Rating: 
Summary: Great introduction to LOTR for kids
Review: I taped this movie (on my parents' Betamax) from ABC in May 1980. It was my introduction to Tolkien; I was 13. Many reviewers seem to relish tearing this adaptation to pieces, but I will always love it. It has heart that the Bakshi version lacks. Frodo and Sam were done properly, unlike the caricatures in the Bakshi version. The closeness of their friendship was actually done right, and that is the *heart* of this version. For all its flaws (and I admit it has endless flaws!), it did get the love between Frodo and Sam right. My best friend and I went on to read the trilogy for the first time that Summer... the greatest Summer of my life!Since so many people have gone to great lengths to spell out what's terrible about this, I will mention some pluses: About half of the characters are done right (Frodo and Samwise being better than their Bakshi counterparts makes up for the grotesqueness of Meriadoc and Peregrin), some of the atmospheres in Mordor are dark and disturbing as they should be, the background paintings are often exquisite, the orchestral score has some nice moments (more than I can say for the cheesy songs). And yes, this was primitive 1979-vintage anime. Clumsy, with no avant garde rotoscoping techniques, but it was a warm, character-driven treatment of the story, and that redeems it for me. I give Rankin-Bass my gratitude and this version 4 very sentimental stars. One technical detail: an earlier factory version of this that I have owned was recorded in EP mode, I just hope that an SP version is now available.
Rating: 
Summary: An Underrated Masterpiece
Review: I grew up with this video, and I thoroughly enjoy it each time i watch it. Reviewers are spitting in its face, claiming the animated fellows don't properly portray the book characters. I would like to rebut: Frodo is excellently done, a handsome noble hobbit, instead of foolish & young as portrayed by other cartoons. Sam Gamgee is also well-drawn, and comes across more brave and dedicative towards Frodo than some other movies like to make him. The songs are fun, and although they may come up a little too much in the movie, are catchy and creative. Gandalf's voice is wonderful to listen to. Altogether the animation is glorious (am I mistaken to assume it is anime?) and the hobbits are nobly and classicly portrayed. Oh yes...did I mention Frodo was handsome? Once more couldn't hurt.
Rating:
Summary: An enjoyable diversion "inspired by" Tolkien's masterwork
Review: While few of us envisioned Middle Earth as a children's animation, this good-natured adaptation stays true to Tolkien in some surprising ways. Sam's devotion to Frodo and the pair's powerful friendship shines warmly as it does in the book. The voice performances are first rate. John Huston's oaken voice evokes all the wisdom and stern presence one could imagine of Gandalf the Grey. This animated feature must be thought of as "inspired by" Lord of the Rings. "The Return of the King" stands on it's own as an enjoyable diversion. I would have liked to see Rankin and Bass produce the first two installments as well: "The Fellowship of the Ring" and "The Two Towers" to bridge they're also delightful "The Hobbit."
Rating: 
Summary: Bizarre interpretation
Review: The film is entertaining as long as it is watched with an open mind and expectations aren't too high. The story is _generally_ the same but there are many small alterations which weren't really nessecary. The songs are overused in places and the disco orc music is completely unnessecary. On the other hand the backgrounds are drawn wonderfully and some of the characters are well portrayed such as Theoden, Witch King of Angmar and the two watchers in Cirith Ungol.
Rating: 
Summary: What a Let Down
Review: I was 10 when I saw the theatrical release of 'Lord of the Rings' and loved it. For its time, the animation was quite good. Of course, it was only the first half of the trilogy and I was eagerly looking forward to seeing the second half. But for reasons unknown to me, the creative team behind LOTR did not film the second half. Alas, Return of the King was made for television by the same team behind 'The Hobbit'. Consequently, the quality of the animation suffered, plus many of the characters were not properly portrayed. For example, Gollum was once a hobbit himself, and in LOTR he appears as he should. But in Return of the King he looks like some giant frog. Merry and Pippin also looked ridiculous. I agree with some of the other critics and was turned off by a lot of the singing too. When I first saw this movie, I couldn't help but feel that all of us LOTR fans were cheated out of seeing a more authentic rendition of the rest of the story. Return of the King is more geared towards young children, whereas LOTR can be appreciated by teens and adults, particularly the depiction of the battle scenes. But the goods news is that the LOTR trilogy is currently being filmed in its entirely and there is a hope that Tolkien's classic work will get its definitive rendition on the silver screen. Let's pray they do it right.
