why do you think LOTR bored you at the theatre? what was the difference in your home viewing experience?
-------------- Original message -------------- From: Daryle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> And here is where the fandom line is sort of drawn. I have said this before, and I will say it again. I saw LOTR in a theater and I have never had such a good sleep outside of my own bed. I tried again with the second picture, and again, fell asleep. These just aren¹t my kind of stories. I can appreciate the production value, but I simply have never cared about these stories. So last year I watched all three on DVD, stayed awake, and was amazed at what I saw. Peter Jackson is a great filmmaker and tells stories better than many of his contemporaries. Raimi has done stories that I DO care about, and I have to say that he is remarkably inconsistent. Consistently FUNNY, but not exactly a string of classics. I like Sam himself more than the pictures he¹s done. WITH THE EXCEPTION of Spider Man 2. On 12/22/07 11:15 AM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > i gotta disagree on "Hellboy". That movie rocked. And some of the pieces: the > initial magic working with Nazis, the religious dude, the look and feel of > their headquarters, all show a deft hand with set design, FX, and even CGI. > It's not a direct one-to-one correlation with the world of the Hobbit, but my > point is the basic skillsets and abilities shown there can be adapted. I mean, > after Blood Simple (think that was it) and The Frighteners, I never would have > pegged Jackson to be right for LOTR, but New Line saw something in him... > > -------------- Original message -------------- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:Gymfig%40aol.com> > > In a message dated 12/22/2007 1:44:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:KeithBJohnson%40comcast.net> writes: > > for some reason I feel del Toro's immersion in fantasy (Pan's Labyrinth, Hell > boy) would work, combined with his natural ebullience and childlike sense of > wonder > > Pan had other theme intertwined in the movie. The Hobbit is not a mature > prequel. Maybe he could do Tne Simarillion. > > Hellboy was a cheap comic book adaptation. It is good for the Sci Fi channel > or FX. I don't see The Hobbit being a sci fi or FX kind of movie. The tone is > too different. > > **************************************See AOL's top rated recipes > (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004) > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scifinoir2/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scifinoir2/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
