影评转贴:The one to rule them all(豪情敬请注意:)
影评转贴:The one to rule them all(豪情敬请注意:)
Film Review: The one to rule them all
(The Sunday Times, by JOHN HARLOW)
Hail to the King. The third episode in Peter Jackson’s Ring cycle is a defining moment in cinema
The opening shot focuses on a blissful moon of a face, a bucolic figure enjoying his last happy moments as he hooks bait on a sunny afternoon. Moments later, brutal murder marks the loss of innocence in this Eden, as a once ordinary fisherman begins his moral and physical disintegration into the creature known as Gollum. This jarring kick-start to the most eagerly anticipated blockbuster of the season, The Return of the King, the final epic in The Lord of the Rings trilogy, is all the more powerful for being played like commonplace domestic violence, more Agatha Christie than Middle-earth. The director, Peter Jackson, has again thrown us off balance.
Jackson, apparently a better class of megalomaniac than the average director, promised us the best for last, and he has delivered, bringing to a climax an already monumental work in a Shakespearian vision of battle, human corruption, madness, loss and joy. Forget the hairy feet and occasional bursts of Elvish ― this is an adult movie with grown-up themes, promoting old-fashioned virtues such as loyalty, respect and sacrifice, that also manages, after a year of disappoint ment in the multiplexes, to make adrenaline respectable again.
The Return of the King reduces the first six hours of the saga to a curtain-raiser for the main event, the one film that binds them all, in more than three hours of cinema unprecedented in its visual grandeur and savage power to thrill. In an Oscar season filled with war, from Crowe at sea and Kidman on Cold Mountain to Cruise looking good in samurai gear, it is Jackson’s battles, unrestrained by reality or even gravity, that you will remember. Yes, forgive my burbling, it’s that good.
Film geeks fret about the best year in cinema. Was it 1939, which gave us Gone with the Wind and The Wizard of Oz, or 1962, for Lawrence of Arabia? Stuff that game ― let’s roll all three Tolkien films together, as they were intended, and shout it from the popcorn stand that, at the 11th hour, we recognise 2003 as a glorious moment in celluloid history. And, let’s not be shy about it, it’s an achievement rooted in British, not US, culture. They just paid for it.
How has Jackson done it? First, he does not have to slow down for exposition. We know this is the mythical land of Middle-earth, where white hats have thrown down one tower of baddies, and two short heroes known as hobbits are trudging their weary way to a volcano to unforge a ring, a source of power for a second dark tower. We are easier with the characters, as Viggo Mortensen’s Aragorn grows from boy scout into Henry V, and accept even Ian McKellen’s prosthetic nose (proven Oscar bait) amid the old-fashioned tricks of forced perspective that give us dwarfs talking to giants. If you are not at home here, ROTK is not the place to start.
Unlike the sad Matrix sequels, this fantastic finale does not merely repeat earlier tricks with a bigger budget. Here be creatures that have never been seen in cinema before. The battles are denser, the cities beautiful ― you can almost smell Minas Tirith, its greasily anxious people and spooked horses seething like a French medieval fortress. Most film-makers would be content with one new enemy such as the hissing subterranean denizen Shelob (Ridley Scott made his name with a single alien), but Jackson keeps cramming them into every corner of his widescreen canvas, at breakneck speed. So supremely confident is he now, he can cut-freeze a doomed cavalry charge in mid-gallop, refusing to show us the first world war carnage that follows the stupidity of Middle-earth’s all-too-human generals, and we do not care. We are hypnotised by Orlando Bloom’s elfin acrobatics, or enjoying the dwarf Gimli gleefully totting up his death toll.
Two other fresh flavours have been added in the remixes since last time around ― jokes and sex. Well, more jokes than sex, but a gallows humour has emerged among the fellowship as they face impossible odds. Gandalf now quips as he mows down his foes. Who does McKellen think he is, the governor of California? The sex is more about choices, painful and dark, but it raises temperatures unfelt outside the volcanic Mount Doom.
By the time we get to that roaring furnace, where a last choice must be made between good and self, we are battered and shaken. We really feel that last crawl with Frodo and Sam. A warning: some preview audiences stumbled out teary-eyed and dumbstruck; others spoke of having unnaturally vivid dreams afterwards. Can one overdose on this stuff?
The old weaknesses remain. The Lord of the Rings is about silly hippie fantasies such as magic rings and trolls, right? Okay, argue that away as analogy, but others remain irredeemable. There is nothing Jackson can do to un-Disney the ents, walking trees with Welsh accents. Some of the eagles could do with a lick of the magic paintbrush, too. But this is petty stuff, and fans will not give an orc.
More troublesome are hanging plot points ― not just missing chapters, such as The Scouring of the Shire, but whatever happened to Christopher Lee’s nasty wizard, Saruman, abandoned, blitzed and disgruntled, on his balcony at the end of The Two Towers? His fate was filmed, apparently, but for that we shall have to wait for the 4hr 15min special-edition DVD next Christmas. Will this saga never end?
That scene at the White Tower was supposed to open the third film, but Jackson felt it looked back too far, slowed the action. So he went even further back in the book, opening with Gollum’s discovery of the ring. It may not be logical, but it gives the British actor Andy Serkis a chance to show his real face ― well, real with extra-pointy ears. Last year, Serkis, like most other cast members, was robbed at the Oscars ceremony. He was locked out because ― as campaigners for more “highbrow” films, now barely remembered, said ― he was not really acting, he was digitised by computer. In reality, Serkis, who joined the cast for 15 days of voice-overs but stayed for 15 months, performed the schizophrenic halfling’s every move and expression. The only difference was that his face was altered by computer rather than latex. But he was thesping like mad, and in this final journey, Serkis is crucial in underpinning emotionally a vast experience in what, in clumsier hands, could have been Conan the Barbarian III.
The hobbits now rest: the Oscar battle for Middle- earth has begun. No more excuses, Academy voters, such as: “We are waiting to see how it turns out.” Let’s start with best film and director. As ticket-buyers, Hollywood, we who pay your wages demand nothing less. This is not Citizen Kane, nor did Jackson ever dream it to be. But for a whole new generation, this will be their Star Wars, their Gone with the Wind, their Wizard of Oz, all rolled into one. It will guarantee that they keep going to the multiplex in soul-seared hope for years to come. Yes, The Return of the King is truly that great.
SCORES OF THE RINGS
Cost of shooting the trilogy:&200m; print and advertising costs &80m; on-set coffee &50,000
Income so far: &1 billion+
Oscars so far: 6
Length of book: 1,200 pages
Length on screen: 9 hours 45 minutes
Film-rights fee for Tolkien estate: &104,602
Salary and profit share for Peter Jackson: &60m+
Bonuses: Wood &1.5m; McKellen &900,000
Injuries: Mortensen broke big toe, nearly drowned; Bloom fractured a rib; several concussions
New Zealand’s share: &110m economic boost, and “minister of the rings” appointed to promote tourism, but LOTR museum blocked by Tolkien’s family
Total crew: 23,000
Horses: 250, including five miniatures for hobbits
Rubber ears and feet: 1,600 pairs
Chain-mail links: 12m, cut from plastic pipe by armourers who wore away their fingerprints
Hero worship: all the key actors were tattooed in Elvish except John Rhys-Davies, who sent his stunt double in his place
Losers: David Bowie was considered for Elrond; Daniel Day-Lewis turned down Aragorn
Mementos: Wood took a ring, Cate Blanchett some bronzed ears, while the ever-munching Jackson was presented with a carrot
(The Sunday Times, by JOHN HARLOW)
Hail to the King. The third episode in Peter Jackson’s Ring cycle is a defining moment in cinema
The opening shot focuses on a blissful moon of a face, a bucolic figure enjoying his last happy moments as he hooks bait on a sunny afternoon. Moments later, brutal murder marks the loss of innocence in this Eden, as a once ordinary fisherman begins his moral and physical disintegration into the creature known as Gollum. This jarring kick-start to the most eagerly anticipated blockbuster of the season, The Return of the King, the final epic in The Lord of the Rings trilogy, is all the more powerful for being played like commonplace domestic violence, more Agatha Christie than Middle-earth. The director, Peter Jackson, has again thrown us off balance.
