Rating: 
Summary: Extremely Enjoyable, But No Paragon of Perfection
Review: Based on the famous Tolkien novel, few films in recent memory have been been as well-received as Peter Jackson's LORD OF THE RINGS--THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING; even so, it seems to divide fans of the novel, some of whom complain that the film lacks the moral complexity of Tolkien's original tale. But what of viewers who know nothing of the book? And what of viewers who are not normally fans of the "middle earth" fantasy it creates? Viewers, in fact, like me, who come to the film with a very limited exposure to Tolkien and without any particular interest in the epic fantasy genre he essentially created? The answer is: it is a very good movie and you are likely to enjoy it as least as much I did. But it is not quite the paragon of perfection you may expect.As almost every one knows by now, the story concerns a world populated by distinctly different races that include humans, elves, trolls, goblins--and a race of small-statured beings known for both their steadfast practicality and their big feet: hobbits. One hobbit in particular, Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood), comes into possession of a ring. But it is not just any ring; it is the key to a revival of an evil that hungers to reign over all the earth. With the wizard Gandalf's support, Frodo embarks upon a quest to destroy the ring in the only way it can be destroyed: by casting it into the very fires of the volcano where it was first forged. Obviously the story offers abundant opportunity for special effects, cinematography, art design and soundtrack--and here indeed FELLOWSHIP goes unchallenged. It is absolutely flawless. Led by Elijah Wood as Frodo and Ian McKellen as Gandalf, and sporting a truly memorable performance by Christopher Lee as Saruman and a supporting cast that includes every one from Cate Blanchett to Ian Holm, the cast is also extremely, extremely good and make their highly fantastic characters remarkably believable. It's all a lot of fun to watch. But I did have some issues with the film, and they were significant. My first complaint concerns the first fifteen or so minutes of the film, which is essentially a long and complicated narrative that explains the origin of the ring and how it came into the possession of a hobbit. Although it contains many memorable images, the entire segment is largely superfluous, for the information it offers is repeated again and again throughout the body of the film. More annoying, the segment has the effect of undercutting the entire film by telling you everything about the ring that the characters will learn over the entire course of the film. That aside, the overall film has an oddly sterile quality to it. It looks great; it sounds great; the cast is great; the action sequences are pulse-pounding. But one or two sequences aside, it never seems to fully engage in an emotional sense. And as a final blow, the conclusion is unsatisfactory. I understand, of course, that this is merely the first in a trilogy--but FELLOWSHIP doesn't so much end as it simply stops. The amazing thing about FELLOWSHIP is that, in spite of these significant problems, it nonetheless remains an extremely watchable, enjoyable film. Fans of the novel and the genre in general will no doubt enjoy it more than those of us who could never get worked up about either--but even so, I'd still suggest it to the latter. While it has great faults, it also has great virtues, and the virtues far outweight the faults. Recommended.
Rating: 
Summary: Amazing movie !! DO NOT listen to the negative comments !!
Review: The time span within the movie make it seem like the scenes take place only a day apart. When in the book Gandalf leaves Bilbo's House and returns in 9 years to tell Frodo he has to leave and destroy the Ring. Just minor details like that are skipped and changed which i feel is better or else the general audience will be lost. This movie did it's job in making the Lord of the Rings "come to life". I don't think any director could make it any better within this century. Maybe in the cosmic future will a more accurate remake be made ? The Nazguls (ringwraiths) were depicted as mysterious, powerful, evil beings, which i thought was very cool ! although i felt that they should have made the Nazguls tougher at the Weathertop scene fighting Aragorn. Aragorn whipped all 5 of them up !! The only problem with this DVD is that the Widescreen borders are large !! the top and bottom borders are large making my 20 inch tv in my dorm looking like a 13 inch tv. if i were to do it again i would have bought a Full Screen version.
Rating:
Summary: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING
Review: It is a fantastic extended edition and it's in DTS sound go and buy it now
Rating:
Summary: Why so many bad reviews?
