Rating: 
Summary: I'm less than enthusiastic...
Review: Now, we know that adult moral ambiguity was not the strong suit of Tolkien's Lord of the Rings. That was never a problem, because Tolkien's narrative technique was so gifted and his prose so perfect for expressing his unique style of escapist fantasy. However, even if it is one of the greatest fantasy novels, its influence upon the fantasy genre has been absolutely one of the worst. Ever since the books were first published fifty years ago and then exploded into popularity about thirty years ago, there have been countless rip-off attempts at creating a Tolkien-esque world by mediocre writers. You can find them lining the sci-fi shelves of your local bookstore to this day. Their qualities are a given: all of that hackneyed sword-and-sorcery Good vs. Evil rubbish, with NONE of Tolkien's magic. There's something kind of disheartening about seeing the Lord of the Rings turned into a bloated box-office spectacle. Tolkien needed nothing more than paper and ink (and his vast imagination) to create one of the best fantasies ever, not a multi-million dollar budget and a bevy of Hollywood darlings. But in the hands of any director, can this movie be anything more than a medieval Star Wars? If you can't read the book, then you shouldn't be exposed to the story in any form. There are exceptions to the basic rule-of-thumb that fantasy movies are ridiculous, and adaptations of fantasy novels are even worse. I enjoyed Willow, partly because it wasn't as pretentious and interminable as this pompous movie. The screen adaptation of the Wizard of Oz remains a beloved institution, but I'm glad to I read the L. Frank Baum book to my children before letting them see the movie. As a result, they weren't as thrilled by that flick as most kids are. I'm also glad they read the Lord of the Rings before bringing them to this one. The best movie adaptations are those that bring out something that was under-developed or hard to express within the context of the source novel. This is NOT one of them. One annoying problem is that movies tend to stamp an actor's face upon one's memory, so that a name is always associated with that face. Moreover, I found that the manic pacing and lavish sets smothered rather than brought out the emotional impact of the story. There were a lot of things from the LOR that just couldn't be conveyed here. The philological aspect of Tolkien's Celtic/Teutonic lore, the sense of a distant mythological past, and all the wonderful effects that a great book produces upon the reader only through the magic of storytelling, not the "magic" of 21st century computer technology. If you have young kids who haven't read the books, don't bring them to this show. You will be spoiling one of the best reading experiences they'll ever have. This movie has a huge budget, state-of-the-art effects, a decent cast, and a decent director. It lacks, however, the one ingredient that is not reproduceable: Tolkien's magic.
Rating: 
Summary: Almost
Review: O.K. I'll preface this with an overview opinion of the source material, which I read only once, a lifetime ago. The novels by their nature, given the amount of information to be disseminated, were a tad dry. Though detailed, they were not emotionally engaging. Fantasy seldom, if ever, is. Humanity and humor are traditionally given short shrift. They are detailed intellectual games, based on moral simplifications. Their characters are constructed to serve the plot not drive it.
That said, the film version is visually striking for the most part. However the use of computerized color filters was a tad distracting, particularly when not applied to all characters in the same frame. Speaking of color, Mr. Wood's turquoise eyes did became a bit much at times. Also obvious rotoscope effects, or their computerized cousin, jar a bit in contrast to full CGI. A Hobbit size quibble I admit.
The scaling techniques worked quite well, with minimal slips of continuity. The blending of CGI and real footage was admirable. Speaking of footage, for all the talk of the hobbit prosthetics, how truly necessary were they, other than in a few closeups. In most cases you were, forgive the pun, too many feet away.
I give the film credit for not bowing to a juvenile audience in that it does not attempt to dilute the menace/threat of evil. Of course Orcs, while fierce, frightening and plentiful, really can't fight for a hill of beans, now can they. Thank goodness the hobbits finally got some smudges on their faces, even Frodo.
I never knew wizards were such talented break dancers. My audience found the homing eagle sequence amusing. Someone, obviously not from middle earth, gave the effect the bird. Elfville, elegant though it was, got a bit static. Hugo Weaving should lighten up, come on you're an elf, live with it. A number of the audience used this sequence for a visit to the little hobbit's room. Hey where did whats'r'name the dark haired elf come from. Recessive genie perhaps. Great costumes, sets (a bit to clean), hobbit housekepping I guess. Perhaps a germanic influence. Loved the horses. Is there a horse award out there?
For the uninitiated it was a lot to follow, no fault to the filmakers, it is simply a lot to follow. Emotionally engaging? Not in the least, but as I said, neither is/are the book/books. Film, however has the need to infuse the humanity and humor that a book might leave to the reader's imagination. The audience I saw it with was primarily adult or semi-adult and appeared to leave somewhat nonplussed. Although I believe a good number were ready to move to New Zealand. Well, to the nice Orc-free neighborhoods at least.
All in all I enjoyed the movie. I guess I'll have to look elsewhere for magic.
Rating:
Summary: A Must-see!!!
Review: O.K...I'd give this movie a 4.5, but there's only a 4 and a 5, so...:) It only gets a 4 because it didn't follow the book. Otherwise, it was great. One of the best movies I've ever seen. It wasn't overly gory, and had a couple of funny scenes in it. I think it was a very well-done movie considering the complicted book.
