It foesn't matter. I just want more.
Preferably, I'd like to see a meandering tv series, going word-by-word through the entire book. Poems and trees and all.
No, frick giving them any creative freedom at all. Follow the book, TO THE LETTER.
They have long since proved that they're not mature enough to wield creative powers.
There's no book about aragorn's travels. We know he goes to Rohan, we know he goes to Gondor where he's known as Thorongil, he makes a name for himself and mounted an attack on Umbar.
Which is why a show based on his travels would be pretty dope, and as long as it kept established lore and canon intact, would be perfectly fine.
Only for 2 and 3, fellowship is the only one where the extended edition adds meaningful scenes and character development. For instance you actually get a gimli scene where he’s not making moronic quips and you get more back story between Aragorn and Boromir
>it's better to fast-forward through Isildur's death in the prologue because hey the ring just fell in a river for no reason its not important >it's better for Frodo and Bilbo to have less dialogue with each other because they have literally no relationship with each other >it's better to never even mention Mythril in Moria because it's not like that's the only fricking reason the mine exists >it's better if Celeborn has absolutely nothing to say at all because he's an unimportant character >it's better if Galadriel doesn't even mention having a ring of power herself because hey, why bring that up it has nothing to do with anything >it's better not to see the Fellowship get their gifts on the way out even though Merry's dagger being an elvish blade with +10 damage to darkwraiths is kinda significant later but since it's supposed to come from the barrows anyway I guess we can just dispense with the lore entirely >it's better not to have Boromir's scene with Faramir in Osgiliath because who wants more Sean Bean or context for Farmir and Denethor's arc or any sort of character development or depth to the story at all >it's better not to have Christopher Lee appear for even one fricking second in ROTK and just have treebeard casually say he's not important anymore in a scene that feels totally natural and not at all weirdly abrubt and unsatisfactory also the palantir's just on the ground because it is, okay? Get off my back about it >It's better not to have Gandalf confront the witch king even though it's a fricking awesome scene and we literally tease it in an earlier scene >let's edit out the best orc in the trilogy (don't you know we're at waaaaaaaar!) because who enjoys those guys >it's better if Aragorn never confronts Sauron in the palantir even though that's what he meant by Sauron taking the bait and it's the payoff for his nightmares about the Evenstar necklace shattering, look we're teasing a lot of stuff that doesn't pay off writing is hard
>1
That’s not how it’s depicted in the theatrical cut, you’re just being disingenuous. Plus IIRC they only removed like 5 seconds here. >2
Bilbo is barely important in the movies at all. The only point of Bilbo from the movie perspective is to demonstrate that it’s difficult to let go of the ring, and to give Gandalf a reason to visit. >3
It literally does not matter, they just dug too greedily and too deep. It would be the same shit if they were digging for gold. >4
Celeborn is a pointless character who does nothing in both versions. Giving him an extra line of dialogue doesn’t fix that. >5
They literally show her with one in the first scene in a close up shot. Do you need everything spoon fed to you? >6
I agree that they should explain this, but they don’t explain the barrow dagger in the extended version either, so there’s no point in having this scene. >7
Again, do you need everything spoon fed to you? The actions of Denethor and Faramir in RotK fully establishes this >8
I agree with you on this one >9
It’s not an awesome scene, it’s awkward and moronic how Merry runs up with his sword and then just drops it and cries. Plus iirc this confrontation never happened in the books and from a lore perspective Gandalf should be much more powerful than the Witch King. >10
Not the best orc in the trilogy but I agree with you here >11
I generally agree with you here although iirc this scene clogs up the pacing a bit.
It's absolutely hysterical how most people on this board are dunking on writers, when most of you have no fricking clue about composing an engrossing narrative. Take an easy example >it's better to never even mention Mythril in Moria because it's not like that's the only fricking reason the mine exists
Correct, this is pointless fluff that has zero impact on the plot, characters, or world at large. It is completely useless information that only a autistic nerd would give a frick about.