Rating:
Summary: Doesn't really follow the book, but I don't care!
Review: It's still a great movie! It and Rankin/Bass' adaptation of The Hobbit are what got me intersted in Tolkien's work in the first place. I still can't read any of the books in the Lord of the Rings Trilogy without hearing Orson Bean voicing Frodo and Bilbo, John Huston as Gandalf and Roddy McDowall as Samwise. I recommend this as a way for younger kids to start out with Tolkien. Once again, excellent.
Rating:
Summary: Left Wanting More
Review: I am not a huge fan of the Hobbit or the Return of the King although I have both. They are very good movies but geared toward children. Republic Pictures did a movie The Lord of the Rings which I thought was more mature. The story itself was better although sporadic. The singing in these movies sometimes gets on my nerves as there is a lot of it. I find myself humming Frodo of the Nine Fingers quite a bit. It is good for a once around but cramming the trilogy into one movie just doesn't work.
Rating:
Summary: Sense of closure but that's it
Review: The box says that tis is supposed to be a sequel to The Hobbit. Let me tell you if the only background for this movie you have is seeing the Hobbit you are going to be in trouble. I got this movie because I had just watched Ralph Bakshi's amazing film the Lord of the Rings. That movie is a must-see for any Tolkien fan. The problem is tha the movie ends before the story is over. I think a sequel was anticipated but never happened. So, needing some closure, I picked up the Return of the King to end th estory. The characters aren't even comparable toBakshi's. Roddy MacDowell (an amazing actor) was terrible as Samwise, he was trying to turn the lovable bumkin into Hamlet. The Orcs and Ring Wraiths aren't frightening. Gandalf's character hasn't changed since The Hobbit and every three minutes tehy break into a mindless song (How many times can we hear Frodo of the nine fingers?). This movie is good for a true Tolkien fan but everyone else should just read the book.
Rating:
Summary: Loveable adaption of the best book of all-time!
Review: Well, some of you may have read my review on THE HOBBIT and LORD OF THE RINGS, but i have to say that this film sticks to the books faithfully overall, apart from the naff 70s songs, and the beggining with the song, "Frodo with the nine fingers!" The film begins with Frodo, Sam an American Pippin and Merry along side Gandalf (American),Bilbo and Elrond. They state that 2 ages past Bilbo found his ring, forgetting that 2 ages ago would have been the time of THE SILMARILLION. Well, the film is overall a cheap,overated sequal to the Bakshi film, and it begins with Sam saving Frodo at Cirith Ungol, and it finishes at Mt.Doom, and then we see our heroes at the Grey Havens sailing off to Aman, the blessed realm. It's a pitty we never see The Scouring of the Shire or the Ents, or how Merry and Pippin get seperated, by the Witch-King_vs_Eowyn scene was done nicely, apart from the fact that they call her Theoden's "niece" not daughter. The Witch-King looked good, but the rest of the Nazgul looked like Skeletor from He-man on the backs of Pegasus! It's good they included the Oliphaunts as well, and Gollum is real good! Overall, i recommend that you BUY this film:-
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Childrens Version of Tolkien Classic
Review: Keeping in mind that animation was extreamly difficult and expensive in 1979, and there was no such thing as a mini-series, R&B did the best they could to produce a follow up to their animated classic, The Hobbit. True, this version leaves out much of the details in the trillogy, it does achieve what it sets out to do - give young viewers a glimps into Tolkiens Middle Earth and an introduction to the rich characters Tolkein brought to life. If you want to introduce a child to LOTR, get the Hobbit video and the Return of the King video - then for Christmas 2001, go see LOTR:Fellowship of the Ring. Encourage him or her to read the books as soon as they are of the right age. Something else to enjoy is the full legnth Radio Play - perfect for listening to on a long family vacation or while spending long hours in traffic. The BBC version is the only audio recording worth listening to.
| 
