Rating: 
Summary: Well...there will never be a movie that will shadow this one
Review: OMIGOD!!!! This is the greatest movie of ALL TIME seriously, I absolutely adored it, and wowsa Elijah and Orlando are soooooooo gorgeous!!!! Oh baby the part where Frodo gets stabbed by a ringwraith had me sniffling to say the least! The orcs were really gross and Sauron really gave me the heebies! I thought Liv Tyler was great in her role, she really made the charactor 3 dimensional. Just please take my advice... Buy-the-movie.
Rating:
Summary: Film History in the Making
Review: On December 23rd, 2001 I walked into a theater to see 'the Lord of the Rings: the Fellowship of the Ring', and though I did not know it at the time, I walked out a changed person. Of all the movies I have ever seen, this film and the sequel after it were clearly and obviously the best of them all. Every element of this film is flawless...the acting, the direction, the score, everything. This movie is not just entertainment, it is art...every frame is a beautiful masterpiece. Although it deserved far more recognition than it got, what the Academy thinks holds little sway with me. I know that this film towers above any of its time as not only a good film, but a superb film, an acheivement in filmmaking as well as storytelling.
Rating: 
Summary: Computer Users: Be Warned
Review: On many late model Dell computers, both laptop and desktop, you won't be able to play these DVDs. Your computer won't even know you have a disk in the DVD drive. The problem: your Samsung SD-616 drive won't recognize the disk. The solution: go to the Dell site and download the firmware update for your drive.
Rating:
Summary: Slightly used "theartrical" version for sale
Review: On second thought, I'll keep that one for the bonus material, which is totally different from the 3 extra disks (including the Nat Geo special) in this set. About the bonus material in the extended edition: I spent an extended weekend swimming through the ocean of material, but just the other day, I was surprised to find "new" stuff that I had missed before. I'm wondering how they are going to match this effort when they release "the two towers" DVD.The extended/new scenes alone are worth getting this set, if you are a LOTR fan. They chopped a lot of important stuff to get the theatrical release under 3 hours. I have no reason to view the chopped version ever again. Alright, alright, I'll admit it. All I really wanted was the really cool book ends. They're too small and light for books (and not flat-sided, like a functional bookend) but it looks cool on my entertainment center holding this dvd set, the NatGeo special, the theatrical version, and the 3 animated LOTR/Hobbit dvds. OK, so Peter Jackson re-wrote a lot of the story to make it into a movie (what's all this Arwen business?) but I'm rating this DVD set as 5* on it's merits. I'm not rating the movie (4*)
Rating: 
Summary: Oh, what could have been?
Review: On the question, should this movie be purchased? Possible, but mostly likely NO. That's what a review on amazon.com should be about. To further explain, if you are a collector of movies and a big ( but not true) tolkein fan, then maybe, just maybe, you should purchase this movie. Else-- Just rent it one time and be done with it. Peter Jackson misses many of the main points of the written story. One of the main points of the Lord of the Rings (book) is that Aragorn accomplishes much of what he does to be worthy of the elven princess, Arwen. In the book Arwen is praised as an evening star, untouchable my most mortals; yet Aragorn aspires to wed her, the most beautiful female on the planet.
The character of both the ent and Faramir are trashed by Peter Jackson works and the changes he made are poor choices in that the changes hurt the story and do not improve on the orginal text. So, although the movie has some merit (mostly in visualy effects) this movie should not be purchased by the masses and therefore only recieves one star from my review. I can recommend that you read the original books. Which can also be purchased at amazon.com
Rating:
Summary: Missed key element(s)
Review: On the surface, it was all done "right"..the acting..scenery..special effect etc..but overall, that special magic in Tolkiens story was missing. Instead of focusing so much on Orcs (who were made to look like Freddy Kruger) many beautiful/powerful subtle moments were cut short/lost. Even the ominous roving eye of Sauron, which in the book, was scanning and searching for Frodo, was always presented as a full blown piece of special effects. So in short, Tolkiens moving epic saga was rushed though and lost much in this translation. For instance, Braveheart, which Peter Jackson said he used in some ways as a template...was more moving in the psychological arena and the characters evoked more awe and empathy than in LOTR. Even in Starwars, the dynamic between Vader and Luke was stonger than in this movie...which it should not have been. In spite of all of this, I gave it 4 stars because so much was good..but, over the top and one of the best movies in the last few years, it sadly is not.
Rating: 
Summary: If you loved the books don't waste your time with the movie
Review: Once agin the old addage "The book is always better than the movie." is proved here. Very little was as it should be. I could not watch this movie a second time. Peter should be ashamed at what he did to Mr Tolkien's wonderful story. I can't tell you how disappointed I was when I saw this movie. Jackson seemed more interested in highlighting his special effects abillities than telling the story as it should be told. I will live in Middle Earth in my imagination thanks to Mr Tolkien not jackson.
