Rating: 
Summary: AWESOME JUST AWESOME SPECTACULAR!!!
Review: this movie is da bomb! no boring parts! they even made the shelob part scary! awesome music great graphics scary parts action parts no corny parts! AWESOME this movie will definetly be a classic! this is a must see movie!
Rating:
Summary: BEST MOVIE EVER!
Review: What can I say that hasn't already been said? It's perfect! Pne thing I would like to add. Someone said that gollum should have been played by a real actor. He was! Andy Serkis completly acted the part. Gollum's expersions are his. They just altered his appearence.
Rating: 
Summary: Four Improvements
Review: RETURN OF THE KING
Theatrical Version ReviewAlthough the cinematic achievement of the theatrical version of 'The Lord of
the Rings: The Return of the King' may be considered unparalleled in the genre
of epic fantasy, there are problems with the film. Arguably, there are four
major areas where I feel there could be improvements. 1.) The Smeagol flashback opening runs a bit too long, and could be trimmed to
one half of its length. The Edoras Victory Party could also be cut in half.
Streamlining the first twenty minutes of the film would leave room for the
Death of Saruman, a necessity considering the evil wizard's stature in the
first two films. 2.) Denethor's ownership of a palantir and his obsession with using this seeing
stone would explain his madness more fully. A short scene revealing this fact
once again develops Denethor's character better than the film's simplistic use
of grief alone. 3.) The absence of the Orc Chieftain Quasimodo's death scene as well as the
face-off between Gandalf and the Lord of the Nazgul are both glaring
omissions. The over-expanded Arwen story could have been trimmed to include
these two necessary story closures that would have greatly improved the film. 4.) The House of Healing scene is compulsory for two reasons. The hospital
sequence establishes the blossoming romance between Eowyn and Faramir as well
as revealing the healing powers of Aragorn. The omission of this scene is yet another
poetic jewel left out of the Lord of the Rings' cinematic crown. Again, my affection for this trilogy soars even though I feel the critique
above illuminates the editorial errors in bringing the great epic to the silver
screen. I eagerly await the Extended Edition that surely includes some of these
scenes.
Rating:
Summary: LOTR - ROTK - Heart Wrenching Eye Candy
Review: Doing a "blue collar" review of this movie is at best difficult. I sat for the three and a half hours in a theater with two hundred plus other people totally engulfed by this production. Though not faithful to the books I read for the first time in Vietnam, the story flowed beautifully with no breaks (those places that inevitably occur in most movies where you look around and see what other people are doing) in the story line. Peter Jackson and Company have brought to the screen a visually stunning, action packed, and, in places, a heart wrenching version of this third installment of Tolkien's masterpiece. The setting selections coupled with the special effects make this one of the great visual epics of all time. I was especially taken with the performance of Sean Astin (Sam) during the scenes with Frodo after reaching Shelob's lair. I actually heard the lady beside me crying during the scene where Sam thinks Frodo is dead and again on the side of Mount Doom. Though overlooked for major awards, Mr. Astin proved, at least to this reviewer, that he is a fine actor. The battle scene before the gates of Gondor was the most visually exciting segment of the movie with Orlando Bloom's (Legolas) battle with the giant elephant capping it. Elijah Wood (Frodo), Viggo Mortensen (Aragorn), and Sir Ian McKellen (Gandalf) turned in their normal solid supurb performances begun in the first and second movies. While the part of Arwen was played beautifully by Liv Tyler, I didn't care for insertion of a love story that was only hinted at in the books. Mr. Jackson was able, though, to make the story flow naturally as if it was part of the original story. I was also a little bewildered by the number of endings the film seemed to have. For the last five minutes of screen time I, not being an individual who stays for the on screen credits, felt like a jack-in-the-box. Movies, in my mind, should be like an classical music overture and give you one good loud ending after which the director puts down his wand and bows. This grand movie seems to be like we who have been watching the trilogy for over two years now. It and we didn't want it to end. Probably the best thing about this movie and it's two prevously released installments is that young and old will be watching on the edge of their seats and enjoying this future classic long after I'm history. If you haven't seen the movie you've missed a great "feel-good" experiences in cinema history.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent movie!!
Review: This was a great movie. Although I never read the books, the movie was very well made. There was plenty of action and the special effects were phenomenal!! The story always kept you on the edge of your seat and even had some surprise twists and turns. This movie was a bit too long for my liking (about 3 1/2 hours) but otherwise a very enjoyable movie.