Review: I've seen this movie of the lord of the rings when it came out on video. When I saw it, I found out that J R R Tolkien's work wasn't ruined as allot of the negative reviewers think. Are the bad reviewers under the influence of the ring? I think so. The people who wrote negative reviews of this movie have not scene the movie and don't have any idea of what they're talking about. They're trying to make you Harry Potter fans. Don't listen to them. Of course they have fireworks displays at Hobbiton, but that's part of the story. I like this movie because I've found that this story inspired the Final Fantasy video game series. I like the battle scenes in this movie. I also like the ring wraiths. They're cool. I've seen this along with The Two Towers. What more do you want people! I highly suggest you give Peter Jackson a break. You can't stop him. I know because I've read the books, and even dreamed about seeing the films. I highly recommend this to future fantasy fans, and you negative reviewers! Stop complaining about Peter Jackson's direction! He does this trilogy the same way as J R R Tolkien did.
Rating:
Summary: Astounding is an understatement
Review: WOW
This is the best adaptation of a book (and film) that I have ever seen. Although Peter Jackson left out/changed a few parts form the book (like Tom Bombadil and the Barrow-Wright), they were for the better. To all of the whiners out there that wanted a complete, word for word rendition of the book- it simply can't be done in a film. Jackson expertly edited the script to include what was needed for the story. (and yes, I have read the trilogy five times over)
What Peter Jackson did show on film was incredible. It was almost exactly what I had pictured when I read the books, from the scenery (New Zealand is beautiful) to the creatures and the characters. The actors in this film were nothing short of AMAZING (and when I say amazing, I mean that there simply could not have been a better cast). All of the hobbits played their roles to perfection, as did Ian McKellan (Gandalf), Sean Bean (Boromir), John Rhy-Davies (Gimli), Orlando Bloom (Legolas), and Christopher Lee (Saruman). However, I must say that my favorite actor is now Viggo Mortensen after I saw him in his role as Aragorn. I could write another 1,000 words on how great of a performance his was, but I will leave it at a few words in saying that he deserved an Oscar (and I have been a theatre actor and studied acting for years).
In addition to the visuals, the soundtrack deeply evokes the the spirit of the story and of Middle Earth. It's soudntracks I've heard in a long, long time.
In all, this is an extraordinary film, especially in the extended edition with the 30 additional minutes seemlessly added.
To come to a point, what makes this movie great is that both the casual movie goer and the diehard Tolkien fan can love it. (I'll be back when the Two Tower's comes out on DVD! It's also incredible, although a bit less accurate to the book.)
Rating:
Summary: Great Movie!
Review: If you haven't seen this movie yet, you should. Peter Jackson is a great director. I give this 5 stars because it deserves 5 stars. If I could, I would give it 99 stars or more. The special features rule! Elijah Wood does great acting skills again! The costumes are great. Everything about this movie is great. Read the books and get the soundtrack.Go and get it somewhere now! Thanks guys for loving it. Running Time: 178 Minutes Rated: PG-13 For Epic Battle Sequences And Scary Images. DVD Special Features Include: 2 Theatrical Trailers
Exclusive 10 Minute Behind the scenes of "The Two Towers"
Enya "May It Be" Music Video
15 Featurettes Including Interviews with Cast Members like Elijah Wood, Ian Mecellen, Liv Tyler and More!
Preview Of Ea Games Video Game of "The Two Towers"
Passage to Middle Earth (Sci-Fi Channel Special)
Quest of the Ring (FBC Network Special)
DVD Rom Features: Exclusice Online Content
Lord Of The Rings.net (Original Website)
and Much, Much More!
Rating:
Summary: Absolutely brilliant
Review: I think the previous two reviewers must have been watching the old animated version that I watched when I was a kid, and are totally unjustified in their comments about this movie.
Peter Jackson has done a quality job in porting this book to the big screen, and in my opinion has done an even better job with the Two Towers, a movie that will be hard to beat. I also noticed that the film was slightly drawn out at times, but I think it only helped to capture the atmosphere. Tolkein would have been proud of this adaptation. It would be impossible to try to successfully map a book to a movie directly.. Just look at the first Harry Potter sham-of-a-movie. Adaptation is all about exactly that - adapting. Peter Jackson has to think of the wider audience. To map it directly would have produced a 6 hour film. Although I think it's a brilliant movie, and this trilogy will go down in the history books, it's only my opinion. I have a number of non-Tolkein fan friends, who didn't particularly like the movie.
