And though its 3 hrs it still feels like it ended half way for someone who's read the book.
TTT the movie seems hurried towards the end. At the end of the Battle at Helm's Deep and the Ents deciding to attack Mordor. And simply a huge chunk of what made TTT the book great was left out (Palantir, Voice of Saruman, Shelob, and the Choices of Samwise). In FOTR PJ could focus on one linear story and focus on fewer characters. Much of the book FOTR was there but not so with TTT. And though its 3 hrs it still feels like it ended half way for someone who's read the book.
For the purposes of film though, a trilogy is necessary - as well as trimming some moments from the end of the section of LOTR referred to as TTT. Personally, I think Peter Jackson wisely saved the Shelob section for the beginning of ROTK as I feel the climax of Helm's Deep would have been sullied. Perhaps some might feel that a cliffhanger with Frodo being poisoned might have been cool, but I think it would have been over-extending the film - not too mention it seems a little trite to me ending on such a note.
IMHO anyway...
Which do I feel was the better film? I can't honestly say until I've seen the second part more times. Frankly, ROTK was always my favourite "act" of the book - so I suspect that will be at the top of my list when it's released, but for the moment I still need to see TTT more before deciding. Also, my opinion is biased because I have seen the EE of FOTR.
-matt
12-23-02, 07:07 PM
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
raithen,
I'm willing to accept the fact Shelob and the Voice of Saruman were left out. I'm disappointed we didn't get to see it in this installment but I do consider the fact there were other stories that needed to be told. I'm not bothered with the flashbacks and flashforwards with Arwen, Elrond/Galadriel, or the detour to Osgiliath either. I thought they was nicely done.
It is the way the end of the battle at Helm's Deep and the Ents leading up to the storming of Isengard was handled and put together. The other Ents too quickly appear when Treebeard finally understands Saruman's treachery. And I thought an extended overhead shot of fleeing Uruk-Hai from Helm's Deep was needed.
I'm willing to accept the fact Shelob and the Voice of Saruman were left out. I'm disappointed we didn't get to see it in this installment but I do consider the fact there were other stories that needed to be told. I'm not bothered with the flashbacks and flashforwards with Arwen, Elrond/Galadriel, or the detour to Osgiliath either. I thought they was nicely done.
It is the way the end of the battle at Helm's Deep and the Ents leading up to the storming of Isengard was handled and put together. The other Ents too quickly appear when Treebeard finally understands Saruman's treachery. And I thought an extended overhead shot of fleeing Uruk-Hai from Helm's Deep was needed.
Last edited by Ian11; 12-23-02 at 07:13 PM.
12-23-02, 09:01 PM
#11
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Burlington, ON, Canada
Posts: 1,470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Ian11
It is the way the end of the battle at Helm's Deep and the Ents leading up to the storming of Isengard was handled and put together. The other Ents too quickly appear when Treebeard finally understands Saruman's treachery. And I thought an extended overhead shot of fleeing Uruk-Hai from Helm's Deep was needed.
It is the way the end of the battle at Helm's Deep and the Ents leading up to the storming of Isengard was handled and put together. The other Ents too quickly appear when Treebeard finally understands Saruman's treachery. And I thought an extended overhead shot of fleeing Uruk-Hai from Helm's Deep was needed.
As for the Uruk-hai fleeing the scene, this is definitely something I would like to see as well.
All in all though, minor quibbles.
-matt
12-24-02, 12:43 PM
#18
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: The house that boredom built.
Posts: 4,459
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Number of times I looked at my watch:
Fellowship: 5
Two Towers: 1
Number of
Fellowship: 8
Two Towers: 3
Number of naps
Fellowship: 2
Two Towers: 0
Fellowship: 5
Two Towers: 1
Number of
Fellowship: 8
Two Towers: 3
Number of naps
Fellowship: 2
Two Towers: 0
12-24-02, 03:35 PM
#19
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Germantown, MD
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fellowship definitely, because it was more intimate, emotional, better paced and had more memorable moments. TTT feels like a darker yet slighty "dumbed down" version of the first film.
12-26-02, 12:33 PM
#22
New Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FOTR and TTT theatrical versions left me with different feelings. FOTR seemed like there needed to be more to it and when we saw the extended version it was exactly how it should be. TTT seems to have needed more editing to make room for some scenes that would have explained a few things better.
Both FOTR and TTT are absolutely jaw-dropping beautiful. Jackson's visual sense and ability to execute the visuals is the most important achievement. Unlike George Lucas, he does maintain a balance when it comes to using special effects and telling story. Lucas' films tend to have plenty of nifty special effects without any soul at all. In Lucas' latest two films I do not care about the characters as much as I care about them in Jackson's films. I think this is because Lucas' actors are mostly doing blue screen work, whereas Jacksons' actors have an opportunity to interact with each other and develop a relationship with each other.
As far as CGI characters, I think Gollum blows away both Jar Jar and Yoda, and he also blows away E.T. as well. At first I was admiring the work they did with his skin, his expressions, his hair, his movement, and his interaction with other characters. Eventually, I forgot he was CG and enjoyed his bouts between his evil and good sides.
