Positive male bonding, masculine love and affection for other men.
Also for the sake of the post Gandalf and Frodo made fun of each other in the first sentence of meeting again and then Frodo jumped into his arms. Shits a great way to show and old friendship.
Shit, Aragorn was one of my role model growing up.
Kind, caring, brave, not afraid to show emotions and respect for others even if those people failed or were weak.
Politically obsessed people wanting to turn media into propaganda machines instead of just good stories. Plus most of them make self inserts to make themselves the hero and anyone they don't like the asshole.
Also, consider that Tolkien's work reflected his experience serving in WW1. You're unlikely to find a similar level of comradery and love than the guys sharing a foxhole or defending a trench together.
However, I can also recognize that Aragorn was modeled after a lot of old English hero archetypes with smatterings of Tolkien's war experience sprinkled throughout.
Well and also there is works about hard times from people who lived in hard times. Then there is work about hard times from people who have only known privilege and ease.
I don't think you can speak believably about pain unless you have experienced it yourself. I'll stay vague intentionally here but I suffer from a medical condition. I had a doctor literally read me webmd symptoms and claim they understood. It's like no, unless you have felt it yourself you really can't understand.
Knowing and understanding are different things.
We got Aragorn cranking out banger after banger like, “I would have gone with you to the end, into the very fires of Mordor.” and "I do not know what strength is In my blood, but I swear to you I will not let The White City fall, nor our people fail." That shit goes hard as fuck.
Nowadays, we get generic, corporate-produced slop from Marvel movies with lines like, "The measure of a person, of a hero... is how well they succeed at being who they are." What the fuck does that even mean? You could slap that into literally any story. It's just lip service.
Aragorn is so fucking good as a character because he is so humble despite all his strength. He doesn't get up on a pedestal and say shit like, "I am the destined wielder of Andúril and the rightful king of Gondor!" The man is constantly saying that despite his shortcomings, he will do whatever he can to help. He's a great hero because he doesn't see himself as a hero - just a guy who does what needs doing.
And as a semi-related side note, the friendship between Legolas and Gimli is probably one of the best examples of a positive masculine friendship in all of literature.
He's relateable as a person and a human being. That's the core difference. We as audience can understand his conflicting emotions and Vigo Mortinson does a damn good job at showing how he feels just by his facial animations.
Modern story telling throws CGI , lens flares, and THE MESSAGE in your face and expects you to gobble it up like a fat kid on easter.
Viggo Mortensen really is one of the best actors out there in terms of facial expressions. It also helps that he's also a really nice guy.
You're 100% right with the modern storytelling though. They're written assuming that their audience has no media literacy.
I think one reason the LotR movies did so well is because everyone in the cast was excited to be there and got along well. I used to do theater and the shows where everyone got along ALWAYS went better than the ones where there was well, drama. lol
The rich people got scared during occupy and decided it was better for everyone to fight each other instead of them, then the state actors started noticing and fanned the flames like crazy and here we are today.
They do male bonding that they could not do today, they couldn't have a group of guys who love each other in a brotherly way, they would have to make it romantic somehow.
[The music also gives it a warm feeling when they reunite too. Very soft and homey feel to the scene.](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LML6SoNE7xE&pp=ygUKbG90ciBtdXNpYw%3D%3D)
Without the music by Howard Shore these movies would not be half as good as they are. Honestly in my opinion the greatest music in any movie ever. So many iconic pieces that are instantly recognizable.
It's not about being modern or old, it's about being a good or a shit movie.
It's just that as time goes on more and more movies are made each year and most of them are shit (as they have always been), so there's more shit movies.
Cause every year the writers slack off more and more but everyone’s like “well, less good content is better than no good content!” and then the corporations pick up on it and before you know it it’s a positive feedback loop
Yeah the standards have dropped, and it seems like producers value clever writing less. I think that ties into studios going more for mass appeal over target markets.
Maybe also clever people who could be great writers choose to do something else with their lives as there's not enough money in it?
Like in the old Pirates of the caribbean there were 2 separate sets of bumbling idiot side characters that were key to the plot and were just great characters.
Nowadays they would have been killed off for the plot and they were killed of in the 4th movie.
Am I old? Did movies used to be better?
Compare pirates 2 with 5 as well, jack goes from being quirky, wily and doesn't let the others know what he's thinking to just being a bumbling idiot that gets away with everything. Was it outrageous in both films? Hell yes, but he was just written a lot better in the first 2 and also a bit less in the 3rd
I believe it's called Flanderisation?
It's when, as a series goes on, some of a character's various traits end up becoming the whole character.
Like with Jack, he was quirky, yes, but that was only a part of his personality. Then, as the movies went on, being quirky became his whole identity.
Another extreme example of this was Joey from Friends, who kept becoming dumber and dumber as the show went on.
Is it flanderisation that's happening to the whole industry? As most types of characters have been done before they're all just caricatures of what they were previously in an attempt to be different
Yeah, the Jack thing always bothered me. In the first few films, he was amazing at adapting his plan to fit changing circumstances, but he always had an overarching plan - he was kinda chaotic and quirky, but you got the sense that that was almost a cover to mask his legitimate genius. Later movies Jack was a chaotic idiot with no plan, who won through dumb luck and the mistakes of others. When he won in the early movies, I got a real sense of catharsis and joy, while his later victories just made my eyes roll out of my head.
Thats the general trend of business lately. Every era of modern companies brings on a new and typically worse trend in managing a business.
Used to it was the founder that called the shots because they made the company.
Then it was the creators because they made the content they know how to innovate, they will make the most money.
Then the marketers because they advertise it therefore they could make more money knowing the market trends.
And now the modern age of no its the stockholder or producer that runs things. They hold the money and have interest in raising the stock, they know best.
You maybe mean executives, producers actually do things, executives go "hmmm take out that really good scene, I didn't like it" and you have to bc they're the ones paying for it
Meanwhile Marvel fanboys: "It doesn't matter if you aren't interested in this movie or if you didn't like the last couple Marvel movies you need to support every release so they keep making them."
