Decennial, in case you're not hip to the term, means: 1. relating to or lasting for ten years, or 2. occurring every ten years. It's really a word that we should hear more often. Anyway, this will be my series where I count down my favorites from the last decade, and since I don't plan on it taking 10 years to finish, we're going to go with the second definition.
Previous day's posts:
12/21: Intro/#10: Idiocracy
12/22: #9: Children of Men
12/23: #8: Pan's Labyrinth
12/24: #7: Wall*E
12/26: #6: Memento
Number 5 on the RD-oBCDS is...
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
Many tried, and many failed. Even The Matrix, a sci-fi origin tale that dovetailed perfectly with the booming popularity of the internet, could not sustain its momentum outside of the first movie. The Lord of the Rings trilogy, having already been a popular and known commodity for decades, did what no others could: rival the Star Wars universe for the battle for geek's hearts everywhere.
Working from Tolkien's source material was a disadvantage in addition to being an advantage, though. Though there might have been a built-in audience at least for the first film, its success with the public (and as a film in general) would largely determine its overall place in the cinematic world. Had it not been a rousing success, a la The Golden Compass, interest in future adaptations would have evaporated. Instead, Peter Jackson just so happened to hit it out of the ballpark, setting up the foundation for what would be the defining trilogy of the new millennium.
Previous day's posts:
12/21: Intro/#10: Idiocracy
12/22: #9: Children of Men
12/23: #8: Pan's Labyrinth
12/24: #7: Wall*E
12/26: #6: Memento
Number 5 on the RD-oBCDS is...
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)Many tried, and many failed. Even The Matrix, a sci-fi origin tale that dovetailed perfectly with the booming popularity of the internet, could not sustain its momentum outside of the first movie. The Lord of the Rings trilogy, having already been a popular and known commodity for decades, did what no others could: rival the Star Wars universe for the battle for geek's hearts everywhere.
Working from Tolkien's source material was a disadvantage in addition to being an advantage, though. Though there might have been a built-in audience at least for the first film, its success with the public (and as a film in general) would largely determine its overall place in the cinematic world. Had it not been a rousing success, a la The Golden Compass, interest in future adaptations would have evaporated. Instead, Peter Jackson just so happened to hit it out of the ballpark, setting up the foundation for what would be the defining trilogy of the new millennium.
3 people have chosen wisely: on "The Really Drawn-out Blog Cabins Decennial Spectacular: #5"
meh.
Since I've never seen them, I'm thinking of watching them back to back and doing a live blog. I'm wondering I'm even capable of doing that. For sure it will be a true test of will, not unlike Frodo's own quest.
JLG: If you do, it must be the extended versions. I tried to watch all 3 extended versions back to back once. I made it through Two Towers and gave up.
Gay - w.e., dood. There's not a lot separating them all in my book, but the third is just decades too long and has waaaaayyy too many false endings (and a big spider, which scares my tender soul) and the second...I don't know, it just doesn't have the impact of the first. Or maybe I'm just not a fan of 45-minute battle scenes. Either way, you're wrong and I'm right - I think the first is most people's favorite of the three.
Post a Comment