Rating:
Summary: This rating is for the movie not the DVD
Review: Obviously I haven't seen the DVD so I can't comment on any special features etc, but I can tell you that the movie was dreadful. I felt like I had watched the author write this blasted thing word by word it went so slow. The attention to detail was excruciating, painful, laborious, you get the picture. While the visuals were beautiful, the novelty of that wore off in about 15 minutes and then it was scene after torturous scene of this Baggins jackass on his horribly boring hike to the fiery mountain (which by the way he never gets to, that will happen after 6 more illegally boring hours of this gruesome "epic"). If your idea of "magical fun" is watching wierdo's hike through neat scenery for hours and not get anywhere, you'll love this. I'm 35 years old and I can honestly say that I've NEVER been so happy for a movie to be finished in my life (I would have left but I was there with a friend who appeared to be in to it, so I was nice). For my part I'm going to skip the next two and maybe watch some grass grow, it's free and I won't feel bad if I fall asleep. My advice if you insist on knowing the story would be to read the book, it's got to be better, quicker and easier then watching this movie.
Rating: 
Summary: Wonderful...
Review: Obviously I haven't seen the video yet, but the movie was amazing. It was longer than I thought, but they told the stories of each person. It was almost like you became part of their world for a few hours. Wonderfully weaved story to last the ages. The creative minds behind the making of this movie should be praised loudly. I eagerly await the next installment to this magical story. I hope you enjoy this movie as much as I.
Rating:
Summary: The Fellowship of the Ring Rules Supreme
Review: Obviously, the books and one's imagination are the best ways to experience Tolkien's grand story. However, this movie is an excellent movie in and of itself, even if it contains some slight deviations from the book (*Cough* Tom Bombadil *Cough*). But, since it is so well done, even taking most of its lines straight from the book, and is based on the great story of Tolkien, I consider it one of the best movies of all time. The visual effects are some of the best ever. The acting is uncannily good for a ragtag bunch of fairly obscure actors (except two). In addition, it simply captures one's imagination, emotions, and excitement. See it many times. Buy the DVD.
Rating:
Summary: Great movie, or rather one-third of a great movie
Review: Occasionally, a controversy arises in advance over whether Hollywood can do a book justice in the movie version. In the case of Lord of the Rings, make that three movies. New Line Cinema gave New Zealand director Peter Jackson hundreds of millions of dollars to film the entire J.R.R. Tolkien trilogy. These were shot simultaneously in Jackson's native New Zealand. The first, The Fellowship of the Rings, was released last Christmas and is now on video and DVD. The second will open in theaters in December, the third in December 2003. So far, Jackson has triumphed. While some purists have complained about certain elements of the movie (for example, about the lessening of the Hobbits' roles in fighting the forces of evil), most fans seem quite pleased. The movie has been a huge hit both here and abroad, which indicates its appeal goes far beyond the books' rabid supporters. The Lord of the Rings is an epic tale about courage and the dangers of power. It takes place in a time long ago in a place called Middle Earth, which both is and is not of our earth. It is peopled by far more than mere humans beings. There are hobbits and dwarfs, elves and goblins, wizards and assorted strange creatures. Once upon a time, a great but evil wizard forged powerful rings in the fires of the Mountain of Doom. The mightiest of these he kept for himself, but he lost it during a great battle. One day, a hobbit named Bilbo [Ian Holm] found it and kept it. Now he has decided to pass it on to his favorite nephew, Frodo [Elijah Wood]. There is great danger for Frodo because the wizard will stop at nothing to get it back. With the help of another wizard, Gandolf [Ian McKellan], and others, Frodo begins a long and treacherous journey to where the ring was created, for that is the only place where it can be destroyed. The movie is a visual feast. Computer generated imagery techniques have truly come of age. When you mix these cinematic tricks with the naturally awesome and exotic landscapes of New Zealand, the effect is magical. Some, but not all, of this is lost on the small screen, for The Lord of the Rings is designed to be seen larger than life. One of the movie's great accomplishments is the way it seamlessly matches the small and large characters. You would swear that Elijah Wood is a midget in real life, and Ian McKellan a giant. The cast is superb. Especially notable are McKellan as Gandolf, Holm as Bilbo, and Wood as Frodo. These actors will forever be known for these roles. Also mesmerizing is Kate Blanchett in her fairly small role as Queen Galadriel. The Lord of the Rings will not please all viewers. It runs three hours. The characters travel on and on and on, in much the same way Peter O'Toole was forever trooping across the desert in the 1962 classic, Lawrence of Arabia. Also, because this is the first in a trilogy, it doesn't have a true climax. It simply ends with the main characters planning their next moves. I personally can't wait to find out what they are.
Rating:
Summary: A Stunning Movie!
Review: Of all the movies I've seen, this movie tops them all...probably because it is such a great adventure filled with danger and times where even in the darkest hours, light flickers still. The evil is gruesome, but clearly evil and the good side is clearly the good side. The characters from the book come alive on the screen and the story is played really close to the books...with a few minor details. Sacrifice, bravery, and showing the smallest thing can make the biggest changes...you won't even know three hours have gone! A perfectly stunning movie!
Rating:
Summary: Tolkien's mind
Review: of cource this world that tolkien created in about 12 years is very extraordinary but it also is very true if you look at it in a historical way, the movie though is a totally different world with the same charecters and the story itself, but it is a completely different thing and if you start compering the book and the movie you will see thwt eather the book is wrong or the movie because all people think different things. never compare the two, they are both extremely good and that is why the product should have the rating of five. and also not many people have wide screen tv's and full screen is better in many ways because of that.
Rating:
Summary: Great DVD set
Review: Of course this was excellent. I loved all the extra footage, the background film making, and the interviews with the actors. You really do get a feel that as this epic was being made the people( actors, support staff, crew, and etc.) were a very close family. I am a huge fan of Tolkien and loved the books so I may be a bit biased towards the movie version by Peter Jackson.
|
