Rating: 
Summary: will definately win BEST PICTURE mark my words!!!!
Review: lets just look at the competition really quick. Master and Commander?? Mystic River?? Lost in Translation?? the only other movei that really has a chance (in my opinion) is Seabiscuit. M&C wasn't that great. Mystic River was too depressing. Oscar really doesnt favor comedies like Lost in TRanslation over dramas. + come on it really was the best movie. It winning best picture would totally make up for the last two years. Look at the golden globes, they won all 4 awards they were nominated for. it also scored huge at the box office which means LOTS of other people like these movies too. this movie was just so cool. Some people just think its too long, but look at Titantic and Schindler's List and Dances with Wolves. Sometimes u just need to make a movie long to make it good. Some people don't like it b/c its fantasy, don't go see it if u dont like elves and orcs. this is most obviously gonna win best picture and a lot of other things. also.... this is the only trilogy that all three movies were nominated for best picture at the oscars.
Rating: 
Summary: Never read the books - I'm reviewing the movie
Review: Great movie, but a couple of points. Out of 3 1/2 hours, 2 hours were battles and a 1/2 hour was a BORING goodbye scene at the end of the movie, leaving a bad taste after some pretty good entertainment. Aragorn should have ended up with Eowyn. At least she had some spirit. Wasn't the appearance of the ghost-soldiers a bit convenient? Just when they needed unkillable soldiers that were sworn to the King of Gondor, there they were, just down that road.
Rating:
Summary: LOTR Madness!
Review: I love, love, love, love, loved this dvd. When I saw it in theaters I was gripping the seat and leaning forward, getting into it as much as possible. It was so good! The end just dragged on and on though. That bugged me. Overall, it was a great movie.
Rating:
Summary: An Awesome Movie!
Review: I saw Return of the King 2 times already and I want to see it again. It should be rated more than 5 stars it was so good. Go P.J.!
Rating:
Summary: Don't miss the 3rd part
Review: An excellent movie to watch!
Nice shots and play! Very scenic
Rating:
Summary: Almost great, but Jackson's revised ending badly flawed.
Review: I have loved Tolkien's trilogy since first reading it in the '60s. Peter Jackson's film of the first book was a masterpiece, beautifully realizing the most ambitious fantasy tale ever written. Clearly Jackson and the entire cast & crew regarded this project as a labor of love, and they seemed to understand that at heart LOTR is not a story about swords & sorcerers, but about the character of ordinary people who rise to the occasion when fate demands.
After that astonishing achievement, the second film (LOTR: THE TWO TOWERS) was a bit disappointing. The story bogged down, with far too much screen time devoted to the battle at Helm's Deep (perhaps the difficulties involved in shooting that scene affected Jackson's judgment in editing), and a few too many liberties were taken with the story. Consequently I approached LOTR: THE RETURN OF THE KING with bated breath, hoping it would equal the standard set by the first film, but fearing another letdown like the second. At first I was pleasantly surprised. As the story unfolded, scene after scene revealed the same loving fidelity to Tolkien's novel that made LOTR: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING so astonishing. Jackson's success seemed complete, the film an utter triumph.
And then it happened: For some unfathomable reason, Jackson and his colleagues rewrote the ending of Tolkien's beloved masterpiece-and they didn't just leave out a scene or two barely relevant to the story (as with Tom Bombadil in the 1st part). This time they gutted the book's final three chapters, cutting the story of the Hobbits' return to the Shire, their discovery of Saruman's vengeance, and the courageous rallying of their countrymen to rise against Saruman's gang of thugs and free their homeland of his tyranny. Jackson's revised ending-in which the hobbits simply return home to business as usual-felt like a monstrous betrayal. His revision denies the hobbits' growth, eviscerates their character, and even emasculates them as well. By cheating his audience at the end, Jackson effectively plunges a dagger deep into the moral heart of the story. A bitter disappointment, indeed.
Perhaps Jackson cut the ending in order to maximize profits. Perhaps he plans (in accord with the pattern established by the first two films) eventually to release an "extended version" DVD which will restore Tolkien's ending. We shall see. In the meantime, if you are acquainted with only these movies and not the books, but have come to love the story and its characters, then I strongly suggest that you read the books (particularly the end of the last book) to see what you're missing, and to see why Tolkien's LOTR transcends genre to rank as one of the finest literary achievements of the 20th Century. Then you will understand why--in spite of its excellence in most respects-Jackson's LOTR at best deserves no more than 4 stars.
Rating:
Summary: Read the Books
Review: It is a great movie but if you did not read the books you missed ALOT!
Rating:
Summary: Lord of the Rings The return of the King
Review: Great, but you need to see the first two for this to really make sense. Sometimes moves a bit slow but define must see. Would recommend discussion with kids to point out how putting aside difference help them accomplish the gold. Will hold your kids attention.
Rating:
Summary: The BEST MOVIE EVER!
Review: These movies were spectacular! I've never had the pleasure of seeing such excellent movies. Return of the King was an amazing ending to the trilogy. I was on the egde of my seat the entire time and cried like a baby towards the whole last hour of the movie. I am a devoted fan and will always love and respect Peter Jackson and the entire cast for enriching the world with this masterpiece that's a sure classic!
Rating:
Summary: What more can be said...
Review: ...that the movie doesn't? The vocabulary of praise has been exhausted; and I see no need to wax platitudinous. It is simply impossible to capture the feeling this amazing 16 hour movie generates in the heart and the soul. I'm not even going to try. One cannot imagine but that the late Professor Tolkein and his late (?) son and archivist, Christopher, would have cheered this work of not one but MANY lifetimes. Tolkein produced a richly textured mythopoeic millieu that should be real; that is, in fact, more detailed than the history of many nations' national mythologies. Who does not long for a world where evil CAN be driven from the Earth? Jackson, et al, so nailed the entire book (and it's as one movie as it is one book) that he achieved a miracle our dim praise can add nothing to other than competitive effusiveness. The wonder speaks for itself. We all have that sinking feeling in our guts that the self-proclaimed Academy is going to "Annie Hall" LotR as it did to "Star Wars" all those years ago. At least we can thank the stars Woody Allen doesn't have a movie in contention! Back to the sinking feeling: we all know the "Academy" is going to administer the proverbial boot to Messers/Mesdames Jackson, Walsh, Mortensen, Astin, Woods, Rhys-Davies, Ian McKellen, et al. The failure to nominate Astin as Best Supporting Actor was obscene enough. I dearly, dearly hope I'm wrong. If a marginal, ephemeral movie like "Titanic" can sweep, then the greatest movie of the generation, by any measure of justice, can and must do the same. Should things go the way they look to, long after this year's Oscar Lights have faded away, and even amazing films like "Lost in Translation" and "Master and Commander" are forgotten in the bargain bins at Wal-Mart, long after our children have left this Earth to our grandchildren, one ineluctable truth will remain: These movies have few equals and no superiors. Rather like Prof. Tolkein himself. Bravissimo!
| 
