Rating: 
Summary: Peter Jackson NAILED it!!
Review: Before the movie, I re-read the book. Peter Jackson simply nailed it. He was able to make the book come alive without compromising anything. The movie was truly AMAZING. Battle scenes were brought to life in such vivid detail and yet so true to the book, I was stunned.Anyone who reads the book also appreciates the importance of maintaining dialogue from the books. Jackson's attention to detail and ability to capture the appropriate mood of each scene cannot be understated. Truly an impressive work. For fans of the movie itself, there are some wonderful extra features that should not be missed.
Rating: 
Summary: lord of the boring
Review: Before you read my review, let first say that i'm not against watching this movie; in fact, giving it a watch is a good idea -- But when people start calling this movie "great," well that's where I disagree. So with that, here's my review: ~*~
Review written by: justmarvn@hotmail.com Whether or not Jackson's movie was improperly structured (following the paradigm three-act structures most movies use), I personally found it painful to sit through. I agree with this person when she stated that "the first hour or so was charming - I loved the visuals and Ian McKellen. But then it seemed to become the same old thing - chase after chase, swordfight after swordfight -I was hoping the evil empire (or whatever it was!) would get the darn ring and kill all those annoying midgets. At the end the audience looked numb and a bit bewildered at what all the fuss was about. It was three hours and it felt even longer!" (PB, Austria) "I felt that the movie changed the artistic simplicity and subtlety of Tolkien's work into a Hollywood hack and slash, 'magical' adventure. Yes, I know I'm just another Tolkien purist but we're entitled to our opinions too." (Faith, USA) "Let's not kid ourselves. I was so pumped for this movie, and so let down. I can only imagine that those who enjoyed it were rationalizing or really don't have anything better to do for three-plus hours." (Robert Rimaviscus, USA) "The film is just a tad too fast - a four-hour film would have done me fine. I don't know how someone who is unfamilair with the story would feel, but, I suppose, a little lost. We hurtle from big scene to big scene before we can feel something. There is little chance for character development, and that is a huge part of the books." (Stephen, Malaysia) "I thought LOTR was torture - far too long to sit through all in one go. I could have done with a 15-minute break halfway through. The first five minutes were superb, then it went downhill....you get some really annoying dwarves who I really couldn't care about. I wished they all could have been wiped out early on. There were quite a few people who left the hall and didn't return - I couldn't blame them. I may be in the minority, but I won't be returning to the cinema to see the next two parts..." (Massimo Stefani, Paisley, Scotland) "I have been a Tolkien reader since 1958 and had to rebind my books about 10 years ago owing to the wear from re-reading. The books are magic. The film is not. I got bored after the first hour." (Ernie Smart, UK) "But the film lacked any real depth of character, lurched around like an MTV music video, and had no cohesion at all. ...I can't really believe the accolades this film has received and honestly think that regardless of the similarities with the book (or lack of), this film will be judged much harder in the course of time on low cinematic merit alone." (Jo, Canada) Ok, ok... I bet you had enough quotes about now. I'll stop there. So you're wondering what's my problem right? Well for those who simply want goo-goo-ga-ga cinematic special effects accompanied by hack-and-slashes and trinkets of cool looking heroes ~ then fine, this film is for you. But call me a nut, when I see a film I want to be totally involved ~ I want all my senses to be drawn out by the film ~ I want the film to play with my emotions and actually make me feel and leave the theatre still feeling. Oh,well I guess you could say I did feel something watching lotr ~ it was my butt cramping up while sitting through that film for three hours. The big drawback in any movie I believe is characterization. I'm no expert, and probably have a long way to go before I could even develop a movie especially one with great characters ~ but it doesn't take a genius to distinguish the hack-and-slash from the soul-filled. I wasn't drawn to the movie Lotr Fotr for alot of reasons--it was boring. First of all I felt that they lacked alot of the elements of a visual moving story such as suspense--instead, you are constantly bombarded with all these different events that seem to be something like a compilation of some kinda tv miniseries. As PB from Austria said, "...it seemed to become the same old thing - chase after chase, swordfight after swordfight -I was hoping the evil empire (or whatever it was!) would get the darn ring and kill all those annoying midgets." Second of all, the characterizations are so perfuntory that I never cared whether any of the characters lived or died. Gandolf plummets to his doom *snore*. I think the characters better justifies themselves imprinted on the front side of the taco-bell and burger king cups then on the wide-screen. Third of all, in part because the characters were like cardboard cut-outs, I found no soul in anything the movie had to offer. Really, the whole thing with the fellowship group was so superficial and their motivation was either poorly conveyed or it was alltogether just plain trite and lame. I expected more from a movie based on a story authored by "the father of fantasy" tolkien. The movie was mainly plot-oriented, but c'mon the plot itself was so mundane. Where were the twists? The irony? The surprise? Anyways, from what i've come to know, plot-oriented movies tend to fall a long ways back. You see, great movies are developed by great characters. Movies need great characters to be great, period. I could go on and on, but to conclude, a person in the movie-biz said, "There are really only two kinds of movies in the world: the kind where your butt burns and the kind where your butt doesn't burn. That's it." You'll have to excuse the language, but this movie burned my butt. I squirmed around to and fro wondering when the movie would end, and when it did end--Oh, don't even get me started on how a movie should end. If you want to see a good fantasy film i found "The Mists of Avalon" (though it may contain some objectionable content ~ viewer discretion advised) to be worth the watch (like lotr, it's also based on a novel; this one by Marion Zimmer Bradley). Though a lowbudget film that most likely did not have a fraction of the amount LotR spent in the making, it had an extroardinary plot (oh i loved the twists and the surprises) accompanied with exquisite characters.
