Brief response to criticism of film...

Rating: 10/10 (22 December 2002)

I already posted, but, after reading some of the other posts, I must post again.
I truly believe that whomever has serious problems with this film must look into themselves to find the real problem. I've heard people complain about pacing, about being too violent, about poor acting, about being too different from the book, about changes from characters in the book, about too much CGI, and more.
First off, if I ever see anyone compare this movie again to Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones, I'll seriously consider ramming my head into a brick wall. That is the worst insult you could give a film that is deservingly among the top 20 films ever made. I am personally offended that any comparison can be made with Lucas' absolute catastrophe. I seriously feel sick to my stomach having read anything remotely similar to that. It makes me question why I'm letting myself get so upset about a movie. Oh well.
First off, the Computer Graphics in TTT exist to tell the story, whereas the garbage Star Wars film was built around the special effects, probably to mask the fact that the acting was so bad, the story was written so poorly, and that Lucas had forgotten his original or run out of ideas. The dialogue in TTT is so much more meaningful and worthwhile even in its worst moments. Especially when compared to the best moments of The Clones.
This movie DOES have a different feel to it. It doesn't leave you the way FOTR leaves you. After the first movie, I was dying for the next movie. I couldn't wait to see it. After The Two Towers, I wished it didn't end. While this may seem the same, it is different to me. Three hours seemed like 20 minutes to me. The Two Towers flew by in a world of beauty and tragedy and... man, these words don't do it justice.
You know, you can't win. The same people complaining about Gimli's comic relief because it's too light-hearted are the same ones complaining that the violence was too gruesome for their likes. The only acting that can be categorized as poor was Sean Astin's. I will admit it freely.
I do believe more of the book will be revealed in the extended versions. I don't like the way Hollywood sells movies. I don't. And, if you end up liking the extended version better, you should stand up to Hollywood... not Peter Jackson. His hands are tied on so many issues - if you knew how Hollywood works.
Did it feel like there was less plot? I think so. Did this get my panties in a bunch? No. The stories that were presented added more information to the state of Middle-Earth. The plight of every single woman, child, man, main character, creature... was all very heart-felt. Even in this movie, there were so many political, philosophical, emotional undertones for those of us who hate action movies. To me, this wasn't an action movie. It was so much more. Would I like there to be some more dialogue and depth in ROTK than in TTT? Yes. I hope there is. But, these are dark times. It felt dark.
Like another poster said... I could feel my face making expressions. I could feel my awe. I could feel my pain dragged right out of me. And, this was all with an annoying man next to me making comments about the movie through too much of it. I knew how good it was because I could block it out. When the movie was done, I just wanted to sit there and think about what just happened... and, about life... and, the current state of the world... and myself... and soul... and, so much. Just like Fellowship did to me. But, in a different way. Unlike other people, I can accept the variety of emotions a brilliant story like this can give you.
Trust me also, I am a computer generated image critic. I think FOTR had too many scenes with mediocre graphics. I could sit here and tell you where they fell short, but, I don't want to spoil anything for people skimming through. This movie has far, far fewer failures.
Someday...