Rating: 
Summary: Lord of the Rings
Review: This was a great fantasy movie. I was transported to Hobbiton and didn't come back to reality until the credits started to roll. Dark and not without violence, I felt it was one of the best movies of the year. A must own movie for my video library!
Rating:
Summary: Sauron ROCKS!!!!!
Review: This was a great movie. Like all trilogys, the first one is amazing and takes your breath away, the second one(which the makers try to make you think will be better than the first) was good but is not as good as the first, and the third film(which the makers also make you think will be better than the first two) is just plain not what you exepicted. This one is the best of the trilogy. The story is about some small creatures called hobbit. Hobbits are very simalar to humans in every way execept they are shorter. This hobbit, named Frodo Baggins, one day is given his uncle Bilbo ring when he is moving. One day a wizard named Gandalf tells Frodo that the ring was made by a demon named Sauron, who gave the races of the world rings but made that ring so he could take control of the world. Now, Frodo goes to Mordor to destroy the ring, but not alone. With him are a Fellowship to guide him in there. Great movie and last but not least SAURON ROCKS!!!!!!!!!!!
Rating:
Summary: Great movie; purists.. chill out!
Review: This was a great movie; one of the best fantasy movies brought to the big screen. Obviously, Tolkien purists are going to have some problems with it; there are some deviations from the original story. Some of these changes are more significant than others, but most have no real effect on the story.. The visuals are very impressive and the characters do a great job.. Gandalf is portrayed pretty much exactly as I hoped he would be.. All in all, if you like fantasy movies, this one is top-notch.. If you're a Tolkien fanatic, you're going to notice some differences but I think the author himself would be the first to tell people not to get hung up on every little detail.. Now if they'll only bring Dragonlance to the big screen..
Rating:
Summary: hmm.....
Review: this was a hard one.
missing from it was some large aspects from the book, like tom bombadil, anduril, glorfindel and such. and i was sorta hoping that they might have had added these. i wish it was longer so it could include nore scenes (dune was a freakin 6 hours!)
but this is the best movie, or series of movies that will come out in a long time
Rating:
Summary: Incredible Journey
Review: This was a mental journey that held me totally captive for three hours. The characters, the scenery - one wild ride. Loved it!
Rating:
Summary: BEAUTIFUL!
Review: This was a movie-making masterpiece. The cinematography was outstanding, the acting was wonderful, and it stayed true to the books. What more could you ask for? The battle scenes were awesome too! This movie was perfect, and I reccomend that everyone who hasn't seen it, go see it right now. You don't know what you're missing if you don't see it.
Rating:
Summary: Wonderful, the best movie of 2002
Review: This was a really great movie, it truly does have the feeling of the book the acting was great, everything was wondeful, but the problem was is that i thought it was way too serious and dark for my taste, but i still love it,and i will watch this film more than 50 times!
Rating:
Summary: If you want Fantasy, see The Mummy:This is Literature mate!
