Finally saw The Movie

[derien]

Caw phoned a little while ago to ask if we'd like to see a movie, and I had to say that unfortunately we'd just gotten back from watching The Movie - ROTK of course. I've been squirming to see it since afrai posted her first review.:) I'll appoligize in advance for not being much of a squeer, because I know everyone's going to feel let down that I'm not ranting on about my undying love for every single character in the movie. They were all quite good, the whole movie was very good and I liked it very very much.

That said - do you think there was one single solitary drop of sentimentality that they didn't manage to wring kicking and screaming from the fiber of this flick? And overplaying things wasn't just confined to the sentimentality. I really think this would have been a case where just a tad less could have been so much more. For instance...
...the bit where Sam says "I may not be able to carry it for you, but I can carry YOU!!" If he'd said it more matter-of-factly it would have worked better. He was doing this psych-up thing, and Sam just never struck me as a psych-up type person. He's an ox - plod plod plod, there's work to be done, he will do it. That's what I always admired about Sam.

Or as another instance, Legolas playing surfer dude -yet again- on the oliphaunt. He could have shown off his finesse as an archer by shooting them in the eyes, but instead we get that horribly improbably bit where he climbs the beast and somehow stands on it's rump as it's walking. Does he have magic boots that let him stick to things like a fly?



So, yeah, I'm a picky geek. That doesn't mean I didn't enjoy the movie.:) Pippin stole the show for me, right down to his adorable paisley scarf at the end, even with his habitually somewhat stunned expression.;)

EDIT: Whups, I also meant to say... During the post-movie discussion with eor he opined that the slashers didn't have anything to work with where the hobbits were concerned. I was like 'huh??' His reasoning, however; they seem so easy-going and hedonistic that he figured they wouldn't have any angst about just shagging if they felt like it. Ergo, no angst for slashers to write about.;)

Oh, and eor also said (paraphrasing a bit so I won't have to give you the entire conversation) Legolas doesn't have a long bow, he has a short beau.;)

Comments

[carmarthen.livejournal.com]

Eh, but there's plenty of angst for Frodo that can provide opportunities for Sam to comfort him. And really, the slashers have been writing the hobbitangst (mostly F/S) and the hobbitfluff (mostly M/P) since long before the movies, so I doubt they'll have any problem.

Me, I'm vaguely squicked by hobbitsex.

Anyhow -- I don't really care if other people squee, since I'm a blasphemous heathen who finds Frodo and Sam really, really boring, and finds Sean Astin really, really unconvincing.

Legolas doesn't have a long bow, he has a short beau

*sporfle*