yournamehere

I agree with <b>Rogue</b> that there should be another category under "Masterpiece"

I've read <i>The Hobbit</i> and the <i>Lord of the Rings</i> trilogy about fifteen times now. For years, I always said that, in order to make a movie out of it, it would:
1- Have to be animated - No way could all the violent battle scenes be shown with real actors, and
2- Have to be a minimum of 12 hours.

Well, in years that followed, CGI has taken care of rule 1, and Jackson came close to rule 2

Whem I first heard about the making of these movies, my first thought was, "Please do the books justice - don't pull a Bakshi."

Well, now that I've seen 2 out of 3 of the movies, I must give Peter Jackson credit. I feel it's far from a masterpiece, but as with any true fan of the books, it would be impossible to totally please me no matter what. Tolkien and I have created Middle Earth in my imagination so many times that I find it incredible that I didn't spend <i>all</i> my time shaking my head and saying, "no - no - that's all wrong . . . . "

I'll give hime credit for making a set of fairly true-to-the-books movies.

Although - I've heard <i>The Cleansing of the Shire</i> has been left off - How do they explain what happened to Saruman? Too bad.

__________________
If you want to avoid 95% of internet spelling errors:
"If your ridiculous pants are too loose, you're definitely going to lose them. Tell your two loser friends over there that they're going to lose theirs, too."
It won't hurt your fashion sense, either.