Rating: 
Summary: Well....
Review: I was pretty glad I got this DVD, at first. I loved the movie and the bonus material was pretty good, even though some of the interviews and featurettes had the same stuff in them. What kind of disappointed me was that, for anyone who went ahead and bought this, there's another version of it coming out! One that's obviously better (extra footage, new music, more bonus material, etc.) and doesn't cost much more. So, for anyone who is thinking about buying it now, beware. Just wait and get the other version, the 4-disc set. You'll be getting more for your money.
Rating: 
Summary: As Good as anyone could have made it
Review: Despite being an avid AD&D role player, and able to write it, I am not a fan of fantasy literature. I have owned one of the many collected printings of the Lord of the Rings trilogy, but have never been able to get more than a hundred pages into it before Tolkien's dry writing style got to me and I would put it down in order to read some Heinlein, Smith or Niven instead. Thus when I found out that Peter Jackson, the same man who brought us such epic splatter-fests as Bad Taste, Brain Damage, and Meet the Feebles, had begun production on the entire trilogy, I was curious. The only person to have ever attempted this before, Ralph Bakshi, had made a mockery of Tolkien's books with his half baked attempts to render them to the big screen. Jackson on the other hand, even when he was making his gross out movies, had always been a brilliant technical director and I began to wonder how he would handle a project of this magnitude.While I was eager to see the end results, I didn't have the sort of emotional investment that so many Tolkien readers have. I have friend who have read the trilogy over and over so I was curious as to what his responses would be. There are also those fans who, no matter how good the film(s) would be, no matter how exacting they were, would hate them, either just because or just because it didn't fit their vision of what it should like. Or even because they feel that they should never be made into movies. What Jackson has done here is something special and I don't just mean in the technical sense. It became clear to me that he had taken great care to surround himself with craftsmen and artists who understood the books, he even went so far as to hire the two artists who had conceived so much of the later book art to craft much of the three film's final look. Having now seen the movie several times and reading through the first of the many art books, I can honestly say I doubt anyone else could have done a better job at bringing it to the big screen. The Fellowship story is rather simple, but it's epic on a grand scale. Three thousand years ago, during the first age, the Dark Lord Sauron, servant of the Morgoth, had forged 19 rings of power and leadership, 3 for the elves, 7 seven for the dwarfs, and 9 to the race of men- all of the rings were controlled by a 20th ring, forged from metal from all of the others. With this ring Sauron could rule all of Middle Earth. A last alliance of men and elves raised an army and at the foot of Mount Doom, near Sauron's fortress of Barador, defeated the Dark Lord and his army. And it was here that Isildur took up his father's sword and sliced the ring from Sauron's hand, defeating the Enemy. While I felt the opening battle sequence could have been longer, it firmly ingrains the might and power wielded by Sauron. What it doesn't show is Sauron is just a pawn of Morgoth? Who is Morgoth? Read the Silmarillion and find out. As history fades to legend then legend into myth, the ring of power passes from Isildur's after he is slain, lost for centuries until it is found by the creature Golem, the magic of the ring extending his life for five-hundred years until he loses the ring and it is found by the Hobbit, Bilbo Baggins. Enter Gandalf the Grey (Ian McKellen), a wizard who learns from Bilbo that he has The One Ring. However, after his 111th birthday party, Bilbo uses the ring to render himself invisible after a speech, then retreats to his home to gather his things. He has kept it a secret for sixty years until he decides that he tired of everything, simply wanting to finish a book he is writing in peace and quiet. He leaves everything, including the ring, to his nephew Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood), then departs to live out his days with the elves. It then falls to Frodo to bring it to Sauron's realm of Mordor and cast it into the fires of Mount Doom, for that is the only way it can be destroyed. There is more, but I won't attempt to lay it all out for you here- buy it, rent it, but SEE IT. My favorite character is probably Legolas (Orlando Bloom), even though he didn't have a whole lot to say, I liked the portrayal of the elven archer as being a total nightmare to anyone on the receiving end of his bow shots. Legolas does no less than 8 god-like trick shots as well as using arrows as melee weapons. He is also the only Tolkien elf that I can stomach. I much prefer the idea that elves are happy-go-lucky types living for the moment, not the doom and gloom sourpuss elves who are leaving the land- a concept that several fantasy authors since have emulated and why I think so many people dislike elves. Sean Bean's Boromir is likeable as the tragic self-sacrificing knight and Viggo Mortenson as the hell-on-wheels Ranger, Aragorn. More importantly, I loved the easy affection shared by the hobbits, and Gandalf's love for these peaceful folk. Still, I have to laugh at those so-called 'Tolkien Devotees' who scream and wale about what an 'atrocity' or 'abomination' has been wrought by Jackson. One reviewer was aghast at the concept of a playful elf. Yeah, let them all be miserable and depressing. And because people may have actually liked this film, they have to become personally insulting. So what if he didn't follow the Fellowship chapter and verse as it was written, there is such a thing as artistic license in this world or does it only apply to whatever medium you happen to be touting. Who cares if Arwen had a sword and washed away the Ring Wraiths with a spell? Maybe you can devote 5 years of your life and two-hundred million dollars of your own money and make the trilogy only you can enjoy. I'm sure having Ian McKellan on screen for twenty hours as he reads the book to the audience would be infinitely more exciting.
