SexyFighters.com

[Rune174]

I saw the midnight release last night and I have to say, the movie was brilliant. Once again, Peter Jackson did a steller job with the movie, and added plenty of detail to JRR Tolkien's work for fans to go through. Both fortunately and unfortunately, the movie is split into three different parts. Fortunately because it means more details and scenes can be included so all major points of the story can be pointed out. Unfortunately because it means 6 more years to wait for the whole thing.
_________________

[Silvador]

[cheesecaked]

I heard the movie "wasn't" good in 3D
as it made the movie look more fake the movie was converted into
3D not so well, or it could be the high quality recording I heard about. it made too nice
but I heard it's better watching it in 2D
_________________
My Fursona http://forums.pleasurebonbon.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=100410#100410

How dare they use casment window designs,
it's so last century ಠ_ರೃ
◕ ◡ ◕
"I'm gonna miss all the things we'll never do.
I just can't believe you left me here alone,
How in this world can I make it on my own?"

[Silvador]

3D is an over rated and unnecessary novelty.
_________________

Fursonas: http://tinyurl.com/yzcsyug

[cheesecaked]

[Silvador]

From my understanding, the 3 movies are incorporating other books as well as The Hobbit. It's also a regular practise, when converting a book to a movie, for certain aspects of the book to be changed, removed, or even be added to for the purposes of convenience, entertainment value and even simply production budget and/or capabilities.

If the director feels that a part of the book might be long winded or simply boring, they might change it, condense it so that it holds the audience's attention of "spice it up" so as to make it more exciting. Hollywood has a habit of "rewriting" the books they remake for the purposes of... making money.

Rare is it when a book is made into a movie and actually remains 100% true to the original form.
_________________

Fursonas: http://tinyurl.com/yzcsyug

[cheesecaked]

[Silvador]

The the good thing with writing a book. You have complete control over what goes in it and what doesn't. If you feel that a part of the story is fitting and adds to the atmoshpere or aesthetics of the story, but it's not necessarily vital to the plot, you are free to keep it in.

With movies, that part more than likely going to get chopped. MAYBE you might get lucky and see it as a deleted seen or part of an extended version, IF they even shoot the scene at all.

Books are more of a product, crafted and sold as is to whomever wants it.
Movies are more of a service where they are confined to certain "standards" and expected to perform within a predetermined manner. Needless to say, those who establish the "standards" and manner in which the movies are expected to perform are not the consumers (us) but those who distribute the movies. Those making the movies need to ensure that it will garner sufficient revinue. The only way to do that is to "maximise" the "entertainment value". This often results in the original piece being butchered for the sake of making money.

Unless you have considerable funds, talent for directing, and the right connections, there is no hope for a movie that is about story and not "entertainment value" to get beyond the low budget, indipenant developement stage that is essentially Hollywood's "garbage bin".
_________________

Fursonas: http://tinyurl.com/yzcsyug

[cheesecaked]