Rating: 
Summary: Beautiful Film, BUT....
Review: Yes, this was a beautiful film full of special effects, but if you were actually expecting to watch a movie version of JRR Tolken's LORD OF THE RINGS, you will be disappointed. Yes, of course you cannot expect a movie to reproduce an entire novel faithfully these days, though HARRY POTTER seems to be an exception. What bothered me most about this film were the changes that seemed to me to change the plot. Arwen saving Frodo from the Ring Wraiths? She was an Elven princess, above such menial tasks--no warrior princess, to be sure (they have combined her character with Lady Eowyn, who was a "shieldmaiden" of Rohan.) One of the underlying stories of LORD OF THE RINGS was to show how a hobbit, unaccustomed to adventure and warfare, had the courage to change so that by the end of the story, he and his companions were competent enough to take care of the villians that had invaded Hobbiton. So far, in this movie, Frodo seems anything but brave, falling when he should be standing up and fighting. The characters were miscast. Strider is all wrong; he does not give the impression of being a late-fortyish Ranger, out of the Wild. Sam is too tall, and Pip & Merry were too cute and silly. Gandalf, on the other hand, was not disappointing.Kids, don't figure you can do your school book report by watching this movie. It seems such a shame that with all the technology that went into this film, Elliah Wood could not stick to the story, but felt he could "improve" upon Tolken....
Rating: 
Summary: No Other Direction
Review: I love three-hour movies. I often hear about how Fellowship of the Rings (or the Green Mile, for that matter) was a long film. To that I say: no. Why? Because they used every second of those three hours. A movie can be twice as long at half the length if it is the sort that drags on. The Fellowship of the Ring does anything but that. In Fellowship, director Peter Jackson has given birth to what I do not doubt is his life's work. Each scene, each shot is done with expert precision, and filled with touches, which were hardly necessary on their own, but add up to one of the most enchanting epics ever to grace the silver screen. As an example: at one point, Strider picks up a sword, and casts it to the ground. Had this been all, then there would be no complaints. Instead, the blade turns to dust in his hand. A little touch? Yes. But they add up. This is not to say Fellowship is all about subtleties-that would hardly fit the grand epic. From the opening three millennia in the past, to the conclusion, the movie brims with adventure, fear, corruption, mirth, sorrow. It is almost as hard to offer too much praise, as it is to imagine a better adaptation of a beloved English language classic. It's been said before, but it cannot be said to much: New Zealand is Middle Earth if such a place ever existed The Fellowship of the Ring also has some great acting. Gandalf (Ian Mckellan) is given the most acclaim (and an Oscar nod), but he is hardly alone. Ian Holm brings a machless performance as the aging Bilbo, almost corrupted by the ring and still tempted by its evil. Sean Bean's Boromir is the flipside; we see him slowly drawn to the ring. And Elijah Wood does an admirable job as Frodo, who knows his grim fate and does not fear to face it. If there was an ensamble cast Oscar (and there should be), this would take the prize. However, there is one sad note: although I wish everyone involved in this film luck, I believe that The Lord of the Rings may be the occupational highpoint for all involved. Why? Simple: what are the odds of anyone being in both Lord of the Rings and something even better?
Rating: 
Summary: bored of epic things
Review: My biggest criticism of the movie is that it tries too hard to be an epic, and as a result has its moments of grandeur, and unfortunately, its moments of stultifying boredom. I'm sympathetic to the problem the director ran into: keeping true to Tolkien's vast vision while making a movie that didn't sprawl for six hours. As someone once remarked, "more about less" -- I'm sure Tolkien fans would've have complained, but I'd rather irritate a few people than make a bad movie. Don't get me wrong -- I've read the Hobbit countless times, the Lord of the Rings trilogy several times, and finally I've actually read Simarillion twice (for this I believe I deserve significant financial compensation) -- so I don't mean to disparage Tolkien's vision. But to think that one can reproduce the magic of the trilogy by being literally faithful to the text is simply naive. In short, this is probably a good movie if you are a Tolkien fan, but a disappointment if you are looking for combination of action, drama, and special effects (well, they did this pretty well, except for the obscene "eye of sauron" -- what the [heck] were they thinking?).
