The Lord of the Rings

Rating:
Summary: Ok in the beginning....bomb at the end....
Review: Ok, I give this 3 stars, just for dignity, otherwise, I would of given it two. This video made my sister and I laugh at first, the beginning is with actors behind this red sheet! Or thats what it looked like. The animation was very well detailed, but I was confused at times when at Bree or at fights with Orcs and warriors, there were real people!! It just kind of ruined it. And SAM!! That has NO excuse to be soooo horrible!! Sam is my favorite and they make him this extremely fat, space-toothed (...) with a Goofy voice! I was just about to turn it off when he got on! The songs were...ok, not that bad. The Ringwraiths reminded me of demented grandmas sniffing like bloodhounds, and whats with the Saruman being called Aruman or whatever?
I think I actually kept watching this film because of Frodo, and to see what the characters and story plot would look and be like. Frodo I though was pretty adorible, especially when he sees Gandalf after 17 years (look for that). Bilbo and the party was good...Merry and Pippin were cute, and Aragorn? Is he Navajo? Anyways, Legolas, ehhh...Orlando Bloom is definately better! ;) But the plot at the end was (...), and slow and boring, and actaully very blunt at the end. Please, only see this film if you just want to appectiate how wonderful Peter Jackson's film trilogy is.
Last Summary: Animation: 3 out of 5
Arrangment of Plot: 2 1/2 out of 5
Pace of Film: Well paced at first, then after that I was fast forwarding....especially the battle parts...zzzzz
All together: Barely a 3.

Rating:
Summary: Christopher Guard - The Lord of the Rings
Review: While it is true that at the time of its creation, animation was the only form of visual media that could even come close to capturing Tolkien's world, this movie is none the less a horrible scar on my memory. For pity's sake, spare yourself, your children, your friends, do not watch this movie, do not poison your minds eye with its imagery. Unless you seek to degrade the power and beauty of the Lord of the Rings, go elsewhere.

Rating:
Summary: Do NOT buy this
Review: I loved the animated Return of the King and The Hobbit, so when I saw the Lord of the Rings DVD I got all excited and bought it. IT WAS AWFUL!! The Frodo and Sam are completely different and I don't know why they even try to pass this off as part of a set. It was terrible. The presentation is totally different from the other two. I was only able to sit through the first hour, and it was a WORLD OF HURT.

Rating:
Summary: Better Animation Than Disney
Review: For 9 years, I would look at the case, read the synopsis, and look at the pictures. I had read the book THE LORD OF THE RINGS and I LOVED it. I went to the theatre to see the Peter Jackson film, which blew me away. I remembered the animated version I had seen at stores and for my birthday, I got it. After I unwrapped it I popped it into my DVD player and away I went, into a world of adventure, hobbits, elves, dwarfs, and beasts. I was almost as blown away as I was when I saw the Jackson film. Here are many good things about it and a few complaints.

Prologue- Very, very interesting. I thought it was cool how here (and through the entire rest of the film) Ralph Bakshi mixed live action with animation. It might've been even better if it had been entirely in animation.

The Shire- The Shire looked exactly as it looked in my mind when I read the books.I thought all the Shire scenes were very well written, but might've been better if there was a little more music.

The Hobbits- Merry, Pippin, and Frodo looked exactly the same. Sam acted mental and looked just like Bilbo.

Gandalf- his robes kept changing from gray to white, gray to white, but I thought he looked very cool. At the end, when he's live action/ animation, even better.

Saruman- I thought Saruman was awesome. A Shame he wasn't in the movie more than three scenes. I found it rather annoying that Gandalf would call him "Saruman" and then switch back and forth, eventually leading to "Aruman". I think that maybe he should've worn white instead of red. (SARUMAN THE WHITE)

Old Forest- There were no scenes in the Old Forest: Wah! Just like in the Peter Jackson film, they left out Old Man Willow, Tom Bombadil, Goldberry, the Barrow-downs, and the Barrow-wight.

The Ringwraiths- I thought they looked pretty cool, but they should've left their hoods for the entire movie. They looked like spirits of dead Vikings when they're wearing their crowns. I really think they should've remained animation for the entire film, also.

Prancing Pony- WOW! This scene was awesome!!! The live-action people dancing and talking to each other looked REALLY cool. I got a kick out of when Frodo began to dance on the table.

Aragorn- Very good animation on Aragorn. He looks just like a normal human being (with the exception of a messed-up face).

Weathertop- I thought the "Ring World" was interesting (slow motion).

Ford- BORING! The scene drags and drags you along until its stunning conclusion: The Wall of Water. The live-action horses floating in the animated water were very interesting looking.

The Fellowship- Gimli looked cool, but was too tall. Boromir looked like a Viking, but the animation on him was stunning. He was probably the most explained character in the movie. Legolas was very elf-like. His voice was interesting and his bow design was cool.

Gollum- Was very well animated. His toothy grin scared the heck out of me and his eyes are huge.