Jackson, apparently a better class of megalomaniac than the average director, promised us the best for last, and he has delivered, bringing to a climax an already monumental work in a Shakespearian vision of battle, human corruption, madness, loss and joy. Forget the hairy feet and occasional bursts of Elvish ― this is an adult movie with grown-up themes, promoting old-fashioned virtues such as loyalty, respect and sacrifice, that also manages, after a year of disappoint ment in the multiplexes, to make adrenaline respectable again.
The Return of the King reduces the first six hours of the saga to a curtain-raiser for the main event, the one film that binds them all, in more than three hours of cinema unprecedented in its visual grandeur and savage power to thrill. In an Oscar season filled with war, from Crowe at sea and Kidman on Cold Mountain to Cruise looking good in samurai gear, it is Jackson’s battles, unrestrained by reality or even gravity, that you will remember. Yes, forgive my burbling, it’s that good.
Film geeks fret about the best year in cinema. Was it 1939, which gave us Gone with the Wind and The Wizard of Oz, or 1962, for Lawrence of Arabia? Stuff that game ― let’s roll all three Tolkien films together, as they were intended, and shout it from the popcorn stand that, at the 11th hour, we recognise 2003 as a glorious moment in celluloid history. And, let’s not be shy about it, it’s an achievement rooted in British, not US, culture. They just paid for it.
How has Jackson done it? First, he does not have to slow down for exposition. We know this is the mythical land of Middle-earth, where white hats have thrown down one tower of baddies, and two short heroes known as hobbits are trudging their weary way to a volcano to unforge a ring, a source of power for a second dark tower. We are easier with the characters, as Viggo Mortensen’s Aragorn grows from boy scout into Henry V, and accept even Ian McKellen’s prosthetic nose (proven Oscar bait) amid the old-fashioned tricks of forced perspective that give us dwarfs talking to giants. If you are not at home here, ROTK is not the place to start.
Unlike the sad Matrix sequels, this fantastic finale does not merely repeat earlier tricks with a bigger budget. Here be creatures that have never been seen in cinema before. The battles are denser, the cities beautiful ― you can almost smell Minas Tirith, its greasily anxious people and spooked horses seething like a French medieval fortress. Most film-makers would be content with one new enemy such as the hissing subterranean denizen Shelob (Ridley Scott made his name with a single alien), but Jackson keeps cramming them into every corner of his widescreen canvas, at breakneck speed. So supremely confident is he now, he can cut-freeze a doomed cavalry charge in mid-gallop, refusing to show us the first world war carnage that follows the stupidity of Middle-earth’s all-too-human generals, and we do not care. We are hypnotised by Orlando Bloom’s elfin acrobatics, or enjoying the dwarf Gimli gleefully totting up his death toll.
Two other fresh flavours have been added in the remixes since last time around ― jokes and sex. Well, more jokes than sex, but a gallows humour has emerged among the fellowship as they face impossible odds. Gandalf now quips as he mows down his foes. Who does McKellen think he is, the governor of California? The sex is more about choices, painful and dark, but it raises temperatures unfelt outside the volcanic Mount Doom.
By the time we get to that roaring furnace, where a last choice must be made between good and self, we are battered and shaken. We really feel that last crawl with Frodo and Sam. A warning: some preview audiences stumbled out teary-eyed and dumbstruck; others spoke of having unnaturally vivid dreams afterwards. Can one overdose on this stuff?
The old weaknesses remain. The Lord of the Rings is about silly hippie fantasies such as magic rings and trolls, right? Okay, argue that away as analogy, but others remain irredeemable. There is nothing Jackson can do to un-Disney the ents, walking trees with Welsh accents. Some of the eagles could do with a lick of the magic paintbrush, too. But this is petty stuff, and fans will not give an orc.
More troublesome are hanging plot points ― not just missing chapters, such as The Scouring of the Shire, but whatever happened to Christopher Lee’s nasty wizard, Saruman, abandoned, blitzed and disgruntled, on his balcony at the end of The Two Towers? His fate was filmed, apparently, but for that we shall have to wait for the 4hr 15min special-edition DVD next Christmas. Will this saga never end?
That scene at the White Tower was supposed to open the third film, but Jackson felt it looked back too far, slowed the action. So he went even further back in the book, opening with Gollum’s discovery of the ring. It may not be logical, but it gives the British actor Andy Serkis a chance to show his real face ― well, real with extra-pointy ears. Last year, Serkis, like most other cast members, was robbed at the Oscars ceremony. He was locked out because ― as campaigners for more “highbrow” films, now barely remembered, said ― he was not really acting, he was digitised by computer. In reality, Serkis, who joined the cast for 15 days of voice-overs but stayed for 15 months, performed the schizophrenic halfling’s every move and expression. The only difference was that his face was altered by computer rather than latex. But he was thesping like mad, and in this final journey, Serkis is crucial in underpinning emotionally a vast experience in what, in clumsier hands, could have been Conan the Barbarian III.
The hobbits now rest: the Oscar battle for Middle- earth has begun. No more excuses, Academy voters, such as: “We are waiting to see how it turns out.” Let’s start with best film and director. As ticket-buyers, Hollywood, we who pay your wages demand nothing less. This is not Citizen Kane, nor did Jackson ever dream it to be. But for a whole new generation, this will be their Star Wars, their Gone with the Wind, their Wizard of Oz, all rolled into one. It will guarantee that they keep going to the multiplex in soul-seared hope for years to come. Yes, The Return of the King is truly that great.
SCORES OF THE RINGS
Cost of shooting the trilogy:&200m; print and advertising costs &80m; on-set coffee &50,000
Income so far: &1 billion+
Oscars so far: 6
Length of book: 1,200 pages
Length on screen: 9 hours 45 minutes
Film-rights fee for Tolkien estate: &104,602
Salary and profit share for Peter Jackson: &60m+
Bonuses: Wood &1.5m; McKellen &900,000
Injuries: Mortensen broke big toe, nearly drowned; Bloom fractured a rib; several concussions
New Zealand’s share: &110m economic boost, and “minister of the rings” appointed to promote tourism, but LOTR museum blocked by Tolkien’s family
Total crew: 23,000
Horses: 250, including five miniatures for hobbits
Rubber ears and feet: 1,600 pairs
Chain-mail links: 12m, cut from plastic pipe by armourers who wore away their fingerprints
Hero worship: all the key actors were tattooed in Elvish except John Rhys-Davies, who sent his stunt double in his place
Losers: David Bowie was considered for Elrond; Daniel Day-Lewis turned down Aragorn
Mementos: Wood took a ring, Cate Blanchett some bronzed ears, while the ever-munching Jackson was presented with a carrot
我坐了整整四小时, 一点也没觉得坐了那么久, 等了一年总算等到了真值得啊, 太幸福了. 前两部为的都是这一部,就象CAVE转的文章说的.
两军对战前将领的鼓舞人心, 战士从恐惧绝望到鼓起勇气那一段让我最感动, 热泪盈眶.
EOWYN在书里情节更详细, 故事非常动人, 电影里没有, 你看书一定要看啊.
我是看第二集加长版后喜欢上FARAMIR的. 加的部分里有他们父子三人的情节, 我看到他骑在马上忧郁失落的神情, 旁边是GONDOR的那个带树的旗帜在风中缓缓展开, 画面真美丽啊. 还加有EOWYN的一些戏, 为她堂兄下葬唱挽歌的部分, 非常凄美. 第一次见到她的时候觉得怎么这么憔悴苍老, 哪能和美艳打了白光的LIV TYLOR比,越看越觉得她的表演有血有肉, 比LIV TYLER那个大花瓶耐看. 说到底还是导演偏心, 把许多支线都砍掉了.
说得太好了. 战争场面非常非常象莎翁的历史剧,喜欢莎翁的人一定觉得非常亲切.bringing to a climax an already monumental work in a Shakespearian vision of battle, human corruption, madness, loss and joy.
两军对战前将领的鼓舞人心, 战士从恐惧绝望到鼓起勇气那一段让我最感动, 热泪盈眶.
EOWYN在书里情节更详细, 故事非常动人, 电影里没有, 你看书一定要看啊.
我是看第二集加长版后喜欢上FARAMIR的. 加的部分里有他们父子三人的情节, 我看到他骑在马上忧郁失落的神情, 旁边是GONDOR的那个带树的旗帜在风中缓缓展开, 画面真美丽啊. 还加有EOWYN的一些戏, 为她堂兄下葬唱挽歌的部分, 非常凄美. 第一次见到她的时候觉得怎么这么憔悴苍老, 哪能和美艳打了白光的LIV TYLOR比,越看越觉得她的表演有血有肉, 比LIV TYLER那个大花瓶耐看. 说到底还是导演偏心, 把许多支线都砍掉了.
FARAMIR绝望地驰往失守城池的时候,PIPPIN一边唱歌我一边哭。
还有两国的普通战士,明知对手强大到远远超出自己的对抗范围,还是义无反顾地向前。马国的国王和公主显示出真正的勇气,与NASGUL对阵那场惊心动魄,杀戮魔王首帅的是女子!EOWYN把头盔揭下来时我简直要鼓掌了。这几段是我最感动的。那段千里传烽火的也很精采啊,气势宏大。
豪情说的对,有那么多人的事情没交代,很多人匆匆忙忙地露个脸就算敷衍过去了。SAM和FRODO的戏似乎太多了些。GONDOR国国王的疯狂没有很好展开,没有看过2加长版的人根本不会懂得他为什么会轻描淡写地把唯一的儿子逼上死路。还有他对GONDOR结局的悲观从何而来,也没交代?LEGOLAS的戏简直太少,虽然他比前两集还帅。战争的戏不如第2集紧张,让观众从头激动到尾反正也不大可能。
我也喜欢FARAMIR!他和EOWYN站在一起好般配啊,一对勇敢的金童玉女。 ARAGORN在这集里好象不太习惯他的新身份,当然是剧情需要,但也太僵了些,力度不够,他去说服鬼们参加战斗的那场,如果我是鬼就不听他的。 ARWEN比任何时候都象花瓶。
NAZGUL的尖叫简直撕心裂肺,恨不能把耳朵蒙起来。音乐比前两部更好。
1?好象说了一大堆反对意见,其实是精采的地方说不出来。今晚我还要再看一遍,回头再诌。