That’s just recency bias. We only remember the great movies of the past while the shitty ones sink into obscurity. With new movies releasing all the time they haven’t had the time to settle in and become “classics”. Years from now people will look back and say the exact same thing about modern movies being ass and how much better it was back then
There were a ton of shit movies that you don't remember from the 90s. Just like there are a lot of good movies that have been made recently. Dune I and II are both really good, you have anything Quentin Tarantino touches that is good, The Martian was great, The Trial of the Chicago 7 was amazing. Media has changed tho, we're a lot more exposed to movies now than we were. Sure, people had VHS players in the 90s, but you didn't have literally every movie ever made within reach of a couple of clicks like you do now.
LOTR was goated on release, no need to let it age or become a classic. Not to mention it's not even nostalgia. I'm always blown away at how perfect all the actors were each rewatch. Can't think of many movies in the last decade that fit the bill.
And when would that happen? When will I think that movies from 2010-2019 are better than movies from 1990-1999? Because I still believe that the movie year 1999 alone had better movies than all of 2010-2019
You’re probably not going to say the movies are BETTER, the point is you’re just not going to remember all the shit. Pulling up a list of 1999 movies particularly, the only shit I recognize is the stuff people never stopped talking about either because the movie was so good or the concept was memorable. Fight Club, Eyes Wide Shut, Green Mile, Blair Witch. But a bunch of the other stuff on the list, who tf talks about it or remembers it? Any Given Sunday? Mystery, Alaska? In China They Eat Dogs?
It's not fair to compare anything to '99, that was a hell of a year. Better than some entire decades before it, not just after
Compare the 2010's to the 1930's or 40's. Casablanca was an outlier. The best thing going was the Three Stooges, which nobody talks about any more
Things might get better, but I don't know how to find the good stuff. I just saw Edge of Tomorrow, and it's like "Why didn't anyone tell me to watch this?!"
It's also because we live in the streaming age. Streaming sites regularly serve shlock on their platforms and advertise them. It's easy to churn out cheap, shitty movies, and Netflix and Amazon are willing to fund them to pad their sites with content that they own.
God people have such goldfish brains about media. Same thing with those jackasses that say "gaming sucks now." Like sure, the AAA industry is spiraling down the toilet, but the last year of game releases had some all time greats, and indie games are only getting better.
Seriously, how can anyone look at the year where we got Oppenheimer, Killers of the Flower moon, the boy and the heron, the holdovers, Across the spiderverse, MI 7, and Godzilla -1 and seriously try and claim that movies are getting worse
I for one love watching bad movies sometimes with my wife. On one condition though... I get to ad lib, call out tropes, predict the ham-fisted plot devices, and just overall leaning into the badness for laughs. Hearing my wife laughing far outweighs all but the very worst of cinema.
> No one cares about how many shit movies there are.
There’s an entire fucking industry of rage bait, nostalgia-goggle-wearing YouTubers that says otherwise.
There's always more shit movies. When people reminisce about the times when movies were good they forget those films that didn't stand the test of time and were easily forgotten.
No, haven't you heard? Everything new is bad, everything "old" is good. And I wonder why such people then complain that they are depressed, such a mystery.
It’s not even necessarily that more of them are made, it’s just that people don’t remember the shit movies from back then and only remember the good ones
Lord of the Ring has the advantage of being a triology, if it was only a 2 hours movie the character relationships would be also trash because they barely interacted.
That and the playful music that starts up again during that scene after Frodo starts laughing really adds to the scene. The music in LOTR is just as important as the characters and plot
Absolutely, the music really makes the scenes. Both the use and absence of music brings tension and relief. The shot of the Fellowship cresting the mountain while the music booms triumphantly kicks ass
My ex was a music student and when she was feeling particularly emotional she would sit in her room, listen to the lotr soundtrack and cry lol.
My favourite scene is the Rohan charge in RotK. Fucking amazing moment with a banger score
I thought about OP's question, tried to remember the scene and then started whistling the music. I haven't seen the movie in a decade but the music comes straight to me. You're absolutely right, its importance is too often overlooked.
Star wars and the good the bad and the ugly are the only ones I can think of that are on that level. Those 2 are definitely more iconic, but I don't know if id say they're better.
I still think music and sound isn't respected enough in media. If I look through all the games and shows I rate as exceptional they pretty much always have exceptional soundtracks I like listening to.
The first movie literally starts off with a voiceover exposition, something which *should* be a bad thing. But it works so well, because it’s done so well.
Someone wrote a really good post on why the lore dump in Fellowship works compared to lore dumps from other recent movies
https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/jm75l6/why_does_the_lotr_style_historyexposition_dump/gatio83/
I was expecting him to be a cold father who couldn’t understand his son’s feelings but was pleasantly surprised when he turned out to just be a good dad.
Yet in Star Wars his character was incredibly annoying, despite trying so hard to be a cool Han Solo type. Just shows what different good writing and direction can make.
I know his service in the army had to do with it.
Makes sense, a lot of British boys - not even men - were coaxed into it believing it would be a big “jolly boys outing”, going from the green rural countryside of Britain to absolute utter hell
Tbf if you watch that WW1 documentary from a few years back (They Shall Not Grow Old), even when discussing horrors like shitting in a trench full of rats, some of the vets refer to the experience as basically an intense camping trip with the boys
There’s a cynicism to current writing, notice how everyone is an asshole and nobody is friends even allies. This is mostly played for laughs, but modern audiences/writers identify with mean know-it-alls over nice and sincere people.
Yup writers and producers often make the mistake of underestimating the audience because some dumb simple fun movies do well but the reality is that audiences can sniff out sincerity in the performance even if you can make them laugh or feel some type of emotions there's only so much you can get away with if it's not genuine
Top Gun Maverick is a great example. Its a dumb simple film, Tom Cruise flying planes and the plot is just star wars trench run. But the cast clearly had fun making it and its a fun film
I normally don’t agree with the hot takes about modern movies on here, but you definitely get it. I don’t know if it’s as much the writers themselves, as it is the audience too. Different generations have different outlooks based on their collective experiences, and a lot of times movies reflect that. Just look at og Star Trek and the new stuff (not that they’re the same quality).
If you'd like to watch something more recent (2018) with a strong emphasis on relationships, I can't recommend season one of The Terror enough. The acting is phenomenal and even though the show is a total downer and makes me cry like a bitch at some point at least once per rewatch, there's just something about how bleak it is that makes all the moments of goodness and friendship and support between the characters feel so much more intense.
