Rating: 
Summary: Perfect
Review: From the surprising opening to Hobbiton, to Bree, to Rivendell, to Caradrhas, to Moria, to Lorien, to Anduin...Perfect visually in every way...Aragorn's power will be revealed in time..The Hobbits themselves were the best part, and the interaction with 'standard' sized mortals and elves was incredible...Ian McClellan(sp?) was the perfect choice for Gandalf, as Laurence Olivier is no longer available...The best part was the adherence to the verbatim text on occasion...The maps on Bilbo's table...The horror of the enemy...the beauty and rusticity of the Shire...The interactions of the hobbits... The expansion of Saruman's part was masterfully done...the exclusion of Tom Bombadil was unfortunate, but the substitution of Arwen for Glorfindel was fine, much less jarring than I thought it would be... The worst part is that we have to wait a year for the next and another year for the next after that!!! All in all, if you've read it as often as I (about 30 times), it will be stunning in it's occasional truth to the text, and easily excusable for the parts that are not...If you've never read it, it's still easily the most intelligent and beautifully done fantasy movie ever made...
Rating:
Summary: First Book-Turned-Movie I Wasn't Disappointed at
Review: I've read the original LOTR series and, for the very first time, I wasn't disappointed at all by a movie having read its book version. The film is very faithful to the original - which I deeply appreciate as I'd expected Hollywood to reduce Tolkien's classic to flamboyant trash. The special effects are great (of course!), the cast is appropriately chosen, and the landscape background is simply breathtaking. The film was long but you wouldn't feel it. I'd definitely recommend this movie to anyone (except very young children as they may be scared by some of the scenes).
Rating:
Summary: More than I Expected
Review: I have read the trilogy 14 times since the 70's,and was hugly disappointed by the animated version of the books in '78. I have anxiously looked forward to the live action film and I was NOT dissapointed! Considering the the enormous complexity of the material, I thought it was very well done.Well casted and incredably acted! Yes there were large amounts of material left out, but come on the movie would have been 6 hours long if they included everything,I thought they compressed the story well without sacrificing the major story line.A must have when it comes out on DVD, and I'm re-reading it for the 15th time! Loved it!
Rating:
Summary: I really like it (...)
Review: Ok, there were things left out of the movie, true. You could compare the movie to the book for hours. but I loved the movie just the same. Yeah, they should've explained it a lil better, but I think the action scenes were good. All I kno is, I wanna see it again. It's a really good movie, I definitely was not disappointed. *Legolas is the best!* hehehe
Rating:
Summary: The best movie I've ever seen
Review: I have read the book 4 times. The first time I watched the movie I was shocked at some scenes. 'Why is Saruman working for Sauron?'
'Whats up with Galadriel?' But I've watched it again and it was WAY better. All the changes done were necessary or how do you explain something like 'Why doesnt Gimli want to go Moria (as in the book)' to someone who hasn't read the book? It is not possible. The special effects are just great! The beginning of the movie is just breathtaking! The logic in releasing the next movie at X-Mas 2002 is as followed (I think). Till April the people will watch FOTR in Cinema and then ITS Star Wars time till August. In September there is the DVD/Video release. And in December the next (and from my point of view the BEST movie). Those who don't like the movie but LOVED the book should go for another audition in the cinema.
Rating:
Summary: Teresa's Review
Review: I have only these words to say after watching the movie. It was simply wonderful and I love it. I would definitely wait for the other two parts. The scenes in the show kept coming back to me so vividly. I have not regret watching the show and the performance by all the actors were very real. It could bring me into the movie. I could feel the excitement and worries and problems encountered by the fellowship members. Good work and keep it up. I would wait patiently for the subsequent parts. Thank you all for such a wonderful piece of work.
Rating:
Summary: LOTR ROCKS!!!
Review: I loved the movie! It was fabulous!!! Especially the casting. It was as close as you could come to the real thing. Ian McKellen made a great Gandalf, exactly wat I expected from the book. Legolas was my fav character in the book and even more in the movie. I hope everyone, fans of tolkien or no, enjoys the movie cause i LOVED IT!!
Rating: 
Summary: What a waste
Review: Another huge and hugely disappointing film of 2001. My expectations were very great after seeing so many beautiful still images on the web, but most of them were cut out of the final release, obviously to leave more room for stupid sword fighting, in order to appeal more to teenage boys. Acting ranges from very decent(Gandalf, Saruman) to poor (Elrond, why is he so angry all the time?), and so does photography and CGI (the Shire, Argonath, and Orthanc are very convincing, Moria, the initial battle, and some ruins are laughable at best). This film is totally superficial and bears only token resemblance to the book. The changes (for the worse) are too numerous to list here, but it is a fact that Tolkien's great story, stripped of its details, its depth and its history underneath is rather simplistic, and that is exactly what this film is. Safe for a few short scenes, this film left me completely unmoved, quite unlike the book. If you want to see what Tolkien meant by the "valour of old", get Braveheart and John Boorman's Excalibur. Both feature great drama and acting and very good DVD transfers.
Rating:
Summary: For the Love of a Story.
Review: "The Lord of the Rings" might be the greatest fiction ever written. So how can a trilogy possibly live up to the books when most movies fall short of their own novels? This was an adaptation so controversial that Christopher Tolkien, J.R.R. Tolkien's son and author of many Middle-earth books himself, disowned his own son, Simon, for supporting its production. Many fans wondered whether or not it would disappoint them. Most producers were afraid to attempt it. So how did it turn out? I've heard some people complain about it not including the most trivial details: "Gandalf's staff didn't glow." "Where was Tom Bombadil?" "The Balrog wasn't what I expected it to be." I think some people would like a 10 hour installment per book. If you want to understand everything related to Middle-earth then read The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, The Silmarillion, The Unfinished Tales, and the 13 volumes of the History of Middle-earth to get your fill. When I went to see it I was skeptical. If ever there was a movie to be disappointed by, this would have the greatest potential. But it didn't disappoint me. I loved every bit of it. There was a difference between this movie and every movie I have ever seen. Every other movie I have ever watched were money movies. They were made solely to rake in cash. The actors would take their roles seriously and have pride in them, but the movies were mostly there to pull in revenue. This movie was made entirely out of love. You can sense it right away, and it's something you're just not used to feeling from a movie. The cast loved it. The crew loved it. The cast for the nine members of the Fellowship of the Ring each got a tattoo of the elvish symbol for 9. Nothing is taking away from the books. The first thing I did after I saw it was read the books again. Tolkien's son Christopher might be distraught about the making of these movies, but there are clubs out there devoted to worshiping the books. There are games and stories and websites modeled after them. All of these things are there because of the love for the story. He may be right in that it's not Tolkien's books on the screen. It's the love of Tolkien's books on the screen, and that is what has made this film one of the best movies ever created.
Rating: 
Summary: Pretty Good, but ... for Aragorn... sigh
Review: It's an enjoyble 3 hours of fantasy. Unfortunately, I've read the book (I hated the book, it's really tough to read), and I found the potrayal of Aragorn in this film seriously lacking. I don't think anybody would walk out of the theatre being a fan of Aragorn, while in the book, ... he's one of the greatest heros. Most of the people were really impressed with Legolas... that elf really stole the show. We really need someone who have screen prescence to be casted as the actor for Aragorn. Someone like Sean Connery when he was young, etc. Just his entry to a scene should make one think that he is a king.
| 
