Oscar nominations

[Gerbil]

Yup PJ turned Aragorn into basically a wuss who can't tie his own shoelaces without Arwen there casting her special shoe-tying spell on him, but hell, if I am completely honest, I fill in the story with how I think it should be. BUT I've been remarkably quick to 'borrow' PJ's scenery and special effects to pad out my own imagination - for this reason alone I'd love it, but I do love some of the characters, namely Gandalf, Saruman, Gimli, Legolas, Frodo and Sam.
I love Viggo as Aragorn, and can only imagine how good he'd have been if given the proper Aragorn to work with

As for HP - why am I not suprised they changed the ending?
Typical bloody Hollywood ****! Equate 'changing ending' to, say, 'changing Ford of Bruinen scene'

And as for Emma Watson, she'll be a babe when she grows up

[olsonm]

The character interpretations were valid given one thing; time. The movie was only three hours long. The charaters in the movie were surprisingly similar to the books. The problem was the time constraints. With so much cut out they still tried to capture the full flavor of the characters. They chose to do this by folding certain character traits that got cut into scenes they kept in.

jerseydevil, Aragorn may have been 'weakened' in some scenes but I disagree that he was a weak character. Elrond's whole "He has chosen exhile" speech was obscure and wasn't said by Aragorn so I don't think it proves Aragorn had rejected his heritage. I'm not saying that your wrong about him being weak, I just disagree.

[LuthienTinuviel]

i think that harry potter is the kids version of LOTR.

even if you don't agree with me, you have to agree that the movie is hardly comparable to LOTR and that it is a kids movie


read: A KIDS MOVIE


last time i checked, kids books/movies weren't really up to par with the intelligence (or at least comprihension skills) of a movie/book like LOTR.

now im not saying that you have to be kid to enjoy HP or an Adult to enjoy LOTR. i am neither, and i love them both.

so now that that is over

i never saw harry potter. never really wanted to..

yea, so does anyone know the answer to my question ???
about the re-release? now that the noms are out, gerbil's theory was a bit off? anyone hear anything new?

[Nibs]

If you aesthetically enjoy Harry Potter and are easily offended, continue reading, write a wrathful reply, and I guarantee my opinion will not change.

Personally, I've not seen Harry Potter the movie because I read the book. I felt cheated of my time (even though I read it within about 20 hours [not straight!]). I sensed attempts yearning to yield my pathos for this boy, treated like a burdensome pet, forced to live with the ludicrously abhorrent "muggles". All of these elements left a rather bitter aftertaste in my head, especially the end... I would be very highly surprised if this doesn't make you feel like a donkey being led by someone on your back leading you with a carrot on the end of a fishing pole...

Misnomer: The following quote may be slightly altered in one or more ways. However, the overall intent of the passage has in no way been diminished.
Dumbledore: "Alas, the first thing you ask me, I cannot tell you. You must purchase the equally ill-concieved, overpriced sequels to this book to discover the answer to that crux. [to reader] Don't forget to see the movie!"

I'm probably being a little too overbearing on ol' J.K. I think it was a clever little book, solely for those in the single-digit age group. Anyone older and still infatuated with it, I recommend repeated viewing of that screensaver with the flying toasters in thirty minute intervals until the desire fades. Repeat as desired.

Well, let me just end by saying that this is merely my opinion, and I don't wish for it to alter anyone else's toward Harry Potter. If I could have you get only one thing out of this reply, it would be for a vivid image of an extremely hairy guy sitting at a potter's wheel, making an obscenely deformed pot mentally resounding within your own imagination whenever you further hear the phrase "Harry Potter".

[HOBBIT]

Erm ok, thats nice guys. Leave it to Gerbil to get almost any topic on the subject of Potter bashing. Nottice that he is banned (no I didn't ban him, but I totally agree with the admin who did) now. (he is banned for 1 week, turning this topic into a lets flame potter discussion is only part of his ban).

Just because this is a lotr board DOES NOT MEAN that you automatically have to flame Harry Potter.

No, you are 100% incorrect whoever said that Potter is a kids version of lotr. It is a completely different film, plot, and story. They cannot and should not be compared. They are seperate works.

If you would actually fairly read the books, all of the books, you would discover that they are actually quite good. No, they are not the best books ever written. Yes, there is something wrong with an adult who says that they are the only books they read. But if you enjoy the books, that is 100% ok, because they really are good.

Now, unless you want a similiar fate to that of Gerbil, I would suggest that you stop these childish antics immediately and return to the topic which was about LOtr getting Oscar nominations. Ok? Thank you.

[FrodoFriend]

Um.....yeah, I'm actually rather interested in the Oscar nominations. 13 of 'em!!!!! Woohoo!! That's one for each of the dwarves in The Hobbit!! I just saw the trailer for it. Ian McKellan for Best Supporting Actor! I think Sean Bean deserved it more, personally, but oh well. And if LotR doesn't win cinematography and special effects somebody will get hurt . . .

[Starr Polish]

I liked all four of the Harry Potter books, but I'd have to agree that I am enjoying LOTR much more, and that's just a matter of personal taste. I actually do not think that Harry Potter is appropriate for younger children, because some of that stuff is pretty freaky.

And about the entire 'Christians think Harry Potter is evil' thing: I'm a Christian, and I believe that if parents fully explain to kids that Harry Potter's world isn't real (some kids have beenasking where Hogwarts is, et cetera) there is nothing wrong with it. There are also a few parrallels (though I'm sure they are unintentional)

I have yet to see the movie, but I"m far more excited about TTT!

[jerseydevil]

I'm not offended - it's your opinion and my opinion doesn't change.