豪情说的对,有那么多人的事情没交代,很多人匆匆忙忙地露个脸就算敷衍过去了。SAM和FRODO的戏似乎太多了些。GONDOR国国王的疯狂没有很好展开,没有看过2加长版的人根本不会懂得他为什么会轻描淡写地把唯一的儿子逼上死路。还有他对GONDOR结局的悲观从何而来,也没交代?LEGOLAS的戏简直太少,虽然他比前两集还帅。战争的戏不如第2集紧张,让观众从头激动到尾反正也不大可能。
我也喜欢FARAMIR!他和EOWYN站在一起好般配啊,一对勇敢的金童玉女。 ARAGORN在这集里好象不太习惯他的新身份,当然是剧情需要,但也太僵了些,力度不够,他去说服鬼们参加战斗的那场,如果我是鬼就不听他的。 ARWEN比任何时候都象花瓶。

NAZGUL的尖叫简直撕心裂肺,恨不能把耳朵蒙起来。音乐比前两部更好。
1?好象说了一大堆反对意见,其实是精采的地方说不出来。今晚我还要再看一遍,回头再诌。

你们开始讲情节了? 我也忍不住了.
4, 另一个让我感动的地方是PIPPIN唱歌, FARAMIR上战场, 我哭的一塌糊涂. 书里FARAMIR小时候是个NERD, 是GANDOLF的学生, 他当然也有勇气, 比较内敛, 很容易被当成懦弱. BORAMIR是当时典型的武士, 野心勃勃, 好胜斗勇, 不及他有智慧. 他也是对父亲的感情受到拒绝, 绝望上战场的, 明知必死. 和EOWYN上战场的心情类似. 多么高贵的选择. 我说的战场上鼓起勇气部分是ROHAN骑兵, 在面对数倍于己的敌人, 许多人都感到恐惧, 初上战场的EOWYN虽然有决心也瑟瑟发抖.但是主帅鼓舞人心的演说, 用剑与众人长枪相交为誓, 大家战胜恐惧, 士气如虹冲向敌阵, 太真实太有说服力了. 高潮是EOWYN为救叔叔亲手斩龙, 抛去头盔, 向戒灵王宣称"I AM NO MAN", 太震撼了.相比之下, ARAGORN的表演, 哼哼...
电影里没有两人在战役后在花园里一起养伤, 为不能上战场而焦虑, 为战争担忧, 惺惺相惜的部分. EOWYN 每天都向BLACK GATE的方向相望, 明知看不到,也要坚持. FARAMIR打动EOWYN的话非常感人. 我在电影里看到他们站在一起特别欣慰. FARAMIR一定是个仁君, 而EOWYN一定是个坚强的亲王夫人. MMD, ARAGORN在众人面前来个好莱坞式亲吻, 那算什么呀.
ROHAN是她兄弟做了国王. 还有FARAMIR老爸是世代相传的监国, 不是国王.GONDOR最后一个国王在许多年前出走以后没有回来, 所以片子叫国王归来. BOROMIR就和父亲抗议过为什么不能做国王, 被父亲阻止, 毕竟名不正言不顺. 他想夺取THE RING, 当然也有这个野心, 他父亲也很赞赏.
FRODO在戴上THE RING之前那个微笑, WOW, 真是邪气的媚啊. 最后离去时回眸微笑, 看的我晕倒.

4, 另一个让我感动的地方是PIPPIN唱歌, FARAMIR上战场, 我哭的一塌糊涂. 书里FARAMIR小时候是个NERD, 是GANDOLF的学生, 他当然也有勇气, 比较内敛, 很容易被当成懦弱. BORAMIR是当时典型的武士, 野心勃勃, 好胜斗勇, 不及他有智慧. 他也是对父亲的感情受到拒绝, 绝望上战场的, 明知必死. 和EOWYN上战场的心情类似. 多么高贵的选择. 我说的战场上鼓起勇气部分是ROHAN骑兵, 在面对数倍于己的敌人, 许多人都感到恐惧, 初上战场的EOWYN虽然有决心也瑟瑟发抖.但是主帅鼓舞人心的演说, 用剑与众人长枪相交为誓, 大家战胜恐惧, 士气如虹冲向敌阵, 太真实太有说服力了. 高潮是EOWYN为救叔叔亲手斩龙, 抛去头盔, 向戒灵王宣称"I AM NO MAN", 太震撼了.相比之下, ARAGORN的表演, 哼哼...
电影里没有两人在战役后在花园里一起养伤, 为不能上战场而焦虑, 为战争担忧, 惺惺相惜的部分. EOWYN 每天都向BLACK GATE的方向相望, 明知看不到,也要坚持. FARAMIR打动EOWYN的话非常感人. 我在电影里看到他们站在一起特别欣慰. FARAMIR一定是个仁君, 而EOWYN一定是个坚强的亲王夫人. MMD, ARAGORN在众人面前来个好莱坞式亲吻, 那算什么呀.
ROHAN是她兄弟做了国王. 还有FARAMIR老爸是世代相传的监国, 不是国王.GONDOR最后一个国王在许多年前出走以后没有回来, 所以片子叫国王归来. BOROMIR就和父亲抗议过为什么不能做国王, 被父亲阻止, 毕竟名不正言不顺. 他想夺取THE RING, 当然也有这个野心, 他父亲也很赞赏.
FRODO在戴上THE RING之前那个微笑, WOW, 真是邪气的媚啊. 最后离去时回眸微笑, 看的我晕倒.

Last edited by 豪情 on 2003-12-19 17:58, edited 2 times in total.
是啊, ARAGORN本来是骑马带队的, 带头冲锋的时候下来步行, 真反高潮. 敢情他就会浪人那一招啊.
LEGOLAS那场也好看, 可惜他太完美无缺, 不是真人, 不及真人给我共鸣.
虽然战争场面不如第二部惨烈, 人性展示的更丰满, 我的心从头到尾都跟着大声砰砰跳, 一样经历恐惧绝望痛苦兴奋, 虽然不停用"你已经知道故事了, 最后大家都没事"来安慰自己.
某人怎么也不理解为什么MAN不能杀魔戒首帅, 而女人就可以, 我从魔咒解释半天没用, 最后生气了, 去, 看几本莎士比亚去!
GONDOR的主城太太太宏伟了, 绝对是三部片中最雄浑的建筑, 明知是模型还是仰慕得不行. 唯一缺陷是太新了点.

LEGOLAS那场也好看, 可惜他太完美无缺, 不是真人, 不及真人给我共鸣.
虽然战争场面不如第二部惨烈, 人性展示的更丰满, 我的心从头到尾都跟着大声砰砰跳, 一样经历恐惧绝望痛苦兴奋, 虽然不停用"你已经知道故事了, 最后大家都没事"来安慰自己.
某人怎么也不理解为什么MAN不能杀魔戒首帅, 而女人就可以, 我从魔咒解释半天没用, 最后生气了, 去, 看几本莎士比亚去!
GONDOR的主城太太太宏伟了, 绝对是三部片中最雄浑的建筑, 明知是模型还是仰慕得不行. 唯一缺陷是太新了点.