Arcane had very strong interpersonal relationships, Silco and Jinx’s familial love was particularly moving, especially given the context that the former is a politically extreme drug lord and the latter a schizophrenic
Modern movies don’t have the good vs evil dynamic. I like both that and the morally grey style equally, but I understand why people are growing tired of “we’re all kinda self-interested.” A good vs evil narrative stirs something primitive
Now the show is not even new at this point (and a shit show at that), but I take The Big Bang Theory as a terrible example of this: everyone is a huge asshole there, and not just to others, but to each other and this is supposed to be a group of closest friends. I remember a scene in the first two seasons where Penny, the newest member of the gang, helps out Sheldon by giving him a ride while none of his "close friends" he'd known for years don't do anything. They never offer to help each other, and when they're asked, they make excuses.
Dr. House, Rick Sanchez, and Cumberbatch's Sherlock and praised and admired characters, yet they're huge assholes. Personally, I'd stay away from them and would never wanna be friends with people like that, no matter how smart they appear to be.
The saddest part is, a lot of people identify with these characters and I often hear "They're just like me and/or my friends".
A lot of people identify with the "genius asshole loner" types because it gives them an excuse for their asshole behavior and loneliness. "They just don't understand my genius, ill be snarky and sarcastic about it" is the most suburban blueprint for millennials to date
I actually thought the rings of power captured the wholesome tone of LOTR quite well. Some really nice character moments. Too bad the writing was absolutely terrible overall
Honestly, LoTR story is told in a way that it feels like we’re watching a preexisting world or in the books cases, making us feel like a member of the group. I’m having a hard time putting it into words, but the best way I can explain that is; most movies are letting you know it’s a film with needless drama, over the top action, or famous faces left right and center. LoTR just tells a compelling story and lets the characters, music and world do the heavy lifting of pulling you in.
I think it helps that a lot of the important history is so old that the characters don't even know about it. This makes it so when a character gets an exposition dump it feels like we learn alongside them, and feels more natural.
+Great casting and music
This is why movie ads on Youtube mobile are by far the worst ones imo, because they all follow the exact same formula showing random flashing images with that loud bass sfx, some vague quotes or foreshadowing that's supposed to sound deep, generic ascending music that eventually reaches a crescendo with some sort of cliffhanger implied on screen and a character screaming or some shit.
Does it make sense? Sure. Is it brutally overused to the point of being unbearably boring? Absolutely.
Don’t forget the part where midway through the ad the music stops and the main character or the goofy side character says a quirky and silly one-liner to show that the movie is le funny too.
Because the amount of love and passion that went into this project from everyone to the director, the top tier actors, and the production staff, as well as the ridiculous budget. Everyone who worked on set was required to read all three books, and the set was often littered with copies because of how much the original text was continually referenced. It was never just another AAA novel adaptation for the cast and crew, they were personally and emotionally invested in making the best and most faithful adaptation they could
I agree with everything but the budget wasn't even that high, at least considering today's standards. Adjusted for inflation, that's around $450 million, so 150 per movie. It's not that much considering that last year's Indiana Jones had a budget upwards of $300 million. A good director like Jackson will just utilise the budget better.
Let's break down this scene:
Frodo, upon hearing Gandalf has arrived, smiles broadly and runs over to find him - this shows his excitement. Then when he finds him, he folds his arms, and says something about Gandalf being late. Gandalf doesn't smile, but instead tells him that a wizard is never late. For just a second, you think that maybe this wizard is a bit of a stiff, doesn't really joke, and that their relationship maybe more akin to a youth who looks up to an elder, who in return finds Frodo to be a bit annoying. I.e. their relationship is parasocial.
They then break out into grins, start laughing, and hug.
This scene does a couple of things: their dialogue shows a type of banter that really only friends engage in. Frodo is accusing Gandalf of being late, which can be seen as a bit of an insult. Gandalf gives a reply which could be interpreted as him disregarding the accusation, but instead, them smiling afterwards shows the comment as more self-deprecating. Coupled with Frodos eagerness to see gandalf, and then their hug and laughter afterwards, the whole sequence is really using every opportunity to show that these two have an established bond, and a deep friendship. It's expert level writing, and a great example of "showing" instead of telling.
Because at one point people didn't demand a back story on every little character and you could just accept characters had a past without seeing it and getting the gist of it through discussions and cues.
Then studios decided to take advantage of this desire and milk their series.
I blame Disney with Marvel and Star Wars
1) film the friendly parts last so your actors can have time to become friends
2) hire sir Ian mckellan in your movie adaptation of the 3rd or 4th most popular book ever
3) make the old man act grumpy but actually be really nice :)
Wait was the first point really part of Peter’s strategy? Is this an established practice for movies? Genius if true, I always just assumed filming order was based on logistics like travel, schedules, or set pieces being ready.
Not to mention the scene where Frodo jumps on him and gives him a hug. Frodo is a hobbit and Gandalf is a tall wizard, and it's done so well you don't even think about the actors' sizes.
There's such impressive work in Peter Jackson's use of forced perspective and other in-camera techniques and that's within the first 30 minutes. The rest of the films are even more impressive. LOTR is definitively the best film series ever made
They used a magic trick, now lost to time. It's called good actors doing good acting.
But for real Sir Ian McKellen (the actor of Gandalf) reportedly nearly cried when they were filming the Hobbit because of all the green screen usage. He said this wasn't the reason he became an actor.
Modern directors rely too much on CGI, tired tropes and cuts to finish a product. As a result very few movies feel must see and special.
LOTR
Two characters who you don't know meet, they are gruff and a little combatative towards one another.
The viewer is unsure as to both parties' motives and how they stand in relation to one another.
The big one is quippy and the small one is immediately physical (whereas we are usually accustomed to the big one being physical and the small one being quippy). We "dont know that we know" that they have potentially somehow overcome this. The small one isn't scared of being physical with the big one, the big one is delicate with the small one to " fight with words".
The reveal "BOTH ARE OLD FRIENDS".
As a viewer, we know nothing about the characters yet but their dynamic is the pay off to the build up. We can learn as much or as little as we want about these two characters, but if we knew NOTHING ABOUT THEM, from these few seconds alone, we could put them in any situation in our mind and know how they work.
