Rating: 
Summary: Impressive and masterful!!!
Review: I wasn't really sure if I would enjoy The Lord of the Rings but I watched it anyway. I didn't know what to expect because I did not know anything about the film. I sat, watched and was blown away by the amazing suspense and action. It's my favorate movie to date. I am an original Star Wars fanatic but this beats all of the things that I have seen. The movie captures the audiences and takes them to the world known as Middle Earth. Howard Shore's score really deserves the Oscar for best score. It really fits the imagination of the movie. Too bad it didn't win best picture. It deserves it.
Rating:
Summary: By Far the Best Movie Ever Created
Review: Winner of 4 Academy Awards, weighted evenly with an extraordinary cast and the most awesome cinematography known to motion picture. Filmed in the native home land of Peter Jackson (director), New Zealand. New Zealand houses every major land formation, which greatly added to the cinematogarphy options. Even more amazing, Peter Jackson has not ever had a really successful movie and now he was intrusted to make three movies straight without even knowing if the first would be a success. LOTR is the recreation of the magical world of Middle Earth which was created in J.R.R. Tolkien's magical triology of books.
Watch the movie and read the book and you will see the best ever book to movie transformation. When Bilbo Baggins deceides to leave the home he has loved for so long to go on an adventure he gives his entire estate to his adopted nephew Frodo Baggins. The estate includesa magical ring that once belonged to a dark lord. It's to bad for the dark lord has returned and now seeks his ring of power. An army of orcs, black assasins, and the ring itself are all enemy to Frodo. Frodo is given one option and one option only, he must destroy the ring from which it came from. A volcano in the lair of the dark lord. Not only is the dark lord after the ring, he has acquired the help of Sauraman, Gandalf's collegue. Frodo however is not alone. He is accompanied by the first stanza of characters listed below. If you call yourself a movie fanatic, you must see LOTR. For no movie has every accomplished what LOTR has. Truly an amazing feet of man LOTR should be placed right in their with the Sphinx and the Wright brothers. Elijah Wood-Frodo
Ian McKellan-Gandalf
Viggo Mortensen-Aragorn
Orlando Bloom-Legolas Greenleaf
Sean Astin-Samwise Gamgee
John Rhys Davis-Gimili
Billy Boyd-Pippin
Dominic Monaghan-Merry
Sean Bean-Boromir + These characters are not in the Fellowship but do help Frodo on the way: Hugo Weaving-Elrond
Liv Tyler-Arwen
Cate Blanchett-Galadriel These are the remaining characters:
Ian Holms-Bilbo
Christopher Lee-Sauruman
Rating:
Summary: Most Enchanting Tale of All Time
Review: The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring is just simply the greatest movie ever made. In my opinion, it has everything every movie-goer wants to see and experience: magic, action, suspense, fear, beauty, true human emotions, and a few laughs here and there. I must also point out that this is the first fantasy film that's been able to pull me into the entire story and setting; the world created just seems so complete. The history of it all seems so real. Most importantly, the characters are all realistic and genuine in their own respect. This is definitely a must-have for every DVD collector.
Rating:
Summary: BEST MOVIE EVER!
Review: I have seen this movie 3 times and I have absolutely loved it every single time! And I will say, you will either love it or hate it, but for the ones who love it, it's an amazing movie, as many will agree! The special effects are amazing, and all the actors/actresses are brilliant! I can't wait for the next 2 to come out - I STRONGLY suggest this movie!
Rating:
Summary: If you want Fantasy, see The Mummy:This is Literature mate!