Last edited by 豪情 on 2003-12-19 12:42, edited 1 time in total.
是啊是啊,电影里她为MERRY打抱不平时说了,“他和你们一样有权利上战场”,也指她自己呢。tiffany wrote:马国的公主, 我觉得书里写出来她给我的感觉是很害怕生命被浪费掉, 勇猛请战, 追求个轰轰烈烈的事业, 但是国王老让她守业, 她很不高兴, 生怕老了之后都忘记了年轻时的梦想云云. 她一直很爱她的叔父的吧, 不单是因为感情受挫折, 寄托在亲情上面了.
MINAS TIRITH好看得不象话,舰艇形的广场真酷哦。最后大家扬帆远行的时候,那个码头周围的景致象不象威尼斯?JACKSON和他的两个小孩都露了一小脸,豪情看出来否?
ARAGORN做STRIDER的时候也许没心机,一朝权在手后难免不变质,这样对FARAMIR只有好,他本来是恬淡的人。第一集里谁说的:MEN ARE WEAK,腐蚀起来比谁都快。
还有豪情,天天在一个地方聊天的人还需要MP麽,你们来我倒履相迎。

嗯, 那个广场是建在天然的悬崖上的, 还有一个COURTYARD,给那树一个最好的位置. 我看书的时候好象只能左看右看, 只有电影才有这样的全景.MINAS TIRITH好看得不象话,舰艇形的广场真酷哦。最后大家扬帆远行的时候,那个码头周围的景致象不象威尼斯?JACKSON和他的两个小孩都露了一小脸,豪情看出来否?
海港象威尼斯么? 没注意, 威尼斯不是很拥挤么?

我没看出JP和孩子


EOWYN在第二集里面也表示了她唯一害怕的是CAGE. 但是怎么说呢? 只看那片段的话只觉得她是个莽撞BULLY的TOM BOY, 不够可爱. 加入的哀悼她堂兄弟的部分我很喜欢. 我觉得第二集里她和UNCLE之间亲情戏不足,第三集里面ROHAN王死前那段温暖感人多了.
电影里ARAGON不过是一个外来的流浪汉, 没做什么就一下当上国王了, 太没说服力. 书里他可先是很低调地进入MINAS TIRITH 再慢慢做工作. 先用了GONDOR人关于国王能令伤者痊愈的传说(哼, 他做RANGER的, 怎么会没几手金创药), 对FARAMIR市恩, 加上GANDALF及ELF的全力支持(血缘和渊源联系加上政治联姻的再巩固). 最后的ARAGORN我看着有点害怕, 还是FARAMIR可亲. 他问EOWYN "你还想做王后么? 也许你愿意和我隐退到Ithilien? " EOWYN最后的选择太正确了.

是GIMLI还是ELROND说的吧.MEN ARE WEAK
没人喜欢GOLLUM么? 第二集里最可爱, 看他在水池边一边吃鱼一边唱歌, 自得其乐, 不知黄雀在后, 真是笑死我了, 不知道喜欢怜悯他好还是恨他好. 第三集里就太一味反面了, 而且幽默感不如第二集. 开头那段我非常不喜欢, 虚写就好了, 写的这么实就不好玩了.
看完第三集, 觉得前两集的故事情节忽然有了更多更深意义, 一一在记忆里鲜活起来, 象这个影评说的一样.
Last edited by 豪情 on 2003-12-30 16:20, edited 2 times in total.
SAM在电影里赚了我不少眼泪,可他一往无前的忠肝义胆、大义凛然,正面得太彻底,未免缺乏变化?
HOBBITS里头我最喜欢PIPPIN,从开头爱闯祸的毛头小伙子成长为冲锋陷阵的勇士,大战临头时的胆怯,点烽火时的机智却又把它当成好玩的游戏,怕得发抖却手戮敌人救了GANDALF,对不可知的死亡的恐惧,FARAMIR出阵时的忧伤,恶战过去后照样嘻笑打闹,吃喝完乐,血肉丰满,是很全面的HOBBIT形象。他和GANDALF的戏真好看。
我们都很喜欢GOLLUM,不是说他可爱,是那种又可怜又好笑,边干坏事边害怕的神情太生动了。他内心两个自我斗争的戏最好看,一张脸上怎会有那么丰富倏变的表情!
难为他几百岁了狡猾凶恶之余还有幼童的心态,有几句台词笑得我:When did I ever do anything to master? 伤心无辜得要命。唱个歌都是童谣式的,很多语气也孩童化:Get up sleepies! No time to waste, silly! 

HOBBITS里头我最喜欢PIPPIN,从开头爱闯祸的毛头小伙子成长为冲锋陷阵的勇士,大战临头时的胆怯,点烽火时的机智却又把它当成好玩的游戏,怕得发抖却手戮敌人救了GANDALF,对不可知的死亡的恐惧,FARAMIR出阵时的忧伤,恶战过去后照样嘻笑打闹,吃喝完乐,血肉丰满,是很全面的HOBBIT形象。他和GANDALF的戏真好看。
我们都很喜欢GOLLUM,不是说他可爱,是那种又可怜又好笑,边干坏事边害怕的神情太生动了。他内心两个自我斗争的戏最好看,一张脸上怎会有那么丰富倏变的表情!


电影里已经尽量淡化了, 导演和编剧试图用军队的长官和下属关系来解释. 我们大概已经不习惯了吧, 很多人干脆按同志爱解释 
我正在重看FELLOWSHIP. 当时已经觉得很压抑惊险了, 现在再看那不过是小菜一碟. FRODO和SAM在第一集里表演到位, 不象后来那么过火. 第一集结尾是两个HOBBITS的背影,那么小小的光脚, 前面是崎岖坎坷的长路. 非常令人感慨. 在第二第三集里面, 编剧和演员过多重复自己, 虽然电影里给了很多篇幅, 却没有更深刻或多面塑造形象. 其实书里面描写的驯服GOLLUM过程, FRODO的仁慈和智慧都胜过SAM, 电影里太努力使他们平等, 但又拘于原著的情节, 反而使两人的INTERACTION难以解释. 结果这条线闷得出奇.
小白说电影里给FARAMIR加了现代的心理学分析, 我觉得算改得好的. 书里兄弟好坏太分明了. 电影里面的BOROMIR在会议上的陈词, 和PIPPIN, MEERY练武时候的嘻闹, 说服ARAGORN的尝试, 在戒指的诱惑下的失态, 最后英勇的战死,形象也很丰满. 他说I FAILED YOU ALL", 抱歉没有战胜人性的弱点(对了, 我看到是ELROND说的MEN ARE WEAK.) 为人类的命运感到悲哀, 说服ARAGORNGONDOR需要他. ARAGORN从小生长在ELF的环境里, 怀疑人性, 因为惧怕自己身上人性的弱点自我表现流放, BOROMIR最后的醒悟和英勇给他看到人性的光明一面. 我想是BOROMIR死前的话最后打动了ARAGORN,让他面对他的使命. 我发现ARAGORN的表演在这对手戏里也显出他的缺点, 太平淡了, 典型一个偶像派演员, 什么时候都是一个表情, 给BOROMIR比了下去.
CAVA贴的画真好看, 色彩是有点象电影里的GRAY HAVEN, 我发现RIVENDELL也是这样的光线色彩
我印象里的VENICE以大理石的灰白,屋顶和砖墙的红色以及海水的绿色为主. 不记得有金黄色. 大概是季节差别
建筑风格是有点象的, 都是哥特式为主.