Helm's Deep- Starts out very good and then drags for about 20 minutes. It gets boring until Gandalf rides out on the battlefield and kills all the orcs (blood everywhere).

If you've seen the Peter Jackson film and want more LORD OF THE RINGS, then you should definately watch this movie. WHATEVER YOU DO, DO NOT WATCH THE ANIMATED Hobbit MOVIE OR The Return of the King (Rankin/Bass) THEY STINK (musicals of THE LORD OF THE RINGS). Just watch this movie. Afterward, you'll be happy you did. _

Rating:
Summary: Lots going for it; worth a look
Review: Everyone knew this project was doomed from the start; an almost foolish undertaking. Even if Bakshi had the time and budget to finish the "Two Towers" part of the trilogy (let alone "Return of the King"), this 1978 animated "Lord of the Rings" would have been trashed all the way 'round.
What we do have, however, is an inspired, faithful (tho' incredibly condensed) animated version that is hardly a "cartoon". The design, direction and acting is very live action, which lends itself well, I think, to the rotoscoping process that is extensively used. In any era of moviemaking, new techniques are introduced and are sometimes used with laughable results. Not so here, although rotoscoping was rarely used elsewhere before or since. I found the dialogue selection very appropriate and well-executed, tho' we all have chapters and conversations we'd prefer left in over others.
The other thing that kills this version is, obviously, the full-length, full-budget trilogy being filmed by Peter Jackson and its wealth of computerized techniques, location shooting, costuming and set and model design. Jackson himself admits to not having read the LOTR until he saw this Bakshi version and many of PJ's scenes seem directly lifted from Bakshi (tho' details in Tolkein's books are so precise, down to angles and scenery, that this is a debatable point).
I rather enjoy the pacing and cohesiveness of this version. There's much dialogue not used in the Jackson version that I think helps propel the story forward. Many scenes are more accurate (Frodo at the Ford of Rivendell) than the PJ version. I really enjoyed the score, too.
Much of the character development is debatable: Sam, for instance, should be simple and slow-witted, but in the Bakshi movie he is made an oafish buffoon, whereas the live-version makes him, mentally, indistinguishable from the other hobbits.
So, given the time and resources available at the time, I feel Ralph Bakshi's "Lord of the Rings" is worth a look and is, at worst, a different interpretation of the much-interpreted trilogy.
(Note: this movie has nothing to do with the Rankin-Bass ["Santa Claus is Coming to Town"] animated films!)

Rating:
Summary: I had high hopes, most of them dashed...
Review: I started my love affair with Middle-Earth nearly 15 years ago when I read The Hobbit for the first time, and I adore Peter Jackson's version of LOTR despite its changes from the book. I watched the animated version of LOTR for the first time several months ago, and I was looking forward to seeing a different cinematic interpretation of one of my favorite books of all time.

But it turned into a MST3K-style joke fest at my house about 10 minutes into the movie. Most of my complaints have been voiced by other reviewers, but I'll leave a short list of my biggest gripes:

-Hobbits: They looked so similar (except for Sam) I couldn't tell them apart until the Fellowship was broken, and then I couldn't tell Merry and Pippin apart.
-Sam: Acted like he was mentally challenged, and was terribly ugly to boot.
Aragorn: Wore a short tunic without pants, which was very distracting. Also, he had no personality to speak of.
Saruman: He looked sort of like Santa Claus, and his name changed from "Saruman" to "Aruman" at some point in the script.
-Nazgul: Looked like zombies out of some bad 60's horror movie.
-Live action/animation: Looked out of place in most of the movie. The orcs and Balrog looked like guys in bad costumes. They could have been much more impressive (maybe) if they had been animated traditionally.
-Boromir: Looked like a Viking.
-Gimli: Wore a hat like the dwarves from Snow White, and also appreared to be maybe an inch or two shorter than the men or elves in the film. Aren't dwarves supposed to be a little shorter than that?
-Accents: Bad all around.
-Frodo's flight to the ford: Seemed to drag on forever with little real action or point.
-Gollum: I don't think this character was taken seriously at all. He was just ridiculous.
-The Two Towers: Should have been left completely out. It made the film overlong and was a poorly done part of the movie overall. Helm's Deep was a yawnfest.
-Ents: I heard a lot of complaints about the Ents looking cartoonish in Jackson's film, but here Treebeard reminded me of a monster out of Scooby Doo or something.
-Lothlorien: The Lothlorien song sounds like a third grade music recital, paired with some trippy animation.
-Omitted characters: As with Jackson's version, some characters were left out here. This time Glorfindel got the shaft again (Legolas takes his place in the story), so did Tom Bombadil, and surprisingly Arwen doesn't get a mention.

This is one to rent if you are really curious about it, but don't buy it unless you are a collector of bad movies.