Rating:
Summary: A Brilliant Adaptation
Review: Lord of the Rings is the seminal fantasy story. Bringing this to the screen was no small task, and despite the license Peter Jackson took (cutting out Tom Bombadil, expanding Arwen's role) he did a masterful job of capturing Tolkeins vision and bringing it to life.
Rating: 
Summary: very good movie but ?
Review: lord of the rings is a very good movie the colors are nice and smooth the action and effects are very good but as you get deep into the movie and to the end , the drama just runs out of gas and poof movie is over just like that i think the movie in its self is ok but at least they could of gave you a better ending than what they left you with which put a sour taste in folks mouth after buying this movie.
Rating:
Summary: The true history of Tolkien and "LOTR"
Review: All the other reviews have pretty much said it all - yes, the film is fantastic! I have my own 2 disk set copy on Region 2(PAL)(available from amazon.co.uk) - but I'm here to give a different but very, very important perspective - my "patriotic spin" if you'd like, and as a service to all Tolkien devotees and "LOTR" fans.
Something that has been sadly amd sorely overlooked (even by his own countrymen!) is the fact that Mr. Tolkien was very much South African! Yes folks, a South African! We truly are a surprising bunch, aren't we? He may have lived much of his later life in our Commonwealth "mother country" England, but he was born in the city of Bloemfontein in South Africa. In fact he started writing the first drafts of the "LOTR" saga here in Eastern Cape region of South Africa. It was while spending time in a region known as the Eastern Cape in a hamlet known as "Hog's Back", that Tolkien became inspired. It is well known (here) that the mountains, lush wild forests and rivers around "Hog's Back" very much provided the template for Tolkien's "Middle Earth" environs and back drops. I suggest all true Tolkien and "LOTR" devotees to make the trip to the forest village of "Hog's Back" in the Eastern Cape region of South Africa and come and see for themselves, the only and true inspiration for "Middle Earth".
Also of note, is that "The Tolkien Society" are based in his old birth town of Bloemfontein, S Africa, and they do, I beleive, run tours of his birth place and other places of his youth etc. I'm happy to assist where I can, as I fellow "LOTR" and more importantly, as a fellow countryman of Mr. Tolkien, if anybody would like to contact me. "Lord of The Rings" - Proudly South African!
Rating: 
Summary: Nice try, but...