我正在重看FELLOWSHIP. 当时已经觉得很压抑惊险了, 现在再看那不过是小菜一碟. FRODO和SAM在第一集里表演到位, 不象后来那么过火. 第一集结尾是两个HOBBITS的背影,那么小小的光脚, 前面是崎岖坎坷的长路. 非常令人感慨. 在第二第三集里面, 编剧和演员过多重复自己, 虽然电影里给了很多篇幅, 却没有更深刻或多面塑造形象. 其实书里面描写的驯服GOLLUM过程, FRODO的仁慈和智慧都胜过SAM, 电影里太努力使他们平等, 但又拘于原著的情节, 反而使两人的INTERACTION难以解释. 结果这条线闷得出奇.
小白说电影里给FARAMIR加了现代的心理学分析, 我觉得算改得好的. 书里兄弟好坏太分明了. 电影里面的BOROMIR在会议上的陈词, 和PIPPIN, MEERY练武时候的嘻闹, 说服ARAGORN的尝试, 在戒指的诱惑下的失态, 最后英勇的战死,形象也很丰满. 他说I FAILED YOU ALL", 抱歉没有战胜人性的弱点(对了, 我看到是ELROND说的MEN ARE WEAK.) 为人类的命运感到悲哀, 说服ARAGORNGONDOR需要他. ARAGORN从小生长在ELF的环境里, 怀疑人性, 因为惧怕自己身上人性的弱点自我表现流放, BOROMIR最后的醒悟和英勇给他看到人性的光明一面. 我想是BOROMIR死前的话最后打动了ARAGORN,让他面对他的使命. 我发现ARAGORN的表演在这对手戏里也显出他的缺点, 太平淡了, 典型一个偶像派演员, 什么时候都是一个表情, 给BOROMIR比了下去.
CAVA贴的画真好看, 色彩是有点象电影里的GRAY HAVEN, 我发现RIVENDELL也是这样的光线色彩