I have watched FOTR about 6 times now and TTT only once in the theater. Right now I favor FOTR over TTT, but really look forward to ROTK.
I have to take points off TTT for the almost Spielbergean appeal to cute kids in danger during the Helms Deep battle. Cutting once or twice to women and children fleeing is okay, but constantly cutting back and forth to the cute kids.
I have to take points off when they portray Faramir the way they did. Faramir is supposed to be opposite of Boromir from what I remember, and it is an opportunity to show that men are not destined to always tempted by the power of the ring. Faramir is not like his brother, nor is Aragorn like his ancestor.
I have to take points off since I didn't like the interaction between Arwen and Elron, I do not remember Elron being so harsh with Arwen. I understand it was a device for Jackson to present the visions of what life would be like in the future, but I would think there would be another way to do that.
The ents were not as convincing as I would have liked, but I think that they did the best they could given the technology. Jackson's penchant for conflict in almost every scene necessitated the dumbing down of the Ents, as well as other characters in the film.
I was also annoyed by how Gimli is treated. The comic relief was a bit much.
FOTR was 5 star out of 5 stars movie. TTT earned at least 4 stars.
I am hoping that ROTK will knock it out of the park.
Deni
Both FOTR and TTT are absolutely jaw-dropping beautiful. Jackson's visual sense and ability to execute the visuals is the most important achievement. Unlike George Lucas, he does maintain a balance when it comes to using special effects and telling story. Lucas' films tend to have plenty of nifty special effects without any soul at all. In Lucas' latest two films I do not care about the characters as much as I care about them in Jackson's films. I think this is because Lucas' actors are mostly doing blue screen work, whereas Jacksons' actors have an opportunity to interact with each other and develop a relationship with each other.
As far as CGI characters, I think Gollum blows away both Jar Jar and Yoda, and he also blows away E.T. as well. At first I was admiring the work they did with his skin, his expressions, his hair, his movement, and his interaction with other characters. Eventually, I forgot he was CG and enjoyed his bouts between his evil and good sides.
I have watched FOTR about 6 times now and TTT only once in the theater. Right now I favor FOTR over TTT, but really look forward to ROTK.
I have to take points off TTT for the almost Spielbergean appeal to cute kids in danger during the Helms Deep battle. Cutting once or twice to women and children fleeing is okay, but constantly cutting back and forth to the cute kids.
I have to take points off when they portray Faramir the way they did. Faramir is supposed to be opposite of Boromir from what I remember, and it is an opportunity to show that men are not destined to always tempted by the power of the ring. Faramir is not like his brother, nor is Aragorn like his ancestor.
I have to take points off since I didn't like the interaction between Arwen and Elron, I do not remember Elron being so harsh with Arwen. I understand it was a device for Jackson to present the visions of what life would be like in the future, but I would think there would be another way to do that.
The ents were not as convincing as I would have liked, but I think that they did the best they could given the technology. Jackson's penchant for conflict in almost every scene necessitated the dumbing down of the Ents, as well as other characters in the film.
I was also annoyed by how Gimli is treated. The comic relief was a bit much.
FOTR was 5 star out of 5 stars movie. TTT earned at least 4 stars.
I am hoping that ROTK will knock it out of the park.
Deni
12-26-02, 06:34 PM
#23
Guest
Join Date: May 2002
Location: leave me alone!
Posts: 1,347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your "Im holding out for Return of the King" option makes no sense? The question is which of the 2 is better (not best). How can you hold off for the 3rd if the question is posed to the 1st two? That's like saying "What do you like better, Chocolate or Vanilla ice cream?" and you answer "Strawberry" 
You may like Strawberry the best, but it still doesn't answer which you like better (when comparing Chocolate to Vanilla) 
Just bustin' balls!
p.s. To those who chose option #3, saying one film is better than the other doesn't necessarily mean it's the best of all 3. The options should read:
"FOTR is better than TTT"
or
"TTT is better than FOTR"
You may like Strawberry the best, but it still doesn't answer which you like better (when comparing Chocolate to Vanilla) Just bustin' balls!
p.s. To those who chose option #3, saying one film is better than the other doesn't necessarily mean it's the best of all 3. The options should read:
"FOTR is better than TTT"
or
"TTT is better than FOTR"
12-26-02, 07:39 PM
#25
New Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are quite clever, aren't you, Kal.
I didn't until you brought his name up and I did a
search on the Internet. I guess you think that this
is a rather clever dig at my post. I will not apologize for
the high marks I gave Jackson's series so far. I give it
high marks because there are so few really good movies
after 1981. The majority of all-time favorites were made
before you were born.
You certainly have more in common with Mr. Osborne since
he also cannot begin sentences with a capitalization.
Cheers.
I didn't until you brought his name up and I did a
search on the Internet. I guess you think that this
is a rather clever dig at my post. I will not apologize for
the high marks I gave Jackson's series so far. I give it
high marks because there are so few really good movies
after 1981. The majority of all-time favorites were made
before you were born.
You certainly have more in common with Mr. Osborne since
he also cannot begin sentences with a capitalization.
Cheers.