3 ms·
Peter Jackson's offering is beloved because it (largely) respected the books. I watched the Amazon offering. I won't criticise the visual spectacle of setting
by Wildgoose 4y ago
Peter Jackson's offering is beloved because it (largely) respected the books.
I watched the Amazon offering. I won't criticise the visual spectacle of settings like Numenor, nor much of the acting, but the writing was just uniformly terrible. What a disappointment.
Is this likely to be any better?
- unity1001 4y agoThe Ring was better than the later trilogy in my opinion. It was written good enough. Produced pretty fine. Way too good for a series.
- ProAm 4y agoAnd better than The Hobbit. That should have been one 3 hour movie or maybe two 2 hour movies. But it was greed and slop when they made it three.
- jeffwask 4y agoThe also tried to make The Hobbit the Lord of the Rings when they are complete different in tone and style. I wish we got to see Guillermo's version. The Hobbit also had the fingers of 4 or 5 studios in it.
- WalterBright 4y agoThe Hobbit had too many endless Disney theme park rides in it.
- jeffwask 4y agoAnd sexy dwarfs, too many sexy dwarfs.
- seper8 4y agoNot only did it largely respect the books, they invested an astronomical amount of effort into things other filmmakers call minute details, such as making real chainmail instead of the 3d printed garbage used in the Amazon series. Or sending gardeners to the Shire years before shooting even started, to plant the hedges... End result is that everything looks convincing and most scenes in the movies aged very well.