我也转一篇评FRODO和GOLLUM的. 大意我比较赞同, 但是只看电影的话肯定不会有这个结论, 说明电影在这部分处理的不好, 太着重于战争的视觉效果了. 书里绝对不是这样狂喜地GLORIFY战争.
Frodo和Gollum, 魔戒系列的悲剧英雄
Frodo是不是英雄,对我来说本来毫无疑问. 可是有不少人觉得他配不起这个头衔. 不
太明白他们为什么这么想.我无意攻击他们的观点,也无意说服他们. 只是借此重新整
理我对Frodo的理解,希望在这过程中, Frodo之为英雄就象1+1=2一样理所当然.(我将
尽量不谈原著,只谈电影中的角色.)
我可以从某种似乎强词夺理的角度来论证.魔戒系列是不是成功的电影? 应该是吧!
Frodo是不是男主角? 我想是的.至少是最重量级的男主角之一. 象魔戒这样庞大的电
影,如果男主角角色本身或演员表演失败的话,它是不可能成功的.它整体上是表现英
雄主义的片子, 如果观众不能认可主角Frodo是英雄, 他们是不会满意的. 当然其他
角色也都是英雄,可主角不够英雄,足以摧毁整部片子.从这个角度讲, 魔戒的成功已
雄辩地证明了Frodo的成功,尽管他看起来是多么脆弱, 多么凄怨, 而且,他其实并没
有把魔戒丢下去!
想到这里,我才想到Gollum, 才发现Gollum与Frodo的不可分割. 是的, Frodo和Gollum
的关系,某个方面,比Frodo与Sam的关系更密切. 他们都是持戒人. Gollum对魔戒的刻
骨之恋和切肤之恨,无人能出其右, 只Frodo能稍稍理解. Gollum是Frodo地狱般的未
来,是Frodo的前车之鉴, 他们因此惺惺相惜又互相憎恨.
Oracle对Neo说Smith是他的opposite, 他的negative. 我觉得这句话也适用于Frodo
和Gollum, 毫不突兀. Gollum是Frodo的opposite和negative, 如果魔戒不被摧毁,Frodo
将变成Gollum, 而Gollum, 很久很久以前,曾是个单纯的水边Hobbit. 他并不想变成
现在这样, 甚至几百年后,Smeagol人格还一度击败Gollum人格, 足见他的本性之坚韧
. 所以Frodo要救他. 就在Frodo决定放开Gollum,让他做向导的那一刻, Frodo其实是
决定了他自己和Middle Earth的命运.
他说: “Maybe he does deserve death. But for now that I see him, I do pity
him.” Frodo之为英雄,在这一刻已经完成. 英雄不一定要力大无穷战无不胜, 他也
不总是在最后成功.英雄是超我的勇气, 过人的胆识和悲悯的胸怀. 这三点, Frodo都
做到了,更有孤注一掷的执着. 当然多数时候,我们看到他在银幕上跌跌撞撞,担惊受
怕,更因为Elijah的那双超大的湛蓝的眼睛, 我们不习惯看到这么”脆弱”的英雄,所
以我们不舒服.渺小短视的我们!
我承认前两集里的Frodo有点让我失望,因为他看上去真的不堪一击. 但第三集, 不知
怎的,他完全赢得了我的尊敬. 我不知道为什么,他还是时时担惊受怕,一天比一天衰
弱,甚至还当了一回唐僧. 可是就象他带着魔戒一步步爬向末日山口一样,他也带着我
越来越信任他的坚强. 是的,就是这份不顾一切,抛开生死,我不入地狱谁入地狱的勇
气,说服了我,也担起整部影片的道德重量和希望. 当他对Sam说: “No, Sam, I cannot
see them. No taste of food, no feel of water, no sound of wind… I am naked
in the dark.”谁还会怀疑这小小的Hobbit身上有着巨人的勇气?
“可是,他最后没有把魔戒丢下去,” 你说.没错,他最后失败了. 他将魔戒据为己有
. 不过试想如果Frodo站在火山口,将手一松,轻易地丢下魔戒, 是不是非常不合理?魔
戒折磨他这么久, 此刻在Saurun的地盘中心, 它的魔力更强. Frodo虽然鼓勇将它带
到这里, 但是让他放手却成了不可能的任务. 完全合理.不然至尊魔戒也不成其为至
尊魔戒了.
也只有这时, Frodo的宽容和悲悯得到了回报,救了所有人.而Gollum,如果你认为他的
出现只是做Frodo和Sam的向导,那就大错特错了.他是非常非常重要的另类英雄,他是
毁戒人.冥冥之中,Frodo和Gollum联手,才摧毁了魔戒. Gollum深恨魔戒,受涂毒最深
,由他来毁也最适合.当年我读完全书,越想越佩服作者巧夺天工的情节安排.这一情节
PJ是无法做另外的改编的,这是唯一的,最强有力的,最精巧的毁戒方式.
Gollum,不管他曾经多么卑微,罪恶,狡诈,肮脏,受难深重,他救赎了自己, 虽然他自己
并无意于这一救赎. 而且,他最后是快乐的.很欣赏影片中没有让他在坠落中恐怖地嘶
喊,而是浑忘一切地沉浸在重得魔戒的狂喜中,不知末日将临. Bless you, Gollum!
写到这里,我沉浸在对Frodo和Gollum的感怀中,一时间写不下去了.
本来还想说说Elijah Wood的表演是否合格,现在发现不必要了.我闭上眼, Elijah就
是Frodo. 他的大眼睛清澈无底,就象个真正的Hobbit一样纯洁. 如果你只记得他的眼
睛,就抱怨他没有演技,那是因为他的眼睛太会演戏了.事实上,他那副五官可以演出从
天真到绝望,从喜爱到怀疑到厌憎,从脆弱到坚强的种种表情. 上个月我重看FELLOWSHIP
, 当Frodo第一次出现在Shire的绿荫地上时,才惊觉从FELLOWSHIP到TWO TOWERS, 从
Shire到Gondor, Elijah已经把Frodo改变了这么多,而我却浑然不觉. 他是不是好演
员,不用再说了吧.
我还是喜欢ARWEN,虽然她的勇气不像eowyn那样正面,可是我觉得她倒有点符合笑嘻嘻说的“因岁月而产生的智慧和悲伤“,比起eowyn,她远远有更多的故事。但是因为我没有看过书,所以只好在网上找答案。
http://www.talkingabouttolkien.com/arda1_overview.html
这里提到The Silmarillion, 与「The Hobbit」、「The Lord of the Rings」的历史背景有很大关系,书里讲到各魔戒的来历等等,对理解后面的故事很有帮助。
http://www.talkingabouttolkien.com/arda1_overview.html