Or perhaps you can get a hold of my favorite classic film--Franco Zeffirelli's 1968 version of Romeo and Juliet starring 17 year old Leonard Whiting and 15 year old Olivia Hussey. The cast is superb and the theme song will leave you enchanted for days. Just my two cents :)
Rating:
Summary: Tolkien Brought To Life
Review: Before you see the movie, you should read the books. All 3 of them. Quite a commitment. Then, sit down and watch Tolkien's world come to life in a brilliant way. It would have been VERY easy to ruin this unbelievable story in movie form, but the director instead actually brings the ENTIRE book to life. It's the story of Frodo Baggins, a hobbit living in the peaceful Shire in Middle Earth. He shares this world with Elves, Wizards, Goblins, and all other sort of characters. He also shares it with Sauron, a being I can only describe as the devil. Unknown to Frodo, he inherits a magical ring that makes you invisable. This ring once belonged to Sauron, and if he gets it back, it's ALL over. The world will be plunged into darkness and evil forever. So, Frodo and company set out to destroy the ring. The problem is, it can only be destroyed on Sauron's back door which is a long, long, LONG journey away, filled with perils. Frodo sets out with many hardships to fullfil his quest, all the time having his mind poisoned by the evil of the ring. Watching or reading Tolkien almost makes you believe this world did exist, in a history long forgotten and unrecorded.
Rating:
Summary: An epic of distinctive proportions!
Review: Behold the masterpiece of adventure and fantasy! The complete trilogy of Lord of The Rings is about 10 hours of a thrilling quest, blazing action, breathtaking special effects, genious music, marvellous landscapes and scenariuns, magical characters: mythological monsters, knights, dwarfs, hobbits, orcs, elvs, wizards, princess and kings; it's visually magnificent, a splendorous achievement in the film history.
The wonderfull journey for the magic ring starts here. The Two Towers may have greater fantasy and the last may have the most incredible batles but non other can surprise you as much as The Fellowship Of The Ring. This is the first and, specially if you never read the books, prepare to be amazed!
Years from now i believe this film will be remembered as a marking point in a new era. Everything seems possible, just dream things that never were and say "Why not" ?
This extensive edition is the best you can find if you are a true fan of the series. The number of extras will take much time to be totally enjoyed but it realy worths the time.
Rating: 
Summary: Long and boring
Review: Being a big fan of sword and sorcery movies I eagerly anticipated the release of this film. Unfortunately this film is so long and boring it has difficulty keeping the viewers interest. The film has high production standards and is well shot, but unless you are into the book series its a waste of time.