It's not a novel anon, it's a movie adaptation. That shit works fine in prose, but in a film where you have a very limited time to express your story, yes, you will need to trim the fat. Which may mean not mentioning a mineral in a rock with zero fricking relevance to the plot. Keep it simple, stupid.
>a mineral in a rock with zero fricking relevance to the plot
The relevance was revealed in the conversation where Gandalf mentions Thorin's gift of the mythril ringmail and how the shirt alone was worth more than than the entirety of the Shire. Which is significant because Frodo was wearing the shirt at the time, and in a subesquent film the great value of the shirt becomes a plot point because the brawl that ensues over it clears the way for Sam to rescue Frodo and the Mouth of Sauron uses it to taunt Gandalf because its presence implies Frodo was captured and killed, because there's no way he would ever take it off and leave it behind. Not to mention the whole reason the dwarves were willing to go far deeper than they ever should have was precisely because of its great value, which far exceeded that of regular ore. So this thing with "zero fricking relevance" is actually relevant to multiple plot points.
You see how one aspect of the world building leads into another and feeds back into other parts of the plot and all the parts are consistent with and reinforce one another? That's good writing. And you're arguing for the opposite of that to shave five minutes off the runtime? What kind of fricking hack are you?
Anon, the mithril vest isn't important because it's "worth more than the shire", which is something no hobbit would ever give a shit about. It's important because it's a gift from Frodo's uncle during his adventuring days, an heirloom. Also because we see it save Frodo from a direct hit from a cave troll. As for the dwarves digging too deep, they cover that when gandalf is reading out the last words of the last dwarves. We don't need to know why they dug too deep, just that they did, and now we need to deal with the goblins. Because it's a movie with a plot, not a lecture about a fictional world.
What you stated all works fantastically in prose, but again, in a feature film where literally every minute of dialogue and screen time matters, the mithril in the mines is ultimately unimportant, it's a history lesson. The human interactions that take place on screen establish the significance of that vest more than a little exposition could.
> it's better not to have Boromir's scene with Faramir in Osgiliath because who wants more Sean Bean or context for Farmir and Denethor's arc or any sort of character development or depth to the story at all
This is the most important part that was cut. Faramir comes out of nowhere and his entrance is so dull without the backstory. Two Towers drops in energy at this part.
Having grown up with the theatrical cuts and only just recently watched the extended edition, I would say that a few of the extra scenes were good, and some of them not. For example, I liked the extra scenes of Aragorn traveling with the hobbits before reaching Rivendel. It made their journey feel more like a journey. I also liked most of the added Boromir scenes, since it gave him more character development and made it more clear that he was under tremendous pressure, adding context to his later actions and overall attitude towards Aragorn and their mission. The scene of Gandalf sperging the frick out at the council of Elrond, however, was idiotic and wisely cut out. I also didn't care for some of the extra "comic relief" scenes with Pippin in the extended cut, nor did I like the scenes explicitly going over the gifts from Galadriel because it seemed to drag on forever (even I though I know that's directly from the book). It's a mixed bag.
For Return of the King? Absolutely. The extra scenes actually take away the suspense of the Battle for Minis Tirith. Fellowship's are very good. Tower's aren't as good but still add something positive to the movie.
No, the DC would be better with some scenes omitted BUT they are still better than the theatrical.
The EE adds too many shitty comic relief scenes
NO SHIT SHERLOCK
butthole
It foesn't matter. I just want more.
Preferably, I'd like to see a meandering tv series, going word-by-word through the entire book. Poems and trees and all.
Real talk, Aragorn's travels would be an amazing TV series, much better than whatever the frick Amazon is doing with the show.
Just keep the timeline intact, stick to the known lore and you have a lot of creative freedom to tell whatever story you want.
No, frick giving them any creative freedom at all. Follow the book, TO THE LETTER.
They have long since proved that they're not mature enough to wield creative powers.
>Follow the book, TO THE LETTER.