Rating:
Summary: One of the Best Films Ever Made
Review: Once upon a time, an evil sorcerer forged a magical Ring of great power. With it he could rule all of Middle-Earth, but it was taken from him and he was defeated. The Ring passed from owner to owner until, centuries later, a three-foot-tall, furry-footed, peace-loving hobbit found it. But the sorcerer, Sauron, had returned and was determined to reclaim his treasure. Unless Frodo Baggins can destroy the Ring in the volcanic Mount Doom, all of Middle-Earth will be plunged into darkness and oppression. The way is not easy. Much is at stake.
A superb masterpiece necessary for every Tolkien fan to own. If you are not a fan, chances are you will still love it. This film succeeds on every level and is virtually flawless in every respect. You are not a true video collector unless you own this film. A must.
Rating:
Summary: Brilliant - a masterpiece...
Review: Once upon a time, J. R. R. Tolkien taught the world what fantasy could be. Peter Jackson, many, many decades later, re-defines the genre with a fantastic and almost-flawless masterpiece. If you've read the books, you'll know what's been cut out - but every cut is made with the utmost reverence. You can see the effort in every single frame - the fantastic art direction, costumes, the languages even. The addition of conversations in (subtitled) Elvish - one of Tolkien's invented languages was a master stroke - it manages to give us an idea of the sheer expanse of Tolkien's creation without overwhelming us with its detail. The acting is fantastic - from Sir Ian McKellen, who will probably be this century's 'definitive Gandalf the Grey' to Elijah Wood, who is wonderfully apt for the film's main-role, Frodo Baggins, the unlikely hero. The movie's other two wonderfully nuanced performances come from Viggo Mortenson, as brooding king-in-exile Aragorn, and Sean Bean as the flawed-hero Boromir. There are other noteworthy performances - Liv Tyler, as the Elf-princess Arwen (who actually doesn't appear in the first book at all), Hugo Weaving as Elrond and Cate Blanchett as Galadriel, who manages to look beautiful and sinister at the same time (you've got to watch out for her face when she says - All Shall Love Me And Despaaairrr!). Even the criticism that has often been made of the books - that the characters don't have enough 'psychological depth' can't possibly be made of the film. Sir Ian McKellan portrays Gandalf as human - and varies his body language accordingly in every scene; humble in the scenes with Christopher Lee as Saruman, the head of the order of Wizards, and authoritative in others. Watch for his reaction when Frodo offers to carry the ring, or when he delivers Tolkien's famous 'don't be too quick to deal out death in judgement' line - he speaks those lines with the greatest possible sincerity, making them mean so much more. I'm rooting for him to win the Oscar, as I am for Peter Jackson to win Best Director, and for the film to win best Adapted Screenplay. The special effects are fantastic, and wonderfully subtle - there are no laser-rays coming out of Gandalf'f staff; but more importantly, Peter Jackson's directorial vision comes across in every scene - you can see that this is a lot more than a 'SFX-flick' or a 'swords-and-sorcery' epic. I had thought it impossible for anyone to have brought the Lord of the Rings to the screen, but Peter Jackson has managed the impossible, and done it admirably. Criticisms? Yes - I found Elrond's letting the hobbits join the Fellowship a little improbable (the book makes it much more believable), and would have liked more 'character'-scenes - I suspect these were cut in editing, and expect they'll be included when the DVD version is released. But I cannot find another flaw - the direction, screenplay, acting, all make this the best film I've seen this year. The only problem - we need to wait one whole year for the sequel.
Rating:
Summary: Faithful, But Not To A Fault.
Review: One critique of that other movie (which I nevertheless quite enjoyed!) was that it was faithful to its source material to a degree that eliminated the opening for a director's touch; in so doing, some asserted, the real potential was missed for bold creativity and a stirringly beautiful film. The Lord of the Rings is different perhaps because here we see someone who was faithful...but also creative. Doubtless this will cost him something with some constituents. He does take license; but he does so atop a faithful and loving recreation of the whole world and story of The Lord of the Rings. Mr. Jackson's reported habit of re-reading each chapter just before shooting it was a microcosm of his whole approach to the film: othe film was telling a bit of human history, not a some wild fantasy. This history was, perhaps, a bit more fantastical than the usual. As such the story is told much like Homer might tell it, and the audience is left to sort between historical fact, legend, and pure mythologies. There are facets of the way the story was either interpreted or altered to accomodate film that will displease you. Some did me. Nevertheless, I think it more important to say that the film was beautiful, faithful to the heart of the story and nearly all of its facts. Every once in a while it is worth giving something our unrestrained and enthusiastic praise. I believe many will feel in viewing it as I did: that we are lucky to be drawn into such a story, one told so stirringly. We are given feasts for the senses, the heart, and the mind. Part of the film's beauty is in just how bad the bad folks are, just how good some of the good creatures are - and just how conflicted many of the characters are. Beauty is also in the sincerity of the performances, without which the entire thing falls to shreds. Beauty also flows from the images themselves - their qualities and their natures. The faces were extraordinary, the land was near-magical, and the special effects were dazzling, without intruding into the story hardly at all. In this film the depth of character, relationship, story, and exploration of archetypal themes are combined with an amazing breadth of scope, scale, and theatre. I will see this film again in the theatres before I purchase the DVD - something I have not done in many years.
|