Rating:
Summary: A Long-Expected Party
Review: Being a huge fan of the LOTR book(s) and having now seen the "Fellowship Of The Ring" several times, I thought I'd make some personal comments on the movie. For starters, I think it's absolutely great and that Peter Jackson deserves high praise for accomplishing such a difficult job of bringing this classic book to film. Here are some of the best (and worst) features of the movie: THE BEST
- Any and all parts with Bilbo Baggins: Iam Holm puts in a very strong performance as Bilbo. I found both his scenes - in Hobbiton and Rivendell to, unexpectedly, be among the most moving in the film. Whether it's due to Holm's superb acting skills or Bilbo's small but critical importance in the whole story, the "Bilbo" scenes are among my favorites. Alot also probably has to do with the fact that Bilbo's scenes are very true to the book with much actual Tolkien dialog which incidentally, proves to make all parts of the film better. - Race Relations: Not socially, but PHYSICALLY. The most subtle but perhaps best special effect in the whole movie was in keeping the relative physical sizes between humans, elves, hobbits and dwarves right. It made the casting choices (all excellent, without exception) for all the characters based on their abilities and not on their real life sizes and shapes. Truly remarkable and best of breed effects. - Hobbiton: An incredibly beautiful place done perfectly to the book. The "long expected party" scenes had all the wonderful book references including: fireworks, Bilbo's going away comments, Gandalf's discussions with Bilbo and Frodo, whimsical moments smoking pipeweed, fire runes on the ring and much more. These early and quickly forgotten scenes eventually become (as in the book) something that you start to nostalgically think back about and miss. - The Council Of Elrond: I always wondered how such a critical part of the story where most of the fellowship members (and their personal stories) are introduced and where the fate of the ring is decided, could possibly be done in less than 45 minutes and without being boring. Jackson unbelievably pulled it off in 5 minutes. Gandalf's story was unneeded having already been seen as it occured. Boramir, appropriately got the most of the discussion time. Elrond handled the whole thing well and Frodo had his moment too. Unfortunately, Legolas and Gimli were given short shrift in the scene but, who knows - it may all work out in the end. Even Sam got his comical moment, just as in the book. - Calhaderas And Saruman: The snow scenes on Calhaderas, while short were very dramatic and Saruman's conjouring of the storm against the fellowship was spine-tinglingly awesome. - Moria: Such a critical point in the story. All the key points were hit: the watcher's destruction of the west gate, Balin's tomb, the countless orcs, the cave troll and the discovery of Frodo's mithril coat, the discovery of gollum's persuit, the bridge of Kazad Dum, the balrog, Gandalf's fall and the extremely moving affect it had on the fellowship. All done to perfection. - Boramir: While some complain of the lack of character development of the fellowship members, the absolute minumum has seemingly been sucessfully accomplished with so many characters. Especially critical is Boromir. His story arc - altho abbreviated - played exactly as the story should: a warrior from Gondor looking to aquire the ring in Rivendell and his early competition with Aragorn, to his betrayal of Frodo and then his profound regret and heroic defense of Merry and Pippin followed by his "departure" after confessing to Aragorn. Very tragic and very sad. The memories of his scenes will carry thru to the next movies, as they properly should. IMPERFECTIONS
- Black Riders Too Loud: Some of the scenes with the black riders were just too screechingly loud. While such moments might make you want to cover your ears ( to save them) they didn't really strike you with fear. I would have prefered stronger visual frights. In general, the background sounds and music did frequently drown out character dialog. Gandalf and Aragorn in particular, had their sometimes mumbly voices get stepped on. - Whiplash Hobbiton to Rivendell: Alot was skipped much of it appropriately. The Bombadil and Barrow Downs and even Buckleberry scenes are, begrudgingly not all that critical. Severely narrowing down the Farmer Maggot scenes was actually quite well done altho I did miss the terror of The hobbit's hiding in the back of the farmer's wagon in the nite on the way to the bridge scene which was truncated to a simple hobbit-hop onto a raft. Oh well. Bree went by pretty quick and the black rider attack on empty hobbit beds scene was a bit overdone but I suppose the whole thing worked. I had always envisioned Weathertop to be a high, towering peak rather than the little dumpy mound of the movie but the rider attack worked well. Using Arwen a the method of getting Frodo to Rivendell, while very different from the book, actually worked and didn't bother this LOTR fanatic much at all. Battle Scene Confusion: Some of the battle scenes, while well choreographed and sprinkled with fine moments (like the Uruk Hi guy getting a knife jabbed in the leg by Aragorn to then pull it out and throw it at him and get deflected by Aragorn's sword) did get confusing at times. The camera seemed too close to the action making it hard to follow. This could have been done better. All in all - excellent. I figure we will have gotten the deep character development we're all looking for by the end of the second movie - which I figure will be the best of the 3. Can't wait.
Rating:
Summary: an earnest, yet unsucessfull attempt to film the unfilmable
Review: Being a lifelong fan of the book, and having re-read
it just weeks prior to the viewing, it is completely
impossible for me to give Peter Jackson's FOTR an
reasonable evaluation from an artistic standpoint. I
couldn't help but dissect the film scene-by-scene as
opposed to percieving it as one cinematic whole. At
times it felt like a protracted illustration and
little else. Perhaps a second or third viewing will
correct that. For now, on first impression, I can only
say that the film was uneven, at times frustrating.
Frustrating because some of its aspects worked
beautifully; and some were pulling it into quite the
opposite direction. Frustrating because Jackson does
have a strong personal vision, yet he did make some
grave and obvious concessions to Hollywood. Here's the
breakdown: THE GOOD: 1) Visuals: Landscapes, Architecture and Interiors.