Rating:
Summary: Everyone is too Critical
Review: The 1978 version of JRR Tolkien's masterpiece The Lord of the Rings was actually a very good film, despite what most people think. It had its own highlights and flaws just like every movie but that is what makes them great.
One of the problems that everyone seems to have with the Bakshi version is that it oveuses the rotoscope. I can understand how people might be upset because of the rotoscope in the close-ups, but it is very difficult to hand draw large armies in an animated film.
One of the things I liked most about it is the awkward and almost crawl-like movements of the Nazgul, as in the novel. This is something that was not seen in the new version.
Some other people have problems with the strange animation in some sequences such as before the Ford of Bruinen. This was the 1970's people! Animation happened to be a little strange back then outside of the way too traditional Disney and Warner Bros.
The greatest part of Bakshi's version is the way it inspires people to read Tolkien's novel. I saw it when I was ten and I immediately started to read The Hobbit and the rest of the series. Of course I had to read them again later to do them any justice.

Rating:
Summary: Oldie, but worth a watch
Review: I vaguely remember that this movie was released during my high school years. It very closely follows FOTR and the TT novels up through the battle at Helm's Deep. The animation is very good, with a beautiful look to the background scenery. The "rotoscoping" gives the film an other-worldly appearance, but I guess it was used primarily as a cost savings for the overall project. It is a shame that the director was not allowed to create the conclusion to this first half of the story. For a "cartoon" it held my attention for the 133 minute running time, and wait til you see Gollum.

Rating:
Summary: Dutiful, But Disappointing!
Review: Given the popularity of Peter Jackson's current Lord of the Rings project, I'm sure that more than a few people have discovered (or become interested in) Ralph Bakshi's animated version. For those unfamiliar with Bakshi, he essentially made his name in the early 1970's as an offbeat, adult-oriented animator. In fact, his film "Fritz the Cat" was originally an x-rated animated feature. Mostly, though, Bakshi has struggled as a director; his last "big" film, Cool World (with Gabriel Byrne and Kim Bassinger) was a critical and box office flop.

But I digress. Bakshi's Lord of the Rings is a mess. His film covers the first half of the trilogy, leaving off after the victory of Helm's Deep, but the movie feels very rushed. Bakshi is more or less accurate up through the end of the Fellowship of the Ring, but the Two Towers material feels like an afterthought.

Still worse, the animation is dreadful. Though many have argued that Tolkien's world isn't appropriate for animation, I tend to disagree. I think that talented artists could perhaps bring Tolkien's vision to the screen more accurately than can live actors. After all, if you can think it and draw it, the sky's the limit. Yet this is why Bakshi's film is so disappointing. If animation is-in theory-limitless, then Bakshi has no excuse for the horrible, horrible drawings. Gandalf looks goofy, lacking the distinctive facial features that the Rankin-Bass people pulled off fairly well when drawing Gandalf for their made-for-tv animated versions of the Hobbit and The Return of the King. Bakshi's Aragorn looks like an Indian chief. All the elves look like some odd mixture of California surfers and West coast hippies. Gollum comes across as an odd mixture of British gent, bushman native, and extraterrestrial. Don't even ask about the Balrog. The Balrog looks like the cowardly lion from the Wizard of Oz.

So does Bakshi do anything well? Yes, actually. Bakshi is much more faithful to Tolkien's books (at least the Fellowship of the Ring). Merry and Pippin come across as they truly are-close friends who are more like family-rather than the caricatures we see in Jackson's recent films (where Merry and Pippin are reduced to the Hobbit equivalent of Beavis and Butthead) In fact, Frodo, Merry, and Pippin are all decently drawn and characterized (Sam, however, comes across a tad too, er, how do I say: special). Plotwise, Gandalf leaves the shire for a number of years (twelve, I think?) while he tries to divine the "truth" about the ring. Frodo does a dance in the Prancing Pony and falls, just like in the novel. Frodo also makes a brave stand against the Black Riders at the ford (i.e. he's not rescued by Arwen, super-elf). Also, Bakshi retains a lot more of Tolkien's original dialogue, something that Jackson pretty much ignores. Thus, Bakshi gets a generous star added to my one-star opinion of his move for staying close to the original material.

Finally, much has been said about Bakshi's technique of combining live actors with animation. To me, the technique feels awkward, but I don't hate it as much as most. At times, it can be interesting. Overall, though, it was probably yet another bad move by Bakshi (or, because Bakshi's always been famous for combining live action with animation, he might have stubbornly decided to stick to what he knows).

Final opinion: stay away from this version unless you're a Tolkien fanatic or are truly interested in seeing all the Lord of the Rings versions out there.

Rating:
Summary: terrible!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Review: This movie is NOT very good!!! It focused on the story well, and followed the book, but the animation was terrible; it looked like they rushed it. Also, they end the movie in the middle of the 2nd book, with nothing concluding at all. They're in a battle near Rohan, and it just ends and says something like, "They won the battle and conquered all of Middle Earth!", and Frodo and Sam are just left there on Mordor's border, without getting rid of the Ring, which is the whole point of the story! It sort of makes me think that they ran out of money or funding at the end of the movie- I wouldn't be surprised!