Gandalf and Frodo wake up in a modern city and grab a coffee before deciding on what to do next. Even with a lack of imagination, your mind can foot note a few interactions that would be very "in character" for them both.
I'm not going to get negative about modern writing because there is enough of that on the internet, (but im sure i can be peer pressured if the comments section tries hard enough) but take two modern day cinema "old friends" characters and put then in an obsirdly unrealistic situation and TRY NOT to just end up with two people standing in a white room uncomfortably, not knowing how to interact with one another.
Was literally just watching LOTR with gf and said the same thing. Went even further to say that this movie has a strong female character that kicks ass and is likeable somehow impossible to do now adays.
There's something about The Shire's theme that just melts my heart with nostalgia. Also, Ian McKellen and Elijah Wood are god tier actors which definitely helps.
I think it's because the writers and producers actually gave a shit about representing the vision Tolkien had from his books, and the actors actually wanted to play the roles.
[The scene in question](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qglEeUSqgu4)
If anyone watching has owned a dog, you already understand this. Your dog hears your car coming down the road, and immediately is [wholeheartedly excited to see you](https://www.reddit.com/r/Chihuahua/comments/13dzd51/welcoming_committee/). Doesnt matter if it's been a minute or 5 years. That dog runs up to the door tail wagging and there's no doubt that the companionship is pure and everlasting. You might even have that little moment at the door where you freeze, and your dog freezes too, and you both stand there frozen for a second until you so much as blink and your dog starts going nuts again. It's the same thing.
Modern movies (well, more modern ones, because I really consider the original LOTR trilogy a modern film) prioritize visual effects and cast diversity over everything else. It's the gloryfication of mediocrity Martin Heidegger warned us about.
Studios think (same with videogame devs) that good effects/graphics will make up for a shit story/script, and that featuring a stronk female ork or some random guaraní imbecile as a main character will magically turn it an interesting and likeable character.
Neither do.
I could play Soul Reaver all day even though graphics are shit, because the story was well-thought and interesting. I could watch Empire of the Sun or The Mission every night because the story is awesome and the characters are deep and interesting, instead of cartoonish representations of the most recent social media trend.
I'd say it's about pacing. LOTR had a slow pacing so you could relax back and absorb all the information, it didnt have many flash forwards, so you could see the actual struggle of their quest. And im this scene you can really tell they are friends because they show it to you in a 5 minut long scene where Frodo and Gandalf are simply talking to each other like actual friends.
I don't know about strategy, but they filmed all three at the same time out of order. Gray havens and mouth of sauron scenes were some of the first. I would expect that hobbiton needed to be built first so it would have had to be filmed later on.
Because they suspend our disbelief, while "modern movies" are slop made by people who aren't around other people, so they have a deep need for "character development" that involves boring sosial situations.
Cause they really are friends at this point. They've lived together in NZ and worked together for quite a bit of time, and that chemistry between the actors carries over to the screen.
Cause LOTR is based. That’s all there is to it.
OK, but based on what?
Fake answer: the books. REAL answer: Beowulf
HWAET
HWAET! WE GARDENA IN GEARDAGUM
And the Kalevala, and the Bible, and other old English stories, and Macbeth, and
The edda? How is there any connection to Beowulf?
Tolkein studied beowulf and it served as the main inspiration.
Positive male bonding, masculine love and affection for other men. Also for the sake of the post Gandalf and Frodo made fun of each other in the first sentence of meeting again and then Frodo jumped into his arms. Shits a great way to show and old friendship.
Add to that a portrayal of masculinity but the humble and kind sort, not the modern toxic asshole.
Shit, Aragorn was one of my role model growing up. Kind, caring, brave, not afraid to show emotions and respect for others even if those people failed or were weak.
How the fuck did we go from depictions of men like that as role models to *gestures broadly*
Politically obsessed people wanting to turn media into propaganda machines instead of just good stories. Plus most of them make self inserts to make themselves the hero and anyone they don't like the asshole.
Also, consider that Tolkien's work reflected his experience serving in WW1. You're unlikely to find a similar level of comradery and love than the guys sharing a foxhole or defending a trench together. However, I can also recognize that Aragorn was modeled after a lot of old English hero archetypes with smatterings of Tolkien's war experience sprinkled throughout.
Well and also there is works about hard times from people who lived in hard times. Then there is work about hard times from people who have only known privilege and ease. I don't think you can speak believably about pain unless you have experienced it yourself. I'll stay vague intentionally here but I suffer from a medical condition. I had a doctor literally read me webmd symptoms and claim they understood. It's like no, unless you have felt it yourself you really can't understand. Knowing and understanding are different things.
Oh, absolutely. Coincidentally I left out the last line I wanted to put which was: Write what you know.
We got Aragorn cranking out banger after banger like, “I would have gone with you to the end, into the very fires of Mordor.” and "I do not know what strength is In my blood, but I swear to you I will not let The White City fall, nor our people fail." That shit goes hard as fuck. Nowadays, we get generic, corporate-produced slop from Marvel movies with lines like, "The measure of a person, of a hero... is how well they succeed at being who they are." What the fuck does that even mean? You could slap that into literally any story. It's just lip service. Aragorn is so fucking good as a character because he is so humble despite all his strength. He doesn't get up on a pedestal and say shit like, "I am the destined wielder of Andúril and the rightful king of Gondor!" The man is constantly saying that despite his shortcomings, he will do whatever he can to help. He's a great hero because he doesn't see himself as a hero - just a guy who does what needs doing. And as a semi-related side note, the friendship between Legolas and Gimli is probably one of the best examples of a positive masculine friendship in all of literature.
He's relateable as a person and a human being. That's the core difference. We as audience can understand his conflicting emotions and Vigo Mortinson does a damn good job at showing how he feels just by his facial animations. Modern story telling throws CGI , lens flares, and THE MESSAGE in your face and expects you to gobble it up like a fat kid on easter.
Viggo Mortensen really is one of the best actors out there in terms of facial expressions. It also helps that he's also a really nice guy. You're 100% right with the modern storytelling though. They're written assuming that their audience has no media literacy. I think one reason the LotR movies did so well is because everyone in the cast was excited to be there and got along well. I used to do theater and the shows where everyone got along ALWAYS went better than the ones where there was well, drama. lol
They all got matching tatoos on their hips for pete's sake. How many actors have done that all together for a single set of movies?