Rating:
Summary: it sticks with you long after its all over
Review: I love the Lord of the Rings movies, and LOTR: The Return of the King is quite a satisfying conclusion to the Peter Jackson trilogy. It's better than the previous two films, not in terms of story, as all three simply begin, continue, and end the story of the 'ring', but rather in terms of quality and expression. You can tell that the filmmakers are really in their element by the time they work on this film, and all I could do was sit back and be filled with awe time and time again at the music, the imagery, the grandeur, the epic nature of the battles, the incredible effects, and the emotion. I see the whole trilogy as one movie now, but each part has a certain style different persons may prefer; 'Fellowship' was graceful and beautifully slow, capturing the feel of the shire, the argonath, moria and rivendell perfectly, showing off incredible music with each scene, a really well done introduction to middleearth, 'Towers' was a huge suprise to many with all its action and heart pumping visuals, taking the best action shots of the first film to the next level, like the 'balrog's fall' and the 'attack on isengard by the ents'; it created many new fans who thought middleearth was 'quite beautiful' but still 'quite boring', by really increasing the tempo of the story. And gollum...oh, my, GOODNESS. He was already so compelling (yet repulsive) in the first film...but NO ONE could have expected the endearing (chilling) performance he gave in the Two Towers. This third film, 'King', is my favorite though. I like it the most because it combined the graceful imagery and music of the first film, with the action and heartracing tempo of the second, and then added delicious layers of emotion again and again until the whole film just transcended genre and became a masterwork of cinematic expression that i have rarely ever experienced. I felt like there was so much to take in that was enjoyable, that I would just have to see it again and again in order to fully get the most out of it - it was that amazing to me. When it ends you realise you just can't hate something that has this much love of story and filmmaking written all over it. You may not cry at how the story ends, but the experience stays with you long after it over, and should you see it again, you tear ducts may not react the same way. I highly recommend the filmed trilogy of the Lord of the Rings to everyone, especially those who are tired of the same old same old kinds of movies all the time (really - many more films lack exceptionality than not), or those just looking for something new or different, or unexpected. This is a movie for the thinker who likes a slice of adventure, beauty, and music with his/her story. An epic adventure with beauty and heart, that isn't from the Lucas/Spielberg era...who could have expected it?
Rating: 
Summary: A Respectable Finish
Review: There were a number of terrific scenes, and the cinematography and special effects were probably the best I've ever seen. I do not think it was too long, or had too many endings -- in fact I look forward to the extended edition. The Aragorn/Legolas/Gimli story was especially well adapted, and Gollum was a delight, but after an astonishingly good start (the first two movies), I feel that Jackson slipped a little on this one. I have three complaints:
1 - Overlooking Minas Tirith (the big Gondor city) is an absurd man-made cliff with an opening in the middle of the wall. All that was missing was a sign saying "leap here". Was it really neccessary to create this monstrosity so that the steward could jump rather than just burn to death?
2 - Some scenes were so melodramatic (including orchestra swells so obvious it seemed like parody) that I found myself laughing during what were supposed to be tender moments. Sam and Frodo were the primary culprits. Entirely too much time was spent repeating the same extreme close-ups of those two doing their best "love and concern" faces.
3 - There was also a dull, unneccessary (and to those who read the books, confusing) side story about Arwen becoming mortal.
A good movie, but not a great one. I expect that the scenes added in the extended edition will bump it up to 4 stars for me, but it can't compare to Fellowship, or even Two Towers.
Rating:
Summary: Worth its Acadamy Awards!
Review: Why do I need to write about something that swept through the Oscars? Because it is that good, if not better! The movie is 3 1/2 hours long and my only complaint is that it had to end! There are some really tense moments in this film especially when Frodo, Sam, and Smeagle battle over the ring. Some of the band of characters fall in this film but I do not want to give it away. Will Aragon become King? Perhaps if he can get the help of some ghost knights. Some phenominal battle scenes including some new giant "elephant-like" beasts that are as well animated as any Star Wars creature.
Rating:
Summary: The most enjoyable 3 1/2 hours ever!
Review: The only thing bad I can say about this movie is that I didn't want it to end! Just as good as the first two (I wonder why this was the only one to win Best Picture). If you are unfamiliar with the books then some of the suspense may overwhelm you, especially one of the climatic scenes between Sam, Frodo and Smeagle and the Ring. Some of the band fall and you wonder when things get bleak if Aragon will indeed return as king. I don't want to give it a way but some ghosts play a big part in how things turn out.
Rating: 
Summary: just an ordinary movie
Review: This movie is fine and "okay".Maybe it deserves only 3 stars but since there are too many hyped and confused fans of the series giving it all stars I will try to be different. STORY - nothing original nor refreshing, actually this kind of fantasy story is so common it becomes dull. In addition since I play a many RPG games I can tell you the endings from just the first of the movie. I DO NOT understand why academic awards gave it a hyped rating and awards but after all most movies awarded by Oscar are all very dull and I fell asleep almost immediately. The story has a lot of pointless talking to make the movie really long, I mean seriously they can simply finish the story in just one movie. For me: throw the damned ring into a volcano and be done with it. I think there is a difference between me and those who supports the movie: I have seen a lot in term of the story, and LOTR fans are like frogs living inside a well - never know what the world looks like. SPECIAL EFFECTS - inturn of effects it still falls behind The Matrix series. Due the the dull story I constantly remind myself how fake everything was. Yes Matrix is fake but it is intense enough to not to think of the special effects but rather the story. SOUNDS - the sounds/musics are fine but lack the intensity of musics that rival those of matrix or star wars. In other words it is too oscar-liked musics that are used to put babies to sleep. Philosophy - There is absolutely no philosophy in LOTR for anyone to ponder upon. The conversation is straight simple/ plain talking for those simple minded commoners. And that's why it receives a lot of support, it is plain simple and common since people do not have the capability to ponder upon philosophy. I heard of some people saying how the core movie shows the fighting against evil, that's lame. Think: would you ever be motivated to fight evil? No! there are other reasons for you to fighte evil beside plain fighting evil. Trust me if everyone feel the need to fight evil the world will be a lot peaceful WHY? there is evil in every politics/government, FIGHT them. But in reality what happen? People support the government, thus people are the evil's minions and they do not know it(they think they are fighting the right cause). Back to the LOTR - it is an okay movie that receive too much hype by people and media. I sat down and think how it is better than other movies(based on academic awards) and I could not think of any reasons all all. But after all even Olympic Games are fraudulant who knows what dark secret happened in the Awards. They are after all only humans.
| 