Review: This was a truly excellent movie, no doubt about it. Anyone who is still waiting to go see this, should definitely go. It is a wonderful piece of movie-making and a treat for anyone who loves movies. As a visual rendering of Tolkien's masterwork, Fellowship of the Ring is wonderfully evocative of the spirit of Tolkien, and this, I think, is why Peter Jackson should have won the best director nod from the Oscars. If "A Beautiful Mind" won for subject matter, then LOTR:FoTR was a far better piece of filmic creativity. LoTR is about power, and the way that power corrupts. The task of defeating the greatest and most evil entity in Middle Earth, is destined to fall upon the least conventionally heroic of peoples: the rustic, "English countryside" -dwelling hobbits who love food, smoking and running around barefoot. To save the wiser, more war-like and subtler races of "the free peoples" of Middle Earth, Frodo and his servant Sam must overcome evil not by head-on confrontation, but by destroying the Dark Lord Sauron's ultimate source of power: his gold ring. The drama of LoTR cannot be denied, the scenery and the cinematography were breathtaking (the Second Age battles at the beginning of the movie and the over-flights of Saruman's transformation of Isengard particularly stand out)and the action scenes, while a little 'sensationalized' for the video-game audience, were pretty gutsy. The combat scenes in particular had much more of the feel of hand-to-hand fighting than sword and sandal travesties like "Gladiator". That said, I did have a couple of moments of disconnect with the movie. One was the silly wizards' duel between Gandalf and Saruman. It looked more like Buffy the Vampire Slayer, than Tolkien. The other was the petulance of Elrond (although I very much enjoyed Agent Smith's portrayl of the Elf-Lord, he seemed a much less impressive character than he was in the book). Still, in the final analysis, LoTR is not about the individual characters (except Frodo, Sam and Smeagol/Gollum). As a work of literature, and as the ur-father of fantasy novels, it is about big ideas, and this is where (for my money) Peter Jackson's talent really comes through. On one level, LoTR (both the movie and the books) are just good entertaining fun, but on another level, there are deeper and more disturbing issues: As many scholars have pointed out, Tolkien's story was about the denial of power rather than the triumphant use of it. It's a story with deep humanistic (and religious) roots. Tolkien himself refuted the idea that LoTR was about the atom bomb, but there are more than enough interesting links between Tolkien and Milton for us to see that the central issue for Tolkien was the nature of good and evil and the way in which humanity (via its various avatars - elves, humans, wizards, dwarves, hobbits, and even orcs) come to terms with the demands of both good and evil as guiding forces in the world. It should be noted in these more multicultural times, that Tolkien's moral universe was a thoroughly English form of Christianity, and a mixture of late 19th century and Dark Ages Christianity at that. One of the most important differences between Tolkien and the more simplistic versions of fantasy that make up the bulk of what came after the publication of 'The Lord of the Rings' is Tolkien's insistence on the inevitability and sadness of endings. Even if the good guys win, much will be sacrificed, and the world as the protagonists know it will come to an end. This is most evident in his handling of the elves, but also in figures such as Aragorn who is shown not as a young man, in the glorious morning of adulthood (as he would be in almost any other fantasy author's hands), but as a guy who is definitely a little the worse for wear and tear, even if he can still decapitate orcs with the best of them. This is not Walt Disney's world of primary colors or John Wayne-style westerns with unambiguous good guys and bad guys. In fact, in Tolkien's universe, the good are often hampered by their own deficiencies, or tempted by their own delusions, or disabled by the treachery of erstwhile allies. The bad guys often unwittingly facilitate their own doom through the same kinds of in-fighting and mutual suspicion. No one in LoTR has absolute moral clarity, and that, I think is part of Tolkien's creative genius. Through careful casting, camera-work and scripting, Jackson has been able to capture this essential ingredient in Tolkien's Middle Earth. Cate Blanchett's Galadriel and above all, Ian McKellan's Gandalf embody this to the tips of their boots. Huge cheers for the whole cast and the technical crew for this movie. Tolkien's spirit goes on into the new millennium.
Rating:
Summary: Real Cool!
Review: This was a very good movie. It has alot of action at the begining. It is pretty violent. It is not gory. It is not scary. See this movie! It Rules!
Rating:
Summary: what can i say...
Review: This was a wonderful film. It was everything I expected and more. To anyone who disliked this film, all I can say is get a life! The acting, direction and cinematography were great. I did have a few problems with the film such as:
1.I'm sure Hugo Weaving is a fine actor, but his Elrond was dull.
2.Did anyone notice that Legolas did not have many lines, he just stood around or fought, but I guess everyone was too busy drooling to notice (I'll admit Orlando Bloom is hot!)
3.Cate Blanchett took Galandriel a little too extreme (but she was good anyway.)
I enjoyed the rest of the film, and have to give props to Ian McKellan who was born to play Gandalf, Viggo Mortensen who IS Aragorn, and Sean Bean who not only gave an excellent potrayl of Boromir, but made him more likeable in the movie than in the book and I felt his performance was underrated by critcs and fans alike!
|
