Well, the people from the production offices were trying to get him past security -- but security wasn't having it.

JessPMoon, is this in line with your assessment of the Trilogy?

(From the The Toronto Star.)

Mortensen is a man of carefully chosen words and strongly held convictions about integrity and honesty. He's proud of his work in The Lord Of The Rings, and he's a staunch defender of the trilogy, but he candidly states that the first film, The Fellowship Of The Ring, was the one where the acting counted for the most.

"Especially the extended version.

"There was more of a balance between the special effects and the fantastical and the subtle and human interactions.

"I think with the second movie and the third and the final part, the direction went from balancing that more towards the broader brush strokes in terms of performance and emotion, and very much towards special effects."

I think that's a fair assessment, yes. Especially the "broader brush strokes" part.

From the History News Network a draft Aragorn campaign.

(I nabbed this from Readerville's Tolkien thread.)

From that link you posted, sumi, I followed to this one:

Zinn v Chomsky LOTR

"And observe the map device here — how the map is itself completely Gondor-centric. Rohan and Gondor are treated as though they are the literal center of Middle Earth. Obviously this is because they have men living there."

Okay, more. Sheer genius here:

Well, you know, it would be manifestly difficult to believe in magic rings unless everyone was high on pipe-weed. So it is in Gandalf's interest to keep Middle Earth hooked.

"I think with the second movie and the third and the final part, the direction went from balancing that more towards the broader brush strokes in terms of performance and emotion, and very much towards special effects."

Absolutely on the money, as far as I'm concerned. I enjoyed the hell out of all of them, but I still find Fellowship the most emotionally engaging, despite the acting pyrotechnics in Return.

I still find Fellowship the most emotionally engaging

I find it more emotionally compact, but I did cry much more in RotK. FotR gets me at Amon Hen and "although I do not know the way" -- I see those moments as both iconic.

For RotK, however, it's all Pippin, most Eowyn, and fires to boot. I also think that Billy Boyd, Ian McKellen and Sean Astin turn in their strongest performances.

I think FotR had to spend more time on showing the nuances of the characters, because we were meeting most of them there and getting to know them. In TT and RotK the characters had to show how their experiences were changing them, but they had the basic characters established by then.

I think it's telling that I've rewatched FotR on cable whenever I've come across it (weirdly, I almost always hit whatever channel it's airing on during the Moria sequence), yet never went back to the theaters for a second viewing of the other two movies or rented The Two Towers.

From TV Gal's coverage of the Golden Globes:

Moment That Made Me Least Proud of Joan(Rivers): Joan asked Dominic Monaghan of "The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King" if there would be a fourth "Lord of the Rings" movie. Such sad times, Joan.

I spent yesterday cleaning like mad, and I watched both EE's of TTT and FotR--and found that I liked them in a somewhat different manner when I wasn't watching them with a fiery intensity. I caught things I wouldn't have otherwise, moments that I missed when I was watching for other parts. It pleases me that, after watching these films countless times nigh on three years, I can still find new things to enkoy about them.