If you have an imagination, you like a good blockbuster movie, awesome scenery and special effects, orcs and goblins, then this is the movie for you.
Rating: 
Summary: Not bad, not good
Review: The biggest problem I have is with Liv Tyler as Arwen and I can only help but think that she was cast because the brunette girl from the Saved by the Bell TV show had a previous commitment. I've been wondering where the daughter of Aerosmith singer Steven Tyler came by her bogus English accent and hearing her in the extra features segments being her actual Valley girl self makes me believe she spent untold hours with a dialogue coach. The character of Arwen does no more in the book than wait around to be married, but the reason for her elevation to Frodo's saviour is cynically simple. LOTR has always fared poorly amongst females and New Line Cinema has made an obvious attempt to draw more women into the theaters by heightening her role. It doesn't hurt that chick flick cliches were written into the story by Tolkien himself (long before they were cliches) such as the Elven princess and her romance with the ragged wanderer. Pass the hankies please.
Peter Jackson also ruins the Mirror of Galadriel scene (he ruins a few other scenes but I don't have the space for a detailed criticsm) by having Galadriel turn into a poltergeist. It might have helped if a better looking actress than Cate Blanchett had been cast; .....
Mostly what surprised me was how derivative this movie is. The Uruk-hai look like Darth Maul of Star Wars, the little we see of Gollum makes him out to be first cousin of the old Crypt Keeper puppet from Tales of the Crypt, and the "wizards's duel" between Gandalf and Saruman is simply an excuse for Matrix-like special effects. But most of all it's clear that Jackson is a fan of Braveheart. I saw that movie not long ago and you can see the echoes of the Gibson film constantly in FOTR, especially in battle scenes but also in costumes.
Forget the "DVD extras". We've seen this garbage before. Actors tell you how great the director is, the director effusively praises his special effects team and before long we're drowning in a sycophantic cesspool. I had to laugh when Jackson pompously states that the printed LOTRis to be the authority and when anyone questions if something is appropriate to the movie he says "it's in the book". Tell me Peter, where is it in the book that Arwen rescues Frodo or Strider leaves the hobbits alone on Weathertop? I can name dozens of such examples, but this review is getting too long as it is.
There are things to like in this movie tho. The scenery is lush and makes Middle Earth considerably more appealing than Bakshi's 1979 cartoon film. Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn, Ian McKellan as Gandalf and Elijah Wood as Frodo give strong performances. Sometimes (very few times unfortunately) Jackson's vision helped me see Tolkien's work in a different light. But please take other reviews of this movie with a grain of salt. If this is the height of filmmaking at the turn of the millenium then I'd rather go back into my hobbit hole.
Rating: 
Summary: I want my three hours back!
Review: Well, what can I say? I at least expected LOTR to be somewhat interseting, at least to be able to keep my attention for the duration. After the first half hour, I was bored beyond any boredom I have felt watching any other movie. The basic theme that occurs throughout the entire movie is walk for fifteen minutes, find some "monsters" try fighting for about two minutes, then run away for ten minutes. The same thing keeps occuring over and over and over... And for a twist, maybe Frodo might die because of some injury. But then where would the other two stories come in if he died? The scenery and effects in this movie are second to none, but there is only so long that those can carry a movie without anything else. Ian McKellen did a great job as Gandalf, or perhaps it appears that way because the rest of the actors are so bad. I mean was Elijah Wood the best choice to play Frodo? The bottom line is LOTR does not translate into a good movie. It's like translating say a Final Fantasy video game directly into a movie, except without the control, strategy, or the fun. Well, none of you will listen anyway. Go out and watch this, but don't say I didn't warn you.
Rating:
Summary: If only there were even MORE added footage!
Review: For anyone who enjoyed the books, the extra footage is a treat, although no new characters or storylines originally missing (and appearing in the book) are really added to this set. I haven't had a chance to peruse all the documentaries yet, but the parts I have watched were interesting.
|