No
There's no book about aragorn's travels. We know he goes to Rohan, we know he goes to Gondor where he's known as Thorongil, he makes a name for himself and mounted an attack on Umbar.
Which is why a show based on his travels would be pretty dope, and as long as it kept established lore and canon intact, would be perfectly fine.
>Follow the book, TO THE LETTER.
None of the movies did.
You might enjoy the andy serkis audiobook of lotr
Wat, the gollum guy?
That I need to try
Yeah, he does almost an audioplay version. It‘s fantastic
>It foesn't matter. I just want more.
no you dont
they need to release the eowyn getting plowed by orcs cut.
>not arwen
Only for 2 and 3, fellowship is the only one where the extended edition adds meaningful scenes and character development. For instance you actually get a gimli scene where he’s not making moronic quips and you get more back story between Aragorn and Boromir
Saruman’s death
One of the best arguments in favor of theatrical cut
>it's better to fast-forward through Isildur's death in the prologue because hey the ring just fell in a river for no reason its not important
>it's better for Frodo and Bilbo to have less dialogue with each other because they have literally no relationship with each other
>it's better to never even mention Mythril in Moria because it's not like that's the only fricking reason the mine exists
>it's better if Celeborn has absolutely nothing to say at all because he's an unimportant character
>it's better if Galadriel doesn't even mention having a ring of power herself because hey, why bring that up it has nothing to do with anything
>it's better not to see the Fellowship get their gifts on the way out even though Merry's dagger being an elvish blade with +10 damage to darkwraiths is kinda significant later but since it's supposed to come from the barrows anyway I guess we can just dispense with the lore entirely
>it's better not to have Boromir's scene with Faramir in Osgiliath because who wants more Sean Bean or context for Farmir and Denethor's arc or any sort of character development or depth to the story at all
>it's better not to have Christopher Lee appear for even one fricking second in ROTK and just have treebeard casually say he's not important anymore in a scene that feels totally natural and not at all weirdly abrubt and unsatisfactory also the palantir's just on the ground because it is, okay? Get off my back about it
>It's better not to have Gandalf confront the witch king even though it's a fricking awesome scene and we literally tease it in an earlier scene
>let's edit out the best orc in the trilogy (don't you know we're at waaaaaaaar!) because who enjoys those guys
>it's better if Aragorn never confronts Sauron in the palantir even though that's what he meant by Sauron taking the bait and it's the payoff for his nightmares about the Evenstar necklace shattering, look we're teasing a lot of stuff that doesn't pay off writing is hard
have sex
shut the frick up you smug elijah b***h
>Celeborn
Nice bait
>1
That’s not how it’s depicted in the theatrical cut, you’re just being disingenuous. Plus IIRC they only removed like 5 seconds here.
>2
Bilbo is barely important in the movies at all. The only point of Bilbo from the movie perspective is to demonstrate that it’s difficult to let go of the ring, and to give Gandalf a reason to visit.
>3
It literally does not matter, they just dug too greedily and too deep. It would be the same shit if they were digging for gold.
>4
Celeborn is a pointless character who does nothing in both versions. Giving him an extra line of dialogue doesn’t fix that.
>5
They literally show her with one in the first scene in a close up shot. Do you need everything spoon fed to you?
>6
I agree that they should explain this, but they don’t explain the barrow dagger in the extended version either, so there’s no point in having this scene.
>7
Again, do you need everything spoon fed to you? The actions of Denethor and Faramir in RotK fully establishes this
>8
I agree with you on this one
>9
It’s not an awesome scene, it’s awkward and moronic how Merry runs up with his sword and then just drops it and cries. Plus iirc this confrontation never happened in the books and from a lore perspective Gandalf should be much more powerful than the Witch King.
>10
Not the best orc in the trilogy but I agree with you here
>11
I generally agree with you here although iirc this scene clogs up the pacing a bit.
Overall, the theatricals are still better films.
