Amph One Thread To Rule Them All: The Rings of Power + The Hobbit & Lord of the Rings Trilogies

So it's like the news media with "good thing or bad thing"?

 

What the above poster refers to is that Rottentomatoes is provides an aggregate measurement for how well reviewers like a movie based solely on whether a review is overall negative or positive, not how positive or how negative a review is.

Consider an example. Let's say two movies are reviewed by 4 reviewers; movie A gets scores of 10, 10, 10, and 1; movie B gets scores of 6, 6, 6, and 6 (out of 10). So, movie A scores a mean grade of 7.75; movie B scores a mean grade of 6. So reviewers would rate movie A higher on average than movie B. But the Rottentomatoes scores would be 75% for movie A (three good reviews, one bad), and 100% for movie B (four good reviews).

So, in that sense, Rottentomatoes scores can potentially be quite misleading.

 

Nice read

 

good read

 

Sucky read

 

Go drunk, you're home.

 

My local theater is getting mother******* IMAX just in time for TDOS!!!!!!!!!



I may be a little excited. Just a little.

 

They do also provide an average of the ratings each movie got. So, they would also note the mean grades you list above.

Anyway, I use the RT score and the IMDB score; I average those two and see what the aggregate is. If the aggregate is over 66%, I consider going to see it. Unless I just want to see the movie. But anyway, that's what I've used this year and I've seen far more movies that ranked at a personal rating of *** 1/2 to **** stars than all the other star ratings put together. So, my method seems pretty reliable to me.

 

I hope this movie is so good that it wins 30 million Oscars and cures male pattern baldness!!!!!!!

 

I liked Variety's take on the Hobbit trilogy relative to Lord of the Rings

The Hobbit:
A Protracted Journey to a Less Interesting Destination

The emerging critical consensus seems to be that the Distillation of Smog has the same bloated, self-indulgent feel as Part 1, but luckily we're rejoining Middle Earth during a more entertaining and action-packed part of the overlong story, so overall it makes for a better movie.

 

This movie is gonna be awesome!!!

 

Freeman

 

I do love that guy.

 

Going to see this on Saturday. The first one was a big meh fest for me. It was way too long, the intro itself was totally overlong. I did like the random nods to things in the LOTR trilogy though. The swords that Gandalf finds in particular.

Anyways I hope this one is better but its kind of hard to top the LOTR trilogy. I was watching ROTK a few days ago on tv and it just struck me how...fake...The Hobbit looked. Was it just me? Maybe it was the frames per second but it felt too CGish.

 

The Hobbit is using a different style, with smoother and more brilliant colors, for the less dark and more magical time.

 

who woulda thunk

 

1. The Red digital camera they used. LotR used 35mm film. Digital movies can look good especially nowadays, but for whatever reason the Red-brand stuff usually doesn't.

2. The 48 fps. IIRC, it can look weird even scaled down to a more "normal" framerate.

 

DOS is long too, just saying

AUJ - 169 minutes
TDOS - 161 minutes

 

Of course it is its Peter Jackson, he doesn't know how to make a normal length movie the last 13 years. I'm fine with it being long I just want a little more substance this time around.

The camera makes a lot of sense, thanks for the info!

 

I just hope that after all of this is over we get a 3 hour supercut of what the movie should have been.

 

Generally getting good reviews, with most saying it's a vast improvement on the first.

I don't have a problem with it be long as long as the time is put to good use. The problem with AUJ was that half of it could have been cut out. It also leaves Jackson needing to cram quite a bit in for DOS, especially since he's adding in so much White Council/Necromancer stuff.

 

TWO. MORE. DAYS.

 

Come to Austria, movies open on Thursdays, and Hobbit has a midnight showing tonight.

 

I fully plan on making a trek halfway across the world to see this tonight. The movie itself is about a third of that time anyway. I could spend the entirety of the time on the plane or more watching the LOTR EEs on my ipod or something.

 

Going to Grauman's Chinese at midnight with friends again. Tickets are in my possession.

I also bought the EE, but I haven't watched it yet. I must confess that while I do consider the EEs to be the definitive version, my main motivation was the special features. The LotR EE special features were absolutely brilliant; I watched some of them nearly as often as the films themselves. The content was great, and there was so much of it. This time it's the same. In fact, it actually seems to be a continuation of the LotR ones. The first Appendix is numbered 7, not 1. Looking forward to diving into them.