这里提到The Silmarillion, 与「The Hobbit」、「The Lord of the Rings」的历史背景有很大关系,书里讲到各魔戒的来历等等,对理解后面的故事很有帮助。
一直喜欢看诸位的评论.
昨天终于买到并狂看第二集的豪华加长版.4张的.看的累死了,压根我就没去看那四小时的全版电影.每一张碟,我只选择运行花絮,这哪叫花絮啊,我足足看了8小时还没看完.比电影精彩多少倍! 特别想找个地方说说.
导演为什么永远光着脚?我刚看电影的时候老觉着哈比人可怜,爬碎石山也赤脚,结果在音乐幕后中发现,peter在伦墩街头;在新西兰;在爱乐交响乐团里,都是大短裤光脚.结果Gullon咕鲁的造型中,脚就是照导演的脚做的,哈哈.脏西西带着老茧.
Gullon咕鲁的诞生部分,是我首先选择的(在第三张碟里).凝聚了多少心血啊.从AlanLee大师的一张插图开始二年过去诞生出影片中一个震撼人心的大眼睛Gullon,面部从原来的几百个雕塑演化到扮演者Andy的部分特征,在分裂人格那一段戏,他们是如此相似---真实和数码人物,彼此相融.配乐大师特别为咕鲁两段人格写了的配乐,胆小鬼和肮脏鬼,由编剧(二位编剧女将厉害)专门写了歌词,再特别做了一首Gullon之歌,可见这个人物在魔戒中的重要性.托尔金学者说Gullon是个悲剧英雄.
开始我觉得这个角色有点恐怖,逐渐却开始喜欢这个角色.其实他本来也是个甜蜜的哈比人,.在他自己的小天地,唱着歌儿捉鱼那一段,非常童心单纯. 全都是为了ring,他深受嫉妒仇恨复仇贪欲之折磨. 只是个可怜可悲可叹之人
他其实反映了人类真实的内心,善良懦弱与邪恶贪婪并存,为外界遭遇所左右自己的立场,善变,会很好的掩盖和说谎.
对托尔金研究的一段纪录片也非常好看,他一直被朋友所鼓励,人确实需要朋友的支撑.至于树精,好多人都烦那些长个没完的对话,其实本来更长,导演喜欢,他认为老树精有种托尔金的迂腐性格,但是学者分析,树精是托尔金按照他的好友路易斯的声音性格塑造的.
二位编剧还写了很多歌词,片中很多低声吟唱,都是有歌词的,由专门研究托尔金的学者翻译成古英语,严谨.
每当看到FRODO的扮演者以本来面目谈话的时候,我总觉得这个男孩子象宝玉,CAVA不知道有这种感觉否. 他还留了一下巴的胡子
电影版被剪辑掉恐怖的一段:当Faramir要抢夺FRODO脖子上的Ring,FRODO狂叫一声,躲到旁边的山石里,当他慢慢回过脑袋的时候,他变的Gullom一模一样!
幕后有一些FRODO化妆的镜头,面孔狰狞,头发只有几根,脑袋上满半透明皮肤显露血管.真特别有趣的感觉呢,他还对着镜子做了几个Gullom的动作学着Andy说话,象极了.
ROHAN城堡大战半兽人强兽人重头戏,最终银幕上35分钟的戏,足足拍摄了四个月,每天夜里拍摄到凌晨,所有人几乎要崩溃. 我看着都累.
ROHAN国的二个重要场景:宏伟的金殿和城堡,从无到有搭建的过程,特别好看.可惜最后它们都拆除了.特别艰险的过程. 中世纪北欧风格的金殿,每个细节拿出来看都是件艺术品,全部由美术组精心制作. 从太阳标志到宝座,绝美.我特别喜欢宝座后面五张家族徽记挂幅,由羊毛刺绣镶羊皮制作.
深受赞叹的Legolas飞身上马的镜头处理的有点假,象在变戏法,我当初看浓缩版的感觉.确实是数字化制作,奥兰多肋骨断了一根,还咬着牙拍摄那段三人追赶强兽人日夜奔跑的情节. 奥兰多只在马边略跳了一下,其余由WETA公司的制作小组参考俄国马戏团的身法,让他跃身上马.真潇洒.
电影里敬业的好演员实在太多,阿拉贡肯定是第一名.断脚趾断门牙,一手的伤.他也有幽默的一面,有个情节是他被马从河边渐渐舔醒,骑上,非常有默契的片段,他说演小哈比之一的家伙那个谁在剧组造谣说他和马有暧昧关系,他很严肃的说,我和马儿只是工作上的好伙伴.
托尔金学者把Saruman比做希特勒,好象比较确切,编剧认为,小说里除了索荣,没有一个彻底的坏人.人都是有转变而邪恶,比如说rohan国王边上的奸臣(也是个好演员,五次剔眉毛为了表现人物性格)中文翻译叫他巧言(笑),他因为自卑而成为一个变态狂的思想,有段对话中他甚至打动了EOWYN的内心世界他们四目交对,有一刻的心灵相通.
至于Arwen,本来为了爱情戏居然硬编派她在那场Rohan与兽人军队的战斗中,谢天谢地,透露剧情后网络的强烈反对呼声,把她从支援的精灵队伍中剔除了.演员自己说看了网络的文字都哭了.可见大花瓶确实不得人心.
上海这边铺天盖地的都是第三集的不清晰D版,一直在犹豫是否要看.
昨天终于买到并狂看第二集的豪华加长版.4张的.看的累死了,压根我就没去看那四小时的全版电影.每一张碟,我只选择运行花絮,这哪叫花絮啊,我足足看了8小时还没看完.比电影精彩多少倍! 特别想找个地方说说.
导演为什么永远光着脚?我刚看电影的时候老觉着哈比人可怜,爬碎石山也赤脚,结果在音乐幕后中发现,peter在伦墩街头;在新西兰;在爱乐交响乐团里,都是大短裤光脚.结果Gullon咕鲁的造型中,脚就是照导演的脚做的,哈哈.脏西西带着老茧.
Gullon咕鲁的诞生部分,是我首先选择的(在第三张碟里).凝聚了多少心血啊.从AlanLee大师的一张插图开始二年过去诞生出影片中一个震撼人心的大眼睛Gullon,面部从原来的几百个雕塑演化到扮演者Andy的部分特征,在分裂人格那一段戏,他们是如此相似---真实和数码人物,彼此相融.配乐大师特别为咕鲁两段人格写了的配乐,胆小鬼和肮脏鬼,由编剧(二位编剧女将厉害)专门写了歌词,再特别做了一首Gullon之歌,可见这个人物在魔戒中的重要性.托尔金学者说Gullon是个悲剧英雄.
开始我觉得这个角色有点恐怖,逐渐却开始喜欢这个角色.其实他本来也是个甜蜜的哈比人,.在他自己的小天地,唱着歌儿捉鱼那一段,非常童心单纯. 全都是为了ring,他深受嫉妒仇恨复仇贪欲之折磨. 只是个可怜可悲可叹之人
他其实反映了人类真实的内心,善良懦弱与邪恶贪婪并存,为外界遭遇所左右自己的立场,善变,会很好的掩盖和说谎.
对托尔金研究的一段纪录片也非常好看,他一直被朋友所鼓励,人确实需要朋友的支撑.至于树精,好多人都烦那些长个没完的对话,其实本来更长,导演喜欢,他认为老树精有种托尔金的迂腐性格,但是学者分析,树精是托尔金按照他的好友路易斯的声音性格塑造的.
二位编剧还写了很多歌词,片中很多低声吟唱,都是有歌词的,由专门研究托尔金的学者翻译成古英语,严谨.
每当看到FRODO的扮演者以本来面目谈话的时候,我总觉得这个男孩子象宝玉,CAVA不知道有这种感觉否. 他还留了一下巴的胡子