Review: I love Tolkien's work, but this adaptation from the feeble mind of Peter Jackson doesn't do it justice. The quality of the DVD is fantastic, and the extra disc is good. It's not a waste of money to buy it. And as a fan of Lord of the Rings, I will be going to see the next two movies and buying them later as well. However, I've got to rip on Jackson and his special effects company WETA. That stupid cave troll looks nothin' but fake. And where are the orcs? If you blink a couple of times during the film, you might not see any. It's like they're so ashamed of the masks they made that they only show them for half a second or from the back or from far away. To their credit, the Balrog is pretty good. The watcher in the water varies from looking real to looking ultra-fake (tentacle scenes). But the special effects aren't really the problem. The acting is. Some of the casting and acting is good. Saruman and Boromir are great, Aragorn looks the part, but is overly dramatic. In fact, almost everyone in the film is overly dramatic. Just act normal; don't hang on every word and speak so slowly with goofball facial expressions and lip posturing. It takes away from the reality of how people act. The casting was bad, though acceptable for a lot of parts. But two unforgivable screw-ups were Frodo and Gandalf; not the way they looked so much as the way they acted. The most memorable time where I wanted to smack Gandalf upside the head was where he stood there as the light from the Balrog came near, and said "This foe is beyond any of you." Bad acting. It was like he was trying to concentrate more on the cob in his butt than on the approaching danger. Watch it and see. And why did they get that dude from the Matrix to play Elrond? He's not versatile enough to pull it off. I was expecting to see Keanu Reeves pop out in an elf uniform any second. But the worst thing Jackson did was make the movie too drawn out. Why all the slow motion, and slow speaking, and trying to make the whole film feel like a dream-like trance? All he really had to do was amp it up some and it would have been a great movie. It should have run shorter and included more stuff from the book. That was completely do-able if he quit with all the boring afore-mentioned junk. The story would have been drama enough without it. In short, they fouled this up. Still, nobody's ever tried to pull it off before, so I give them that. It would have been better, though, if James Cameron or Steven Spielberg or someone else who knows how to combine real-looking special effects with good acting and editing had done this. Too late now.
Rating:
Summary: What? this movie still on?
Review: I feel asleep three times during the duration of my viewing of "Lord of the Rings", which I thought I'd never even watch at all. As a non fan of this genre, I don't know what came over me to rent this.
See my review of Harry Potter, I talk about how I am not a fan of the genre, but I really enjoyed the movie. Well, things didn't work the same in this situation. The movie has an amazing performance by Ian McKellen, who is a consumate professional actor. He takes the craft seriously, and he is a truly amazing talent and I love to watch him.
I actually did like this movie to some extent, but it just kept going on and on and on and on and on.... It just didn't do anything for me, the first hour was good, It had me interested in wanting to know more of the story, but it just dragged way too much. I was stunned by the visuals, they are just breath taking. It is a beautifully filmed zonker. Sorry, but this is my honest opinion, and we are all entitled.
I have never read any of the books, and I never plan to as I just can't get into this genre of book or movie. This is way too long! It's over three hours. Drink some coffee and don't watch this too late. Eileen Famiglietti
Rating:
Summary: Wait Until the November Edition!
Review: The Fellowship of the Ring is finally out on DVD - but for those who want to get the 'real' version of the movie, one must wait till November when the Special Extended Edition comes out.
However, this DVD is adequate for those who just cannot wait. The trailors are interesting to watch after seeing the movie (you notice just how much footage of deleted scenes were used in them) and Enya's music video captures some of the more poignant momemts in the movie, played in slow motion to her beautiful voice. The 'behind the scenes' clips are also interesting - you can see just how much work went into the movie - for example Orlando Bloom practicing his archery, the hobbit-boys going through dialect coaching and the metres of fabric that went into creating each Ringwraith costume. Big time fans of the book and movie probably caught the documentaries - 'Quest for the Ring', 'Welcome to Middle Earth' and 'Passage to Middle Earth' when they were on television, but they're also included just for completions sake. The preview for Electronic Art's video game is a bit tacky however - it comes across as a bit too much of an advertisement, and the mere idea that Tolkien's epic actually *is* a video game is something that makes me wince.
But now on to the juicy stuff - what most people were waiting for was the Two Towers preview. Although some people speculated (or hoped) it was another trailor, it is in fact a behind-the-scenes preview in which Peter Jackson explains some of the storyline, the origins of the title, introduces us to some of the new characters, and the creation of the special effects (in particular the incredible battle at Helm's Deep, and Gollum, which Peter describes as the most actor-driven CGI creation ever). However, don't despair - there is some footage that has never been seen before, and though some are marred by the presence of cameras and crew members in the scenes, a precious few are actual movie shots.