I like many different movies - from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang to Dr Zhevago to Scream and Friday the 13th to, yes, Harry Potter. Harry Potter is a different kind of movie than LOTR. The two can not be compared. They were made for two different audiences.

Everyone needs a movie they can watch and just forget about lifes problems. That's the type of movie that HP is. And it is made for a younger audience - but that doesn't mean adults can't like it either.

I have also read many books - including Dostoevsky and Charles Dicken and Shakespeare. But sometimes I like to read or watch a movie like Harry Potter.

[FrodoFriend]

Harry Potter's cool. I loved the Quidditch match! Especially Oliver Wood (what is it with people with the last name "Wood"?). And I really can't see how it's inappropriate, but that's just me.

Can we talk about Oscar nominations now? Please? Are there any Hollywood insiders who know how much of a chance LotR has?

[Arathorn]

On HP:

It took me 2 weeks after the movie was released to atcually watch it out of curiosity. I got interested in the books and saw a copy on the net in txt format which I downloaded, read, and finished in a week. Quite light and riveting until the end, I might say. I watched the movie again and didn't like it anymore; although I am still waiting for the next episode because I enjoyed it.

On LOTR and FOTR:

I first read the books right after college 9 yrs ago and read passages ever so often when I have time. I was part of the general fandom who both were excited and shudderred at the thought of someone actually making a film about it. I also said "yeah, they could've done this or that...darned, why did they do that??" but found myself watching it 4 times the first week it came out and 3 more times since then. On the 13 nominations, I agree with giving best supporting actor nom to Sir Ian. Though Sean Bean had such wonderful emotional moments, Sir Ian made me forget the wizard as a cliche and that such a person could be "real". The others will surely be allowed chances to rise to the moment on the next 2 films.

What the heck, I'll be rooting in the most biased manner for all 13 with the limited exposure I had to other movies since january. Woohoo!

[mirrille]

Sean Bean's performance was really amazing. But he was unlikely to get a nomination. Boromir just isn't important enough for that. There are too many characters in that movie and not enough time to develop them all, so there's not really a chance for someone to do enough to get a nomination.
I think Beautiful Mind is going to win the important awards though. I haven't seen it, but it sounds like the type of movie the academy likes. I wanted to see it at first, when I though it was a math movie, but then I found it was a schizophrenia movie and lost interest. Maybe I will rent it eventually.
This all goes back to the traditional prejudice against genre movies.
But 13 nominations is already a huge achievements. Isn't that about the number of nominations that movies like "'Gigi" or "Gone with the Wind", and maybe "West Side Story" (I used to remember these things, but I'm guessing now) got? well, ok. maybe i got the names wrong, but the point is that there have been very few movies to get more than 11 nominations at a time, so this is already very big, win or lose.

[Arathorn]

yup I also saw on video online on theonering.net PJ's interview reaction to the nominations. He said that the crew in NZ which numbers a couple of thousand or so already feel that they've won simply by getting all those nominations. He even said that it'll be interesting next year because people will start comparing the 2 movies and they feel like their competing against themselves.

[anduin]

Two movies have received more nominations.....All About Eve and Titanic.

LOTR will not receive Best Picture, that honor will probably go to A Beautiful Mind. Like someone already said, Oscar likes movies like that better. Actually I will be surprised if it wins anything. Perhaps some of the technical awards, but that is it. And if it does win any of the major awards like director or best supporting actor I will be amazed....elated, yet still amazed.

[coolismo]

i agree, PJ sitting in NZ giving interviews in his oldest jumper belies the tremendous lobbying that NewLine have done with the academy to get this movie nominated. 13 noms is worth a best picture oscar even if you dont get the award itself. It will rake in the bucks in the Easter season so Oscar will have done his job even if PJ doesn't get his grippers on one.

[bropous]

*extremely offensive and uncalled for remark edited out by admins*

However, on point, thirteen nominations is incredible! On another thread I bemoaned my premonition that FotR would be snubbed outright by the Academy. I was wrong. as someone pointed out, only two other films in history have been nominated for more Oscars.

But them's nominations.

As for winning, who can say? I have not seen "A Beautiful Mind" nor or "Moulin Rouge" nor "Amalie", but considering all the hype about, "Mind" will probably get the nod for best film. The two categories I am REALLY pulling for are Ian McKellam for Best Supporting Actor and Peter Jackson as Best Director. I do, however, think that Sean Bean should also be nominated for Best Supporting Actor. His depiction of Boromir was captivating, in my EIDRIORCQWSDAKLMEDDCWWTIWOATTOPWFIO opinion.

Who knows, maybe, just maybe, the Academy is filled with secret EIDRIORCQWSDAKLMEDDCWWTIWOATTOPWFIO's who will vote for FotR and sweep Best Picture.

All I can say is, for the first time in nearly twenty years, I will be sitting through the entire Academy Awards, looking specifically for LotR nods. What makes me wanna hurl though is what the "entertainment" will do with LotR. Some big stage production of Fellowship would make me violently, copiously ill [no offense, hama!!!].

[HOBBIT]

Watch it, Bropous.

[bropous]

Warning heeded.

[Evenstar]

I definite;y think that they deserve an Oscar...I was so annoyed when they didnt' win one....
Is Moulin Rouge nominated...cause that was also a really good movie!!!

[FrodoFriend]

I'd really like LotR to win soundtrack, but it's pretty much a given that that'll go to Moulin Rouge. Haven't seen A Beautiful Mind, but my parents and every reviewer I read said it wasn't that good (except Russel Crowe's performance - there's the Oscar for Best Actor). It'll probably win anyway, though. I also think it deserves Best Adapted Screenplay, they did a good job of keeping Tolkien's words in there.

[Ben]

Actually Moulin Rouge wasn't even nominated for Soundtrack, so that kind of puts it out of the running .