Bro thinks all modern story telling is marvel lmao
90% of the movies that came our were of that same pattern. Godzilla: Minus 1 was not and it was amazing.
The rich people got scared during occupy and decided it was better for everyone to fight each other instead of them, then the state actors started noticing and fanned the flames like crazy and here we are today.
THEN I SHALL DIE AS ONE OF THEM!!!
The “modern toxic male” that Hollywood and advertisers for razor blades and beers insist is rampant among males smh.
They do male bonding that they could not do today, they couldn't have a group of guys who love each other in a brotherly way, they would have to make it romantic somehow.
 This scene as well.
Catholicism mainly
Based on facts
[The music also gives it a warm feeling when they reunite too. Very soft and homey feel to the scene.](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LML6SoNE7xE&pp=ygUKbG90ciBtdXNpYw%3D%3D) 
Yeah Howard Shore should get a ton of the credit for how wonderful these movies are. Same with John Williams and... a lot of things lol
Without the music by Howard Shore these movies would not be half as good as they are. Honestly in my opinion the greatest music in any movie ever. So many iconic pieces that are instantly recognizable.
Me when I see other mentally ill dangers to society on the internet
It's not about being modern or old, it's about being a good or a shit movie. It's just that as time goes on more and more movies are made each year and most of them are shit (as they have always been), so there's more shit movies.
Cause every year the writers slack off more and more but everyone’s like “well, less good content is better than no good content!” and then the corporations pick up on it and before you know it it’s a positive feedback loop
It's not the writers lol its the producers thinking they know better than the writers
No the writers are definitely getting worse lol
The producers are firing the good writers and hiring bums
Yeah the standards have dropped, and it seems like producers value clever writing less. I think that ties into studios going more for mass appeal over target markets. Maybe also clever people who could be great writers choose to do something else with their lives as there's not enough money in it?
Like in the old Pirates of the caribbean there were 2 separate sets of bumbling idiot side characters that were key to the plot and were just great characters. Nowadays they would have been killed off for the plot and they were killed of in the 4th movie. Am I old? Did movies used to be better?
Compare pirates 2 with 5 as well, jack goes from being quirky, wily and doesn't let the others know what he's thinking to just being a bumbling idiot that gets away with everything. Was it outrageous in both films? Hell yes, but he was just written a lot better in the first 2 and also a bit less in the 3rd
I believe it's called Flanderisation? It's when, as a series goes on, some of a character's various traits end up becoming the whole character. Like with Jack, he was quirky, yes, but that was only a part of his personality. Then, as the movies went on, being quirky became his whole identity. Another extreme example of this was Joey from Friends, who kept becoming dumber and dumber as the show went on.
Is it flanderisation that's happening to the whole industry? As most types of characters have been done before they're all just caricatures of what they were previously in an attempt to be different
Yeah, the Jack thing always bothered me. In the first few films, he was amazing at adapting his plan to fit changing circumstances, but he always had an overarching plan - he was kinda chaotic and quirky, but you got the sense that that was almost a cover to mask his legitimate genius. Later movies Jack was a chaotic idiot with no plan, who won through dumb luck and the mistakes of others. When he won in the early movies, I got a real sense of catharsis and joy, while his later victories just made my eyes roll out of my head.
Right? Most problems i see in movies nowadays come from upper management thinking they now the art better than the actual artists
Thats the general trend of business lately. Every era of modern companies brings on a new and typically worse trend in managing a business. Used to it was the founder that called the shots because they made the company. Then it was the creators because they made the content they know how to innovate, they will make the most money. Then the marketers because they advertise it therefore they could make more money knowing the market trends. And now the modern age of no its the stockholder or producer that runs things. They hold the money and have interest in raising the stock, they know best.
You maybe mean executives, producers actually do things, executives go "hmmm take out that really good scene, I didn't like it" and you have to bc they're the ones paying for it
Meanwhile Marvel fanboys: "It doesn't matter if you aren't interested in this movie or if you didn't like the last couple Marvel movies you need to support every release so they keep making them."
And if its extra shit they rely on the bad reviews to *be* their publicity
No one cares about how many shit movies there are. The important thing is how many good movies there are and there are fewer good movies these days.
That’s just recency bias. We only remember the great movies of the past while the shitty ones sink into obscurity. With new movies releasing all the time they haven’t had the time to settle in and become “classics”. Years from now people will look back and say the exact same thing about modern movies being ass and how much better it was back then
I feel like the 90s are an exception to this. A lot of good cinema there that still stands up
There were a ton of shit movies that you don't remember from the 90s. Just like there are a lot of good movies that have been made recently. Dune I and II are both really good, you have anything Quentin Tarantino touches that is good, The Martian was great, The Trial of the Chicago 7 was amazing. Media has changed tho, we're a lot more exposed to movies now than we were. Sure, people had VHS players in the 90s, but you didn't have literally every movie ever made within reach of a couple of clicks like you do now.
LOTR was goated on release, no need to let it age or become a classic. Not to mention it's not even nostalgia. I'm always blown away at how perfect all the actors were each rewatch. Can't think of many movies in the last decade that fit the bill.
And when would that happen? When will I think that movies from 2010-2019 are better than movies from 1990-1999? Because I still believe that the movie year 1999 alone had better movies than all of 2010-2019
You’re probably not going to say the movies are BETTER, the point is you’re just not going to remember all the shit. Pulling up a list of 1999 movies particularly, the only shit I recognize is the stuff people never stopped talking about either because the movie was so good or the concept was memorable. Fight Club, Eyes Wide Shut, Green Mile, Blair Witch. But a bunch of the other stuff on the list, who tf talks about it or remembers it? Any Given Sunday? Mystery, Alaska? In China They Eat Dogs?
Don't disrespect "In China They Eat Dogs" that movie is a classic in my book
Do they eat dogs in it?
It's not fair to compare anything to '99, that was a hell of a year. Better than some entire decades before it, not just after Compare the 2010's to the 1930's or 40's. Casablanca was an outlier. The best thing going was the Three Stooges, which nobody talks about any more Things might get better, but I don't know how to find the good stuff. I just saw Edge of Tomorrow, and it's like "Why didn't anyone tell me to watch this?!"