It's absolutely hysterical how most people on this board are dunking on writers, when most of you have no fricking clue about composing an engrossing narrative. Take an easy example
>it's better to never even mention Mythril in Moria because it's not like that's the only fricking reason the mine exists
Correct, this is pointless fluff that has zero impact on the plot, characters, or world at large. It is completely useless information that only a autistic nerd would give a frick about.
Ah yes, the hallmark of great writing: just cut to the chase and provide no detail, context or worldbuilding
>there was a place
>inside the place was some stuff
>who cares it's not important
Can't wait to read your novel
It's not a novel anon, it's a movie adaptation. That shit works fine in prose, but in a film where you have a very limited time to express your story, yes, you will need to trim the fat. Which may mean not mentioning a mineral in a rock with zero fricking relevance to the plot. Keep it simple, stupid.
>a mineral in a rock with zero fricking relevance to the plot
The relevance was revealed in the conversation where Gandalf mentions Thorin's gift of the mythril ringmail and how the shirt alone was worth more than than the entirety of the Shire. Which is significant because Frodo was wearing the shirt at the time, and in a subesquent film the great value of the shirt becomes a plot point because the brawl that ensues over it clears the way for Sam to rescue Frodo and the Mouth of Sauron uses it to taunt Gandalf because its presence implies Frodo was captured and killed, because there's no way he would ever take it off and leave it behind. Not to mention the whole reason the dwarves were willing to go far deeper than they ever should have was precisely because of its great value, which far exceeded that of regular ore. So this thing with "zero fricking relevance" is actually relevant to multiple plot points.
You see how one aspect of the world building leads into another and feeds back into other parts of the plot and all the parts are consistent with and reinforce one another? That's good writing. And you're arguing for the opposite of that to shave five minutes off the runtime? What kind of fricking hack are you?
Anon, the mithril vest isn't important because it's "worth more than the shire", which is something no hobbit would ever give a shit about. It's important because it's a gift from Frodo's uncle during his adventuring days, an heirloom. Also because we see it save Frodo from a direct hit from a cave troll. As for the dwarves digging too deep, they cover that when gandalf is reading out the last words of the last dwarves. We don't need to know why they dug too deep, just that they did, and now we need to deal with the goblins. Because it's a movie with a plot, not a lecture about a fictional world.
What you stated all works fantastically in prose, but again, in a feature film where literally every minute of dialogue and screen time matters, the mithril in the mines is ultimately unimportant, it's a history lesson. The human interactions that take place on screen establish the significance of that vest more than a little exposition could.
> it's better not to have Boromir's scene with Faramir in Osgiliath because who wants more Sean Bean or context for Farmir and Denethor's arc or any sort of character development or depth to the story at all
This is the most important part that was cut. Faramir comes out of nowhere and his entrance is so dull without the backstory. Two Towers drops in energy at this part.
Having grown up with the theatrical cuts and only just recently watched the extended edition, I would say that a few of the extra scenes were good, and some of them not. For example, I liked the extra scenes of Aragorn traveling with the hobbits before reaching Rivendel. It made their journey feel more like a journey. I also liked most of the added Boromir scenes, since it gave him more character development and made it more clear that he was under tremendous pressure, adding context to his later actions and overall attitude towards Aragorn and their mission. The scene of Gandalf sperging the frick out at the council of Elrond, however, was idiotic and wisely cut out. I also didn't care for some of the extra "comic relief" scenes with Pippin in the extended cut, nor did I like the scenes explicitly going over the gifts from Galadriel because it seemed to drag on forever (even I though I know that's directly from the book). It's a mixed bag.
Spot on Anon.
These movies are so good that the more there are of them the better the experience is, therefore you're wrong AND gay (not a woman tho)
>Theatrical? What's that? I only watch Extended.
For Return of the King? Absolutely. The extra scenes actually take away the suspense of the Battle for Minis Tirith. Fellowship's are very good. Tower's aren't as good but still add something positive to the movie.
The Appendices are better than the films themselves.
Didn't ask esl
Fellowship Extended its the way to go, no doubt about it, theatrical for the others but the boromir scenes are Kino
deranged post