电影版被剪辑掉恐怖的一段:当Faramir要抢夺FRODO脖子上的Ring,FRODO狂叫一声,躲到旁边的山石里,当他慢慢回过脑袋的时候,他变的Gullom一模一样!
幕后有一些FRODO化妆的镜头,面孔狰狞,头发只有几根,脑袋上满半透明皮肤显露血管.真特别有趣的感觉呢,他还对着镜子做了几个Gullom的动作学着Andy说话,象极了.
ROHAN城堡大战半兽人强兽人重头戏,最终银幕上35分钟的戏,足足拍摄了四个月,每天夜里拍摄到凌晨,所有人几乎要崩溃. 我看着都累.
ROHAN国的二个重要场景:宏伟的金殿和城堡,从无到有搭建的过程,特别好看.可惜最后它们都拆除了.特别艰险的过程. 中世纪北欧风格的金殿,每个细节拿出来看都是件艺术品,全部由美术组精心制作. 从太阳标志到宝座,绝美.我特别喜欢宝座后面五张家族徽记挂幅,由羊毛刺绣镶羊皮制作.
深受赞叹的Legolas飞身上马的镜头处理的有点假,象在变戏法,我当初看浓缩版的感觉.确实是数字化制作,奥兰多肋骨断了一根,还咬着牙拍摄那段三人追赶强兽人日夜奔跑的情节. 奥兰多只在马边略跳了一下,其余由WETA公司的制作小组参考俄国马戏团的身法,让他跃身上马.真潇洒.
电影里敬业的好演员实在太多,阿拉贡肯定是第一名.断脚趾断门牙,一手的伤.他也有幽默的一面,有个情节是他被马从河边渐渐舔醒,骑上,非常有默契的片段,他说演小哈比之一的家伙那个谁在剧组造谣说他和马有暧昧关系,他很严肃的说,我和马儿只是工作上的好伙伴.
托尔金学者把Saruman比做希特勒,好象比较确切,编剧认为,小说里除了索荣,没有一个彻底的坏人.人都是有转变而邪恶,比如说rohan国王边上的奸臣(也是个好演员,五次剔眉毛为了表现人物性格)中文翻译叫他巧言(笑),他因为自卑而成为一个变态狂的思想,有段对话中他甚至打动了EOWYN的内心世界他们四目交对,有一刻的心灵相通.
至于Arwen,本来为了爱情戏居然硬编派她在那场Rohan与兽人军队的战斗中,谢天谢地,透露剧情后网络的强烈反对呼声,把她从支援的精灵队伍中剔除了.演员自己说看了网络的文字都哭了.可见大花瓶确实不得人心.

上海这边铺天盖地的都是第三集的不清晰D版,一直在犹豫是否要看.