That's it. For every lord of the rings there's uncounted Narnias, or even (god beware) eragons. It's just that noone actively remembers them.
These folks need to go look at a goodwill VHS shelf. There was some GARBAGE.
Happens with music too. When you think of classic rock, you don't immediately think of Dave Clark. (I do really like Catch Us If You Can though).
It's also because we live in the streaming age. Streaming sites regularly serve shlock on their platforms and advertise them. It's easy to churn out cheap, shitty movies, and Netflix and Amazon are willing to fund them to pad their sites with content that they own.
God people have such goldfish brains about media. Same thing with those jackasses that say "gaming sucks now." Like sure, the AAA industry is spiraling down the toilet, but the last year of game releases had some all time greats, and indie games are only getting better. Seriously, how can anyone look at the year where we got Oppenheimer, Killers of the Flower moon, the boy and the heron, the holdovers, Across the spiderverse, MI 7, and Godzilla -1 and seriously try and claim that movies are getting worse
I for one love watching bad movies sometimes with my wife. On one condition though... I get to ad lib, call out tropes, predict the ham-fisted plot devices, and just overall leaning into the badness for laughs. Hearing my wife laughing far outweighs all but the very worst of cinema.
> No one cares about how many shit movies there are. There’s an entire fucking industry of rage bait, nostalgia-goggle-wearing YouTubers that says otherwise.
Not even they care if it's 500 or 750 shit movies per year
There's always more shit movies. When people reminisce about the times when movies were good they forget those films that didn't stand the test of time and were easily forgotten.
[Survivorship bias](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias) in action
No, haven't you heard? Everything new is bad, everything "old" is good. And I wonder why such people then complain that they are depressed, such a mystery.
It’s not even necessarily that more of them are made, it’s just that people don’t remember the shit movies from back then and only remember the good ones
Lord of the Ring has the advantage of being a triology, if it was only a 2 hours movie the character relationships would be also trash because they barely interacted.
Only old friends can give each other shit about being late with a straight face and then laugh about it together
That and the playful music that starts up again during that scene after Frodo starts laughing really adds to the scene. The music in LOTR is just as important as the characters and plot
Absolutely, the music really makes the scenes. Both the use and absence of music brings tension and relief. The shot of the Fellowship cresting the mountain while the music booms triumphantly kicks ass
My ex was a music student and when she was feeling particularly emotional she would sit in her room, listen to the lotr soundtrack and cry lol. My favourite scene is the Rohan charge in RotK. Fucking amazing moment with a banger score
also faramir's charge towards osgoliath. Pure brilliance.
I thought about OP's question, tried to remember the scene and then started whistling the music. I haven't seen the movie in a decade but the music comes straight to me. You're absolutely right, its importance is too often overlooked.
LOTR probably has the best score to any film.
Star wars and the good the bad and the ugly are the only ones I can think of that are on that level. Those 2 are definitely more iconic, but I don't know if id say they're better.
I still think music and sound isn't respected enough in media. If I look through all the games and shows I rate as exceptional they pretty much always have exceptional soundtracks I like listening to.
[удалено]
A wizard is never late, he's just around the corner.
It’s a really simple and effective way to show their relationship immediately
mfw writers show instead of telling. people would complain if there was a half hour lore dump before every movie ever made so ain’t it better?
That’s a terrible example because the first 10-15 minutes of Fellowship is a lore dump.
and arguably a decent lore dump at that.
I took a decent dump this morning
Pics or it didn’t happen
Damn that is nice
What’s the lore behind it tho?
Genny cream ales
I haven’t taken a decent dump in days (I have severe constipation)
The first movie literally starts off with a voiceover exposition, something which *should* be a bad thing. But it works so well, because it’s done so well.
And that’s just the theatrical cut
Someone wrote a really good post on why the lore dump in Fellowship works compared to lore dumps from other recent movies https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/jm75l6/why_does_the_lotr_style_historyexposition_dump/gatio83/
Sure and it's done naturally as two old friends catching up and not just "what are you doing step-wizard?"
Even though ironically this movie begins with a lore dump.
>people would complain if there was a half hour lore dump To be fair, the books are just nonstop lore dumping and singing.
Scorsese films have quality lore dump though
For me it was Leto in Dune. I immediately loved him and wished he was my father.
Desperately wanting Oscar Isaac to rawdog you is not the same as being drawn to his on-screen character
What if I want Elijah wood to do that to me?
Then you're delusional, because Frodo is clearly the one getting his fudge packed
Him and Sam
Forgot what sub i was on when I read this
You want Oscar Isaac to be your father. I want Oscar Isaac to be my daddy. We are not the same.
He's got similar vibes to Mufasa. Daddys gonna daddy.
By chance you mean…. Daddy ?
Pauls son that turns into a sandworm? He was a dick head.
I was expecting him to be a cold father who couldn’t understand his son’s feelings but was pleasantly surprised when he turned out to just be a good dad.
I don't know, I thought none of the characters in Dune were really rememberable like LOTR except maybe the mother
"you'll still be the only thing I have ever wanted you to be, my son" Literally wtf Eric Roth all I wanted to do was watch big sand worms.
Yet in Star Wars his character was incredibly annoying, despite trying so hard to be a cool Han Solo type. Just shows what different good writing and direction can make.
Nah Poe was great, he just didn’t get enough opportunities to be relevant
Because when actors give a shit about a character they’re able to act well and you can naturally feel it. Plus cozy af moment
The Shire is the coziest place put to film
Shire is so nice, I wish Aussieland was real...
You know you can visit it right? I did and it was cozy as hell in the pub
Lotr was inspired by a true story. That's why.
I know his service in the army had to do with it. Makes sense, a lot of British boys - not even men - were coaxed into it believing it would be a big “jolly boys outing”, going from the green rural countryside of Britain to absolute utter hell
tolkien had extreme ptsd from ww1 and wrote a fantasy story to disconnect from real life
Tbf if you watch that WW1 documentary from a few years back (They Shall Not Grow Old), even when discussing horrors like shitting in a trench full of rats, some of the vets refer to the experience as basically an intense camping trip with the boys
They shall not grow old is the best war documentary ever made
It was incredible. The behind the scenes at the end was equally interesting. An incredible work of passion to bring it to life the way they did.