Review: This was a truly excellent movie, no doubt about it. Anyone who is still waiting to go see this, should definitely go. It is a wonderful piece of movie-making and a treat for anyone who loves movies. As a visual rendering of Tolkien's masterwork, Fellowship of the Ring is wonderfully evocative of the spirit of Tolkien, and this, I think, is why Peter Jackson should have won the best director nod from the Oscars. If "A Beautiful Mind" won for subject matter, then LOTR:FoTR was a far better piece of filmic creativity. LoTR is about power, and the way that power corrupts. The task of defeating the greatest and most evil entity in Middle Earth, is destined to fall upon the least conventionally heroic of peoples: the rustic, "English countryside" -dwelling hobbits who love food, smoking and running around barefoot. To save the wiser, more war-like and subtler races of "the free peoples" of Middle Earth, Frodo and his servant Sam must overcome evil not by head-on confrontation, but by destroying the Dark Lord Sauron's ultimate source of power: his gold ring. The drama of LoTR cannot be denied, the scenery and the cinematography were breathtaking (the Second Age battles at the beginning of the movie and the over-flights of Saruman's transformation of Isengard particularly stand out)and the action scenes, while a little 'sensationalized' for the video-game audience, were pretty gutsy. The combat scenes in particular had much more of the feel of hand-to-hand fighting than sword and sandal travesties like "Gladiator". That said, I did have a couple of moments of disconnect with the movie. One was the silly wizards' duel between Gandalf and Saruman. It looked more like Buffy the Vampire Slayer, than Tolkien. The other was the petulance of Elrond (although I very much enjoyed Agent Smith's portrayl of the Elf-Lord, he seemed a much less impressive character than he was in the book). Still, in the final analysis, LoTR is not about the individual characters (except Frodo, Sam and Smeagol/Gollum). As a work of literature, and as the ur-father of fantasy novels, it is about big ideas, and this is where (for my money) Peter Jackson's talent really comes through. On one level, LoTR (both the movie and the books) are just good entertaining fun, but on another level, there are deeper and more disturbing issues: As many scholars have pointed out, Tolkien's story was about the denial of power rather than the triumphant use of it. It's a story with deep humanistic (and religious) roots. Tolkien himself refuted the idea that LoTR was about the atom bomb, but there are more than enough interesting links between Tolkien and Milton for us to see that the central issue for Tolkien was the nature of good and evil and the way in which humanity (via its various avatars - elves, humans, wizards, dwarves, hobbits, and even orcs) come to terms with the demands of both good and evil as guiding forces in the world. It should be noted in these more multicultural times, that Tolkien's moral universe was a thoroughly English form of Christianity, and a mixture of late 19th century and Dark Ages Christianity at that. One of the most important differences between Tolkien and the more simplistic versions of fantasy that make up the bulk of what came after the publication of 'The Lord of the Rings' is Tolkien's insistence on the inevitability and sadness of endings. Even if the good guys win, much will be sacrificed, and the world as the protagonists know it will come to an end. This is most evident in his handling of the elves, but also in figures such as Aragorn who is shown not as a young man, in the glorious morning of adulthood (as he would be in almost any other fantasy author's hands), but as a guy who is definitely a little the worse for wear and tear, even if he can still decapitate orcs with the best of them. This is not Walt Disney's world of primary colors or John Wayne-style westerns with unambiguous good guys and bad guys. In fact, in Tolkien's universe, the good are often hampered by their own deficiencies, or tempted by their own delusions, or disabled by the treachery of erstwhile allies. The bad guys often unwittingly facilitate their own doom through the same kinds of in-fighting and mutual suspicion. No one in LoTR has absolute moral clarity, and that, I think is part of Tolkien's creative genius. Through careful casting, camera-work and scripting, Jackson has been able to capture this essential ingredient in Tolkien's Middle Earth. Cate Blanchett's Galadriel and above all, Ian McKellan's Gandalf embody this to the tips of their boots. Huge cheers for the whole cast and the technical crew for this movie. Tolkien's spirit goes on into the new millennium.
Rating:
Summary: Movielover
Review: This is the greatest movie ever made, with great actors and a terrific messagem it is a classic. Every household should own this movie, you will watch it over and over and each time see something greater in it than the last time.
Rating: 
Summary: Perfect 1/3 of a Movie
Review: LOTR has all the makings of a wonderful film; however the movie itself becomes a victim of its own ambition. Jackson crafted a fine film, but the emotional structure is deeply flawed. It's all rising action without a decent climactic moment. This was a necessity to film three movies - but I disagree with those that state LOTR:FOTR as the best movie ever made. Granted, the structure problems couldn't really be solved. However, the fight choreography was very poor in my mind. Full of quick cuts and close ups, it was impossible to get a sense of scope or adrenelin in the numerous fights. The DVD though has a lot of bonus features - however, Jackson should save all this for the eventual box set... but that's just my $.02.