Flawless. Majestic. Alan Lee, as design consultant
worked miracles. And furthermore, it made New Zealand
a lucrative travel destination for me. 2) Certain Actors.
Specifically portraying Gandalf, Bilbo, Sam, a few
others... mostly dead-on, much like I always imagined. 3) The "creative license" scenes.
Surprisingly enough, most of them did not detract from
the movie, and even enlivened it a bit. Arwen's
involvement did not seem out of place, and her "flight
to the ford" scene is easily one of the finest
setpieces of the whole 3 hours. In fact, I would have
liked to see even more of her. The allusions to
various chapter titles were in good spirit, and the
comic relief for the most part worked decently,
although it was somewhat upsetting to see Merry and
Pippin reserved strictly for that purpose. The
subtitled Elvish was a nice touch, in part because it
eliminated the prospect of listening to Aragorn's and
Arwen's romantic dialogue in English (!) 4) Action Scenes.
Nicely staged, esp. the entire Moria sequence. THE MEDIOCRE: 1) Heavy Cuts.
It's true that the film is rushed. The only clues to
how much time elapses between various scenes are
periodic edits to the transformation of Isengard, and
that is insufficient. Many scenes feel shortened in
order to meet the 3 hour obligation, especially those
of Lorien and I would hope the more complete version
makes it to DVD. 2) At times, overdramatic.
Some of the players' approach is not very authentic,
overly self-aware, Elrond most of all. Aragorn and
Boromir overact on occasion, but sparingly. Saruman
and Gandalf, bellowing spells at each other across
mountain passes come off as a pair of grand opera
singers. 3) Derivative Effects.
While impressive in their own right, the Wizard duel
scene, Cave Troll, and Balrog seem to be inspired by
latter-day videogames rather than by Tolkien's
descriptions. THE BAD: 1) Frodo's cleanliness.
While Elijah Wood's undoubtedly put his heart and soul
into the role, his physical appearance was just a tad
bit overpolished. He resembled a computer generated
model rather than a living, breathing hobbit. And
throughout the film, not a speck of dirt seemed to
have touched him - does being the ringbearer
automatically merit a daily bath in wartime
conditions? 2) Prologue.
Cheezy and unnessesary. Much of it is repeated through
subsequent flashbacks anyway. Could have done without
it and went on straight to the original storyline. The
initial shot of Sauron holding up the ring is
laughable, straight out of a grade-Z flick. He is
better left unseen. 3)The Soundtrack.
Atrocious, absolutely atrocious. The single element of
LOTR that tipped the scale toward the negative for me.
If it was used half as much, the movie would have been
greatly eleveated in my mind. But this generic
tripe...too closely reminiscent of Titanic for
comfort. Remeber that secne in South Park when a character was tortured to death by Enya's music? Well, that's precisely how I felt...
Rating:
Summary: Make that 10 stars!
Review: Being a native of new zealand and watching the filming myself, I must say this movie is splendid. Elijah wood (if that's how you spell his name) played a fab. roll as frodo. As did the other actors. Although we can all say that we were a tad dissapointed with the fact that the movie makers left some parts out, we have to make an exception that the movie was already 3 hours long! Do you have to ask for more? The message it gives is great and we can say that we learn many diferent things from it. It is the story of a unstopable evil and a stunning good. Tolkien (who was a good friend of C.S lewis) who wrote this book, started out telling the story of the hobbits and creatures to his children during the war. So fasinated by what he had just told his children he decided to make this brilliant piece of work into a book. And what a wonderful job he did! so.....here we are years later with a move to tell the story of miracles for us. But if your not satisfied just go get yourself a hot cup of coffee', sit down on your sofa and read the thrilling adventure of 'THE LORD OF THE RING'!!~
Rating:
Summary: They did it!
Review: Being a Tolkein fan for years and having read the series several times, I was very pleased with the movie. Even though they could never get everything in the movie that was in the book, I felt they did a superb job in covering all the main events. I did not go to the theater until I heard the reviews, not wanting to ruin my love of Tolkein and of course after seeing it in the theater, I pre-ordered my copy and have watched it several times and am currently re-reading the book again. Job well done!! 5 stars from me!!
Rating:
Summary: Well done!
Review: Being older than dirt I've read and reread the trilogy many times since the 60's. I reread it again just before the movie release. I went to the movie with zero expectations so as not to be disappointed. I came away one *happy* camper. The direction, costuming, casting, and makeup alone was worth ten times the ticket price. I went to see it a total of 3 times, and I wish I could see it again. I wait with great anticipation for the video release. Oh dear, I all but drooled on myself here...what would Galadriel think? ;o)
| 
