Rating: 
Summary: A BRAVO FOR THE TRILOGY & 3 SOUNDTRACKS
Review: "I regret to announce that this is the end. I'm going now, I bid you all..." the best. I sure will miss the rush of expecting more from the LOTR cast, after this, there's no more. I love everything involved with the movie and since I'm a composer (film score composer wanna be someday) I will miss waiting for the december to come...after this, the coming christmas won't be the same. I wish these movies will go on forever, but all WE have to decide is what to do with the experience that the producer and the cast left us with. To me, this has been the best cinematic experience of my life. These movied changed my life and I hope in the years to come anybody who watches the movie will still admire the great talent and work of the whole cast. enough said! 11/25/2003
Rating:
Summary: Rich; Beautifully done
Review: The extended cut of Peter Jackson's Award-winning Fellowship of the Ring is even better than the theatrical version. It is a rich and beautifully done rendition of Tolkien's work, more faithful to the book than The Two Towers. Jackson captures the ethos of Tolkien's vast subcreation, Middle-earth, with its rich array of people and places. From the warmth of the Shire and Hobbiton, to the idyllic beauty of Rivendell, to the terror of the Moria and Khazad-Dum, or the enchantment of Lothlorien, Jackson brings it all to life. The characterisations are excellent - who can imagine a better Saruman than Christopher Lee, a better Gandalf than Ian McKellan, or a better Bilbo than Ian Holmes? The extra footage in this film includes an extended gift-giving sequence in Lothlorien, and though the changes in details from the book seem unnecessary, one hardly cares or notices, it is so well done. A great movie has been made even better!
Rating:
Summary: Visually stunning, emotionally riveting!!!!!
Review: THE masterpiece of fantasy or epic filmmaking. A lifetime's achievement. An absolute crown jewel the director & actors will be remembered for in their epitaphs. Sean Bean is fantastic! Kudos for his performance! Anyone who doesn't cry at his final scene is made of stone. Each time I see it, I am more touched by the character's bravery and heart.
Casting overall was superb. Aragorn - perfect. Gandalf - perfect. Hobbits - perfect. Arwen - beyond perfectection.
Scenery is what I dreamed in my head when I read the book. My only complaint is Cate Blanchett as Galadrial. Blanchett just doesn't get the character right. G is supposed to be the most beautiful elf queen you ever lays eyes upon. But Cate Blanchett's G comes off very austere and scary. I like Blanchett the actor, but this not a good portrayal. There should have been more ethereal beauty and her voice was so deep and too booming.
Rating:
Summary: One film to rule them all
Review: This movie was absolutely awesome.
I am fourteen years old, and I genuinely enjoyed this movie. Many of my friends said that it was too long and boring, I didn't think so at all. This is the kind of movie where you have to sit and pay attention so that you don't miss any of the subtleties of the film. I read the books two years ago, and I liked them. I was disappointed that such characters as Tom Bombadil weren't in the movie, but I guess you can't have everything. PLease at least RENT this movie, you won't be dissappointed.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent adaptation of the book
Review: Seen this at least 15 times so far...the extra discs are great too!
Rating:
Summary: No Tom Bombadil, but still an excellent movie
Review: The FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING (FOTR) is like Ivory Soap: it's 99.44% pure. That is, it is 99.44% faithful to Tolkien's Fellowship of the Ring. This is highly desirable, because Tolkien's Lord of the Rings trilogy is the greatest English language twentieth century fantasy novel. This movie has outstanding acting. The performances given by Viggo Mortensen (Aragorn) and Sean Bean (Boromir) near the end of FOTR were particularly effective. The scenery and special effects were exceptional. New Zealand was the perfect location for shooting this movie. The integration of live and CGI action images was executed perfectly and seamlessly. Peter Jackson did an extraordinary job directing this movie. As usual, the book is better than the movie, but FOTR is still well worth watching.
Rating:
Summary: Even better than the theatrical version
Review: What can you say about this amazing DVD? First of all, it validates the format --- you can't put together this kind of package on VHS (especially when you consider all the special audio tracks). The film itself is fantastic. The extended version is superior to the theatrical release. And the documentaries are overwhleming. There's so much to watch and learn, it takes days to absorb it all. Special effects that appear on screen for 10 seconds are given 10 minutes of explanation (like the big rigs). They even spend half an hour on just the *sound* of the movie. It's worthwhile to remember how risky the Lord of the Rings project was. After filming all three movies at once (more or less), the first film had to be a blockbuster or the whole project would've been turned into a salvage operation. The DVDs would have been quick-and-dirty attempts to recoup lost millions. But thanks to the success of the first film, the filmmakers could justify this lavish 4-disc set. My favorite moments: The extended Council of Elrond, the early design drawings, the canoe stories (in the documentary), the construction of the Shire, and the biographical documentary about JRR Tolkien. If this extended cut of The Fellowship of the Ring doesn't rate five stars, nothing does.
Rating:
Summary: This movie is the centerpiece to anyone's fantasy collection
Review: Growing up reading The Lord of the Rings a dozen times over, I never would have thought someone would finally release a movie that would do it justice (I had settled for watching Ralph Bakshi's version thinking that's all there would ever be). Then this gem comes along, and it is exactly the way I always pictured it in my mind. I see now why it took so long--because the film-making technology to perfectly capture what all of us loyal readers kept in our hearts couldn't be displayed on the big screen until now. God bless you Peter Jackson!
Rating:
Summary: What makes something cliche?
Review: I am very upset by everyone complaining about what the movie does not have from the book, but my complaint is much different than most. Almost everyone would have to agree with me that every single work of art has its faults. Now, this may mean that for any work to be good, we need to look passed these, however that is not my point. What bothers me is that this means the book itself had to have some faults. Therefore it is possible for a motion picture adaptation to make improvements. And I personally feel that those things left out by the films (both 1 and 2) have, for the most part, been improvements. Before anyone gets the wrong idea, I also feel that though in the movie it was better for some of these to be left out, there are also a couple that it was better to have in the book. Somethings simply don't fit in a movie as they fit in a novel. Someone recently mentioned some of the fantasy aspects of the film to be cliche. Some of those are not cliche, they are simply the genre of the movie!!! Also, how does something become cliche. There has to be an orginal, and perhaps this is it!! I have to admit that there are faults within the movie, it is simply impossible to do it without them, but I cannot say that this film was not up to par when they are so insignificant. This is definitely one of the best adaptations I have ever seen, and it should be appriciated!
Rating: 
Summary: Lord have mercy
Review: Maybe the book is a literary classic but I suspect this movie left out everything except the violence. Worse, everything here is a rudimentary sword/sorcery cliche, the special effects are murky, and the characters only frown, growl, or sweat. The pointyeared archer is handsome and dashing, and there are a couple of impressive images, but overall you're better off playing with your Playstation instead.
|