Rating:
Summary: Best Film of the Year
Review: The American Film Institute (AFI) was accurate, while the Academy was wrong this year. "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring" was easily the best film of 2001. That said we turn to reasons why it was so. First of all, it should be said that the film was amazingly true to its source material (unlike one other major film which was pure fantasy disguised as biography), and that was no easy matter. The attention to detail was stunning, especially when one went back to the books to review those details. Certain dramatic license was taken to accentuate this chapter and set up the next, but littel was done that was not in the books somewhere. It was also beautifully produced (the Academy at least recognized that). New Zealand's "chamber of commerce" was handed a free ad campaign here. It was a literate tale, of course it had to be given its source. How wonderful to be able to commend a film that may encourage Americans to read, and one that emphasizes literate speech. Across the board the film was very well acted with several performances that warranted recognition. Overall, an epic version of an epic tale. And time will show that this entry, along with the other two that will be seen over the next two years, will be considered film classics. There is a school of thought that holds that "The Lord of the Ring" was the best novel of the last century, and a solid case can be made for that claim. In time a similar claim may be made for this master film version of Tolkein's epic work. Bravo! Bravo! Bravo! Bravo! Bravo!
Rating:
Summary: The most entertaining film I've seen in a long time
Review: Is it the best movie of all time? Probably not, but its certainly one of my own personal favourites. Its received a lot of bad publicity in the british press, but most of these reviewers are willing to admit to their narrow mindedness up front with revealing statements as to the true nature of their objections(eg 'a film that appeals to the computer games generation' or 'I've never been a fan of the fantasy genre') Forgive my cynicism, but its always been the hallmark of the intellectually insecure and pretentious to take a stand point contrary to popular opinion purely because it works outside ones own area of interest, or perhaps to further their own agendas and generate more publicity for themselves. The film is simply a brilliant cinematic experience. From the sweeping landscapes, to the brilliant characterisations, and the roaming camera perspectives. The panning shots around Isengard and the opening prologue were particularly clever and well executed. The themes so important to the success of the book - camaraderie in the face of overwhelming circumstance, innocence and innocence lost - come through strongly without being overly sentimental. Ian McKellan gives an outstanding performance as Gandalf the gray - a wizard has never been portrayed so convincingly in film before. An effort which is only equaled in my mind, by Ian Holm's often overlooked performance as Bilbo Baggins - truely magnificent. Thats not to say the film is completely without flaws, I think almost everyone agrees that Hugo Weaving(who is a great actor in his own right)was probably miscast as Elrond, and for my money, Cate Blanchet's portrayal of Galadriel was possibly a bit too cold and ethereal for its own good. But I understand that may be rectified in the DVD director's cut which shows a far greater range of Blanchett's acting talents. Of course you can't talk about this movie without mentioning the special effects. I was stunned, not so much by the quality, which was comparabe to an industrial lights and magic project, but for the fact that it came from a small New Zealand operation. I just never realised the talent and technology had been refined to that point in that part of the world (I lived there for sometime and have always worked in related industries, so I think I am giving a fair assessment.) The only other criticism I've heard is that the action scenes are possibly a bit hard to follow. I feel this comes down to personal tastes, Peter Jackson isn't John Wu, but by the same merit the Fellowship of the Rings is not an action movie and I think the stylised action scenes complemented the story well. At any rate, I certainly don't hear the same complaints about Gladiator which used a similar visual style. So I'd just like to say, 'thank you Peter Jackson'. You've created a masterpiece of modern cinema, one which will be remembered long after its critics are dead and forgotten, a wonderful legacy that parallels Tolkein's own struggle and achievements in life.
Rating:
Summary: this isn't a movie. it's an epic masterpiece
Review: There will never be anything else in this world like this movie. It is incredible, it is brilliant. There are so many good things about this movie that i could write 10,000 words. It leaves you breathless as you experience the magic and wonder of the movie. You will feel like you are in middle-earth immersed in it's beauty. To make the movie even better there is a superb score that will go down in history. I reccomend this to anyone who enjoys movies of any sort.
| 