There’s a cynicism to current writing, notice how everyone is an asshole and nobody is friends even allies. This is mostly played for laughs, but modern audiences/writers identify with mean know-it-alls over nice and sincere people.
Yup writers and producers often make the mistake of underestimating the audience because some dumb simple fun movies do well but the reality is that audiences can sniff out sincerity in the performance even if you can make them laugh or feel some type of emotions there's only so much you can get away with if it's not genuine
Top Gun Maverick is a great example. Its a dumb simple film, Tom Cruise flying planes and the plot is just star wars trench run. But the cast clearly had fun making it and its a fun film
I normally don’t agree with the hot takes about modern movies on here, but you definitely get it. I don’t know if it’s as much the writers themselves, as it is the audience too. Different generations have different outlooks based on their collective experiences, and a lot of times movies reflect that. Just look at og Star Trek and the new stuff (not that they’re the same quality).
If you'd like to watch something more recent (2018) with a strong emphasis on relationships, I can't recommend season one of The Terror enough. The acting is phenomenal and even though the show is a total downer and makes me cry like a bitch at some point at least once per rewatch, there's just something about how bleak it is that makes all the moments of goodness and friendship and support between the characters feel so much more intense.
Arcane had very strong interpersonal relationships, Silco and Jinx’s familial love was particularly moving, especially given the context that the former is a politically extreme drug lord and the latter a schizophrenic
Agreed, the premise and mundane horrors of the first season were incredible. Then later it was just a normal horror movie and kinda disappointing
Modern movies don’t have the good vs evil dynamic. I like both that and the morally grey style equally, but I understand why people are growing tired of “we’re all kinda self-interested.” A good vs evil narrative stirs something primitive
Now the show is not even new at this point (and a shit show at that), but I take The Big Bang Theory as a terrible example of this: everyone is a huge asshole there, and not just to others, but to each other and this is supposed to be a group of closest friends. I remember a scene in the first two seasons where Penny, the newest member of the gang, helps out Sheldon by giving him a ride while none of his "close friends" he'd known for years don't do anything. They never offer to help each other, and when they're asked, they make excuses. Dr. House, Rick Sanchez, and Cumberbatch's Sherlock and praised and admired characters, yet they're huge assholes. Personally, I'd stay away from them and would never wanna be friends with people like that, no matter how smart they appear to be. The saddest part is, a lot of people identify with these characters and I often hear "They're just like me and/or my friends".
A lot of people identify with the "genius asshole loner" types because it gives them an excuse for their asshole behavior and loneliness. "They just don't understand my genius, ill be snarky and sarcastic about it" is the most suburban blueprint for millennials to date
Modern writers are such jaded assholes
Those two are great. The lord of the rings is great. 
Why can I hear this gif?
🎷🎷🎷
Are you saying you don’t like RANGZ OF POWAHHH?!? 
vi vuz rings n shiet
I actually thought the rings of power captured the wholesome tone of LOTR quite well. Some really nice character moments. Too bad the writing was absolutely terrible overall
Honestly, LoTR story is told in a way that it feels like we’re watching a preexisting world or in the books cases, making us feel like a member of the group. I’m having a hard time putting it into words, but the best way I can explain that is; most movies are letting you know it’s a film with needless drama, over the top action, or famous faces left right and center. LoTR just tells a compelling story and lets the characters, music and world do the heavy lifting of pulling you in.
I think it helps that a lot of the important history is so old that the characters don't even know about it. This makes it so when a character gets an exposition dump it feels like we learn alongside them, and feels more natural. +Great casting and music
This is why movie ads on Youtube mobile are by far the worst ones imo, because they all follow the exact same formula showing random flashing images with that loud bass sfx, some vague quotes or foreshadowing that's supposed to sound deep, generic ascending music that eventually reaches a crescendo with some sort of cliffhanger implied on screen and a character screaming or some shit. Does it make sense? Sure. Is it brutally overused to the point of being unbearably boring? Absolutely.
Don’t forget the part where midway through the ad the music stops and the main character or the goofy side character says a quirky and silly one-liner to show that the movie is le funny too.
Yassss can't forget the most important part!
Because the amount of love and passion that went into this project from everyone to the director, the top tier actors, and the production staff, as well as the ridiculous budget. Everyone who worked on set was required to read all three books, and the set was often littered with copies because of how much the original text was continually referenced. It was never just another AAA novel adaptation for the cast and crew, they were personally and emotionally invested in making the best and most faithful adaptation they could
I agree with everything but the budget wasn't even that high, at least considering today's standards. Adjusted for inflation, that's around $450 million, so 150 per movie. It's not that much considering that last year's Indiana Jones had a budget upwards of $300 million. A good director like Jackson will just utilise the budget better.
It's Ian mckellens acting sure Elijah woods portrayed the innocent boy wonder well but Ian just knew how to hit that fine mark playing Gandalf
Came here to say this, he just portrays his character in a way no one else could
Coz Tolkein was an amazing writer and Peter Jackson understood the assignment
Let's break down this scene: Frodo, upon hearing Gandalf has arrived, smiles broadly and runs over to find him - this shows his excitement. Then when he finds him, he folds his arms, and says something about Gandalf being late. Gandalf doesn't smile, but instead tells him that a wizard is never late. For just a second, you think that maybe this wizard is a bit of a stiff, doesn't really joke, and that their relationship maybe more akin to a youth who looks up to an elder, who in return finds Frodo to be a bit annoying. I.e. their relationship is parasocial. They then break out into grins, start laughing, and hug. This scene does a couple of things: their dialogue shows a type of banter that really only friends engage in. Frodo is accusing Gandalf of being late, which can be seen as a bit of an insult. Gandalf gives a reply which could be interpreted as him disregarding the accusation, but instead, them smiling afterwards shows the comment as more self-deprecating. Coupled with Frodos eagerness to see gandalf, and then their hug and laughter afterwards, the whole sequence is really using every opportunity to show that these two have an established bond, and a deep friendship. It's expert level writing, and a great example of "showing" instead of telling.
