I Don't Care How Good the Movie Is.....

[flavio]

Originally posted by: MaxDSP

Originally posted by: flavio

Originally posted by: palad

Originally posted by: flavio
The problem is when you have to take a leak, your legs are cramped up, or you are dreadfully thirsty.

So don't take a leak. What, am I the only person in the world who can hold it for 24 hours? I feel so lonely sometimes.

I can hold it but I don't like the thought of how much I have to pee intruding when I'm trying to enjoy a flick.

Why can't there be an intermission? Huh?

I read an article somewhere that said that intermissions would cost theaters a lot of cash, because theyd have less time to show movies then.

Altho, I would think theaters could recoup the cost since many people would be likely to get refills on their pop, popcorn, etc or buy more food if there is an intermission

Makes sense to me. i would expect an immediate rush at the snack counter during any intermission.

 

[Spooner]

bah! that's crap! i'd only be looking for a 15 minute intermission

although, could they do that with such large theaters?

 

[glen]

Originally posted by: Spooner
it should NOT be 3 hours long

going to see two towers with the GF tonight, and i'm actually dreading sittin there for 3 hours, even though i really want to see the movie

Am I alone here?

Yep. but I would not mind an intermission if over 3 hours.

 

[Lola]

i think it just depends on how into the movie you are. IF you are watching a movie that your eyes are glued to, chances are, the time will go by alot faster

 

[isildur]

Originally posted by: palad
Can you say 'short attention span', boys and girls?

"Short attent... oooh, look at the pretty lights!"

I hate it when they use big words and long sentances with all those....funny..........what I was saying?

 

[Muadib]

Originally posted by: Beau

Originally posted by: palad

Originally posted by: flavio
The problem is when you have to take a leak, your legs are cramped up, or you are dreadfully thirsty.

So don't take a leak. What, am I the only person in the world who can hold it for 24 hours? I feel so lonely sometimes.

I'm sure most men can, but holding it for an extended period of time puts un-neaded strain on the prostate, which can effect your ability to get and retain an erection.

Do you have a link to back this up?

 

[Jzero]

I found that TTT "FELT" much longer than FOTR. I still liked it, but I hadn't finished the book, and having finished the book, I'm sorely disappointed.

Whereas I felt that with FOTR he cut stuff that was unnecessary to the grand scheme of things, in TTT he cut important things (Gandalf's confrontation with Saruman, and Shelob, for instance (I guess they'll appear in ROTK?)), and he invented a lot of useless bullsh!t like the whole crap with Eowyn.

He completely changed Faramir's character, and where the hell did Faramir drag Frodo and Sam to when they got attacked by the flying Nazgul?

I'd have sooner Jackson delete the extraneous nonsense and included more of the core material.

 

[CraigRT]

I hate long movies too.
and the damn thing only got 3.5 stars in some sort of rating that i saw.
not going to bother seeing until it comes out on DVD...

 

[FrustratedUser]

Originally posted by: Spooner
it should NOT be 3 hours long

going to see two towers with the GF tonight, and i'm actually dreading sittin there for 3 hours, even though i really want to see the movie

Am I alone here?

No, 3 hours of crap is to long.

 

[FrustratedUser]

Originally posted by: alm99
you are not alone I waited till FOTR came out on DVD before I saw it. I swear the longest 3 hours of my life. I almost turned it off because I was falling asleep.

I did fall asleep 20 mins during TT.

 

[AUMM]

the only problem i had with sitting for 3 hrs was that i started getting stiff and my neck hurt, but the movie was definetly worth it, i was wishing it was even longer. wud probably be nice if it had an intermission

 

[tk149]

The measure of a great long movie, is how short it seems.

TTT went by superquick for me. "Totally Awesome" "Two Thumbs Up" "Must See on the Big Screen"

 

[thomsbrain]

it could have been 6 hours as far as i'm concerned. what they should have done was have 3 2 hour movies for each installment, for a total of 9 movies and 18 hours of LOTR goodness.

 

[Glitchny]

Originally posted by: poopaskoopa

Originally posted by: flavio
Are you guys really against intermissions in long movies?

Yeah. Now, TTT(a.k.a. LOTR1.1 I mean... was that movie any different than the first one???) shoulda been shorter.

umm yeah the movie is tottaly different than the first one, hard to compare actually. TTT is much more action oriented and goes by faster. and whoever said that the book for TTT is 600-700 pages is off by quite a bit. caus ei have the book and its maybe 400 pages.

glitch

 

[tk149]

Originally posted by: Glitchny

Originally posted by: poopaskoopa

Originally posted by: flavio
Are you guys really against intermissions in long movies?

Yeah. Now, TTT(a.k.a. LOTR1.1 I mean... was that movie any different than the first one???) shoulda been shorter.

umm yeah the movie is tottaly different than the first one, hard to compare actually. TTT is much more action oriented and goes by faster. and whoever said that the book for TTT is 600-700 pages is off by quite a bit. caus ei have the book and its maybe 400 pages.

glitch

Do you understand that there are LOTS of different printings of the LoTR, and that some are going to have different numbers of pages?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Spooner
it should NOT be 3 hours long

going to see two towers with the GF tonight, and i'm actually dreading sittin there for 3 hours, even though i really want to see the movie

Am I alone here?

Very much alone. I would have sat through 8 hours if they could have made it truer to the book.

 

[Eli]

It looks like you're pretty much stranded on a desert island here, guy.