http://qfmeng.blogbus.com/logs/112888695.html The
first part of the Lord of the Rings: The Lord of the Rings-2001
famous masterpiece , Always missed for various reasons. This time, I especially chose a clear-headed time to watch it, to enjoy this film and see how good it is. However, the greater the hope, the greater the disappointment. This film really does not suit my taste! The process of watching the whole film was quite painful. It was nearly three hours long. I was sitting on pins and needles. I had to stand up and adjust my emotions every half an hour so that I could endure all the dull and old-fashioned plots in the film. All in all, this film is a rather mediocre movie that doesn't live up to its name.
I have also been thinking about why the film’s reputation is so good and the IMDB score is so high? Is it because my taste is too low to appreciate it?
To say it is mediocre, the plot is one aspect. It's too old-fashioned, dark and light, justice and evil. And the setting of this film is very simple, without any complicated background, that is, the simple "dark lord" wants to rule the world, it has been virtualized to a certain extent, and the directors are too trouble-free. The dark side is the "dark demon", and the light side is the elves, dwarves, and humans. This setting is slightly more complicated than other films, but it is just a little bit so. With both good and evil, the two forces begin to confront each other. The whole film is based on the story of "finding the ring" and "guarding the ring". The righteous side is to flee and escape, and the evil side is to chase and chase, simply can't No matter how simple it is! Just such a simple and old-fashioned plot, with no suspense and no twists and turns, how can it attract the audience? How can I sit still?
The plot is mediocre, and the film’s narrative is also extremely dull. The plot is flat and straightforward, and the expression of the movie is also the same, like a running account, one scene continues one scene. What makes me most unbearable is that the three-hour film has no specific content at all, and a large part of the time is spent on dialogue and irrelevant plots. The various descriptions of the Hobbit villages at the beginning, the large conversations between Gandalf and Bilbo, the exchanges between the people during the march, the disputes among the people at the meeting, etc., these unrelated plots have nothing to do with the main story at all. Can be dropped or reduced. The plot that was originally very mentally retarded, coupled with the chatter of a group of people, is really unbearable. However, I must have watched the extended version of this film. I wonder if the theater version is more compact? It seems that the movie does not necessarily have to be watched in the extended version, and there must be a reason why some plots have been cut.
In addition to what I said above, the film's theme and character creation are not satisfactory. The theme of the film is very simple, nothing more than the light will never compromise with the dark, brave people will challenge the dark forces, everyone should stand the temptation, have a team spirit, trust each other and so on. This kind of American values can be seen more or less in any Hollywood movie. It is not new at all, and the same old tune is repeated! The characterization is not perfect either. Although the time is three hours, the time allocated to each character is not much. Except for the actor Frodo, which is slightly more, there are not many others. Some characters have more dramas, such as Gandalf; there are some characters who don't have a few lines, such as Legolas. As for the female characters in this film, they can be ignored. Arwen plays for ten minutes, Galadriel plays for a few minutes, and their lines are just a few sentences, which belong to the role of the dragon. I don't understand more and more, what the directors have told in three hours.
After talking about a lot of shortcomings, let's talk about the advantages. In my opinion, the advantages of this film are only the beautiful pictures and special effects. The picture of the whole film is very beautiful, many panoramic shots, many rare and beautiful scenery, many of which can be taken out as photographic art to appreciate. The special effects of this film are equally spectacular, all kinds of magnificent buildings, all kinds of exciting fighting scenes, especially the battle in the underground mine. The scene of jumping up the stairs makes me remember deeply, and this is the only thing in this film that makes me The scene of throwing into it.
Finally, let's talk about actors. The cast of this film is strong. Although the two beauties, Cate Blanchett and Liv Tyler, are reduced to vases, they are still amazing. Actors are also handsome, especially Orlando Bloom, so handsome. As for the acting skills of the actors in this film, let alone talk about it. This kind of special effects blockbuster with mentally handicapped plots can be performed with due diligence and does not require much investment.
There are a few extra words in this film that are more tangible. Whether it is a large forest, a large desert, a mountain, a river, or an iceberg or a rock, the Hobbit walks the world barefoot with a pair of iron feet, which is too ridiculous. They have neither magic nor superpowers, just physical bodies, and the film does not explain why they don't wear shoes. This setting is simply not realistic. Furthermore, if you can really walk the world barefoot, why do other people wear shoes? Another thing that makes me feel funny is that when Yan God confronted Gandalf in the underground mine, Gandalf did not move at all. Yan God himself bounced twice and collapsed the stone bridge, and then fell down by himself. It's too ridiculous! At the beginning of the film, Yan Shen was rendered, as if how terrifying it was. Who knew that he was a big fool. Didn't he know that he was so heavy that he could crush the bridge? I have never understood these two points. Did the director just take care of the overall situation and forget these little details? Or is it a little humor set up by the directors?
Recently, I have watched several such fantasy movies in Europe and the United States, the "Harry Potter" series, the "Chronicles of Narnia" series, and this movie. When I first watched "Harry Potter", I thought it was terrible; but after I watched "The Chronicles of Narnia", I realized that "Harry Potter" is actually very good-looking. Called bad. Now, when I watched this film, my thoughts have changed again. "Harry Potter" can be regarded as a masterpiece, "The Chronicles of Narnia" is not a bad movie, "The Lord of the Rings" is called a bad movie! Compared with "Harry Potter", it is simply too far behind. At least there are family, friendship, and love in the plot of "Harry Potter", which is somewhat suspenseful. I don’t know if my taste is unique, but I can’t stand the first part of the "Lord of the Rings" series. I really don't understand why its evaluation is so high? I hope that the next second part, don’t do the same, if it still does, I really will vomit blood!
Serial: 0244
[The Lord of the Rings: The Messenger of the Ring].The.Lord.Of.The.Rings.The.Fellowship.Of.The.Ring.2001.BDRip.X264-TLF
2011-03-30
View more about The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring reviews