What many people weren't expecting however on this DVD was a preview for a second version of the 'Fellowship', which has approximatly thirty minutes of deleted scenes actually incorporated into the movie, along with their own original musical score. These glimpses are perhaps more enticing than the Two Towers preview, which include Sam and Frodo witnessing elves departing Middle Earth for the Grey Havens, Aragorn at his mother's grave, Gollum floating downstream on a log, Pippen and Merry partying at the Green Dragon Inn, the Fellowship departing Rivendell, the famous Galadriel gift-giving scenes, a few quiet scenes of Frodo talking to both Gandalf and Sam, and a lot more fighting footage in both Moria and Amon Hen. No doubt most of these scenes, which seem to mainly include serene, restful moments, were unfortunatly sacrificed to speed up the action.
Do what I did: RENT this version, and save your money for the four-disc Special Edition, which not only has these scenes, but over four hours of extra footage. You have been warned. As for the movie itself, what can I say that hasn't already been said? There are some prunes out there who disliked it (I had a skim through the one-star reviews) but in most people's eyes, whether they be Tolkien fans or newcomers, Peter Jackson and his people did a masterful job of creating a movie that contained both traditional Tolkien and fresh new ideas.
Of course, it is inevitably diminished in its transition from movie to television screen. Scenes such as the Balrog simply *cannot* have the same effect as when they were towering over you at the movies. However, scenes of imtimacy are still as effective, especially since the viewer has the power of rewind in their hand to explore all those extra details you didn't notice at the movie theatre - which can be as subtle as a glance from one character to the other (ie. when the Fellowship first meets Galadriel). I also strongly suggest watching the movie at least once with the subtitles on - you'd be surprised at how much dialouge you may have missed when you were preoccupied with other characters - such as Gandalf arguing with Boromir at the disrupted Council, Merry and Sam fighting over the mushrooms, and the Ring itself - which has a surprising amount of dialouge for an inanimate band of gold!
Rating: 
Summary: ZZZZZZZZZZZ
Review: Unless you are a big Lord Of The Rings fan, as well as big on fairy tale sci fi flicks you are going to fall asleep with this one. After an hour I had to shut it off, aside from the fact that I had no idea what was going on in fairy tale land, the 3 hour long movie just moves at a snail pace! This is a love it or hate it flick, there's really no room in between!
Rating:
Summary: Tolkien Would Have Been Proud
Review: 'The Lord of the Rings' remains one of the most cherished pieces of literature of all time. It is a classic, and is also, fifty years later, one of the best selling novels of all time. Upon first seeing previews for 'The Fellowship of the Ring', I admit to being skeptical. It seems that drama, wit and human emotion, for the most part in cinema today have been replaced by explosions and eye candy. Admittedly, there are a few contemporary exceptions, Braveheart and Hart's War among them, but, for the most part, there never has seemed to be a middle ground, a ground where battles and violence can link arms with character development and still come off as being an excellent story. The first part in this epic trilogy did it superbly. Peter Jackson's masterpiece brought back memories of the novels, making me immediately reread them and relive the wonders that almost every child has experienced with these books. What impressed me the most about this first installment was the fact was that Jackson's vision was not MTV friendly, and by saying that I mean jazzed up to appeal to a contemporary audience. There was far less Dungeons and Dragons expose' than I expected there to be, and much more richness. The story was not touched, which was wonderful to see, the score by Enya and Howard Shore was magnificent (and the soundtrack is worth the buy), the sets and special effects are some of the finest since Terminator 2, and the acting was fantastic, most notably by Viggo Mortenson and Sir Ian MacKellen. Certainly, there are epic scenes of action and violence, sometimes on a seemingly R-rated scale, but somehow, Tolkien's themes of friendship and honor seem to shine through every second of this film and make you eager for the second chapter of this grand trilogy, and especially the third. Brilliantly adapted, finely directed, flawlessly acted and divinely scored, this film will be remembered for generations to come, and not just because it retells one of the finest stories of our time, but because it opens new doors for cinema. It is the 'Jaws' and the 'Star Wars' for the new millennium, as no one has seen, or ever will see again, anything as brilliant in terms of what makes a fantasy epic so great.
|