Rating:
Summary: Breathtaking
Review: This DVD sets a new standard for the DVD market in general. Not only does it contain the first movie in the trilogy, which was worth the money I paid for it, it also contains in-depth commentary from the director who previews part two of the triology. The preview was good, but begs the question, what characters from the book will they leave in and what will they cut out? Probably one of the most debated issues from Lord of the Ring's junkies I know of. I am not a Lord of the Rings junkie, but I do appreciate the quality of this DVD and the filmaking that went into it. Most DVDs have special features, but these are actually worth watching. A must see.
Rating: 
Summary: Incredibly boring
Review: Although the DVD hold the interst somewhat better than the book, The Lord of the Rings remains incredibly boring.
Rating: 
Summary: Wonderful Movie, Awful DVD!!
Review: Wait for the 4-disc release in November. 'nuff said.
Rating:
Summary: Looking at the double dip
Review: This review is addressed to those of you concerned about buying this DVD, when the super-special edition is due out in November. I bought this DVD. And I will buy the special edition. I don't like double dips any more than you do. but this is one of the few that is worth it. First of all, I doubt this is a "cheap marketing ploy". Peter Jackson and company are a little bit busy with the Two Towers right now. So we could have waited for November or gotten this now. Second, if you buy both versions, you'll get a $5-10 rebate, depending on the version. That substantially reduces the cost of the double dip. As for the DVD itself, I agree that the extras are nothing to write home about. Three TV specials, but they are heavily based on the lordoftherings.net featurettes. You'll find the same interviews repeated over and over again. The preview of the extended DVD and the Two Towers was nice. The transfer is excellent -- a little bit of pixilization here and there (especially in the credits), but no halos around foreground objects, no murky colors. The movie looks and sounds great. As for the movie (hey, isn't that what reviews are about?), it is of course, excellent -- the best movie of 2001. Grand, exciting and touching -- almost operatic. OK, yes, it does not have the magnicent sprawl and contemplation of the books -- but I don't see how it could without being 10 hours long. I suggest doing both -- read the books and watch the movie -- in either order. I am reminded of the Arthur legend. Malloray's Le Morte D'Arthur is excellent. Excalibur is a great movie but is far smaller in scope (thankfully) than the book. In essence, Peter Jackson is taking Tolkein's story and re-telling it in film, as though re-telling an ancient legend passed down for generations, with as many nods to the book as he can squeeze in.
Rating:
Summary: RING O PLENTLY
Review: WELL WHAT CAN I SAY EXCEPT THAT I CANT WAIT FOR THE SECOND AND THIRD INSTALLMENTS OF POSSIBLE THE GREATEST STORY EVER WRITTEN AND IF MY EIGHT YEAR SON CAN SIT THOUGH A THREE HOUR FILM WITHOUT A MUTTER THEN I KNOW IT'S NOT JUST ME WHO THINKS THAT THINKS THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING IS A TRUE MASTER PIECE.
Rating:
Summary: Must See DVD
Review: I saw The Lord of The Rings in a movie theater (after re-reading the trilogy) and was absolutely enthralled. Many times it was like Tolkein's words were leaping out of the book onto the screen. I have waited for this movie for ages and it was all that I hoped it would be (I have the original VHS tapes of the Hobbitt and the semi animated version). However the beauty and excitement of the movie could not completely wipe out the discomfort of the theater seats--the noise of the people munching and drinking (and talking). Now I have the DVD and have seen it twice in the comfort of my home--and seen things that I missed before--the coffee got cold and the munchies uneaten--the 3 hours went so fast I could not believe it was over. The special features on the second disk I could have done without since I had already seen them on the Web and the TV--except for the preview of the 'Two Towers'. I will buy the extended edition of this DVD but I could not wait until November so I bought this one first. I await the second movie with excitement in my heart--I have always wanted to see a 'live' version of the Ents. So suspend your disbelief--'Middle Earth Lives' and Jackson has made it more real--see all of the movies and read the books and buy the DVDs so you have the magic forever.
Rating:
Summary: LotR - DO NOT BUY THIS DVD
Review: Hey, I loved the movie - but this DVD is just a marketing ploy. The real DVD set doesn't come out until November, wait for it! The extras on this DVD add absolutely nothing but advertising.
|