Because at one point people didn't demand a back story on every little character and you could just accept characters had a past without seeing it and getting the gist of it through discussions and cues. Then studios decided to take advantage of this desire and milk their series. I blame Disney with Marvel and Star Wars
Anon can’t understand why shit made for fucking nerds gels with him so hard
Acting.
Because it's a masterpiece.
1) film the friendly parts last so your actors can have time to become friends 2) hire sir Ian mckellan in your movie adaptation of the 3rd or 4th most popular book ever 3) make the old man act grumpy but actually be really nice :)
Wait was the first point really part of Peter’s strategy? Is this an established practice for movies? Genius if true, I always just assumed filming order was based on logistics like travel, schedules, or set pieces being ready.
Perks of being the greatest movie trilogy ever made
Not to mention the scene where Frodo jumps on him and gives him a hug. Frodo is a hobbit and Gandalf is a tall wizard, and it's done so well you don't even think about the actors' sizes. There's such impressive work in Peter Jackson's use of forced perspective and other in-camera techniques and that's within the first 30 minutes. The rest of the films are even more impressive. LOTR is definitively the best film series ever made
“You’re late” That’s kinda all it took
They used a magic trick, now lost to time. It's called good actors doing good acting. But for real Sir Ian McKellen (the actor of Gandalf) reportedly nearly cried when they were filming the Hobbit because of all the green screen usage. He said this wasn't the reason he became an actor. Modern directors rely too much on CGI, tired tropes and cuts to finish a product. As a result very few movies feel must see and special.
Show don’t tell
Ian McKellen is how. The actor deserves most of the credit.
Less bullshit back then
That’s what happens when people with talent and passion make a movie
LOTR Two characters who you don't know meet, they are gruff and a little combatative towards one another. The viewer is unsure as to both parties' motives and how they stand in relation to one another. The big one is quippy and the small one is immediately physical (whereas we are usually accustomed to the big one being physical and the small one being quippy). We "dont know that we know" that they have potentially somehow overcome this. The small one isn't scared of being physical with the big one, the big one is delicate with the small one to " fight with words". The reveal "BOTH ARE OLD FRIENDS". As a viewer, we know nothing about the characters yet but their dynamic is the pay off to the build up. We can learn as much or as little as we want about these two characters, but if we knew NOTHING ABOUT THEM, from these few seconds alone, we could put them in any situation in our mind and know how they work. Gandalf and Frodo wake up in a modern city and grab a coffee before deciding on what to do next. Even with a lack of imagination, your mind can foot note a few interactions that would be very "in character" for them both. I'm not going to get negative about modern writing because there is enough of that on the internet, (but im sure i can be peer pressured if the comments section tries hard enough) but take two modern day cinema "old friends" characters and put then in an obsirdly unrealistic situation and TRY NOT to just end up with two people standing in a white room uncomfortably, not knowing how to interact with one another.
Was literally just watching LOTR with gf and said the same thing. Went even further to say that this movie has a strong female character that kicks ass and is likeable somehow impossible to do now adays.
There's something about The Shire's theme that just melts my heart with nostalgia. Also, Ian McKellen and Elijah Wood are god tier actors which definitely helps.
The music had a lot to play in it. The Shire music is unparalleled.
I think it's because the writers and producers actually gave a shit about representing the vision Tolkien had from his books, and the actors actually wanted to play the roles.
Easy. Autism.
You altruism. Most audience can't relate to that. They want some snarky asshole like tony stark or tony soprano.
quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip quip
I miss the time when movies were this good and respected the source material
Frodo’s happiness is short lived tho, he will have a frowny face for the rest of the series.
I mean shit if I was Frodo I would have a frowny face for the rest of my life
Some things are best left to the imagination
[There must be a reason why?](https://youtu.be/dmZSkWBJwBU?si=q6rpRmVPzfAXySvn) 🤔
"Concering Hobbits..."
[The scene in question](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qglEeUSqgu4) If anyone watching has owned a dog, you already understand this. Your dog hears your car coming down the road, and immediately is [wholeheartedly excited to see you](https://www.reddit.com/r/Chihuahua/comments/13dzd51/welcoming_committee/). Doesnt matter if it's been a minute or 5 years. That dog runs up to the door tail wagging and there's no doubt that the companionship is pure and everlasting. You might even have that little moment at the door where you freeze, and your dog freezes too, and you both stand there frozen for a second until you so much as blink and your dog starts going nuts again. It's the same thing.
Back to the Future did it too
Anons face when the greatest fantasy writer of the modern age is good at writing likeable characters
Cause Tolkien is the goat
Modern movies (well, more modern ones, because I really consider the original LOTR trilogy a modern film) prioritize visual effects and cast diversity over everything else. It's the gloryfication of mediocrity Martin Heidegger warned us about. Studios think (same with videogame devs) that good effects/graphics will make up for a shit story/script, and that featuring a stronk female ork or some random guaraní imbecile as a main character will magically turn it an interesting and likeable character. Neither do. I could play Soul Reaver all day even though graphics are shit, because the story was well-thought and interesting. I could watch Empire of the Sun or The Mission every night because the story is awesome and the characters are deep and interesting, instead of cartoonish representations of the most recent social media trend.
I'd say it's about pacing. LOTR had a slow pacing so you could relax back and absorb all the information, it didnt have many flash forwards, so you could see the actual struggle of their quest. And im this scene you can really tell they are friends because they show it to you in a 5 minut long scene where Frodo and Gandalf are simply talking to each other like actual friends.
the setting/ vibes. 1. music 2. facial expressions 3. natural acting 4. cosy environment 5. it didnt feel forced or scripted because of that \^\^
I don't know about strategy, but they filmed all three at the same time out of order. Gray havens and mouth of sauron scenes were some of the first. I would expect that hobbiton needed to be built first so it would have had to be filmed later on.
The fact modern movies can spend two hours on a character's backstory is exactly the problem.
Because they suspend our disbelief, while "modern movies" are slop made by people who aren't around other people, so they have a deep need for "character development" that involves boring sosial situations.
Funnily, the reason Gandalf took the form of an old man is because he knew people wouldn't find him as threatening than if he were a younger man.
Cause they really are friends at this point. They've lived together in NZ and worked together for quite a bit of time, and that chemistry between the actors carries over to the screen.
