Rating: 
Summary: Bakshi Version: Not All That Bad; Not All That Good
Review: I was a LORD OF THE RINGS fan before the movie came out. I read it when I was in 6th grade. My friend Ralph and I would talk about the chapter we were on during soccer practice ("Last night I got to the part where Frodo stabs the cave troll in the foot..."). When Ralph Bakshi's film came out I was very excited to see it. I bought a few of the action figures as well as some coloring books and a fotonovel. I liked the film! I was in 6th grade, though ...I just got the DVD version of Bakshi's LORD OF THE RINGS and am glad that it is shown in its widescreen ratio. The film, after all these years, looks good and is entertaining for about an hour. The second half is dark and hard to follow and incomplete. Bakshi seemed to concentrate on the battles. There is a lot of screen time spent on seeing humans confront then kill orcs. Bakshi pushes the limits of his rotoscoping technique, but in the end it still looks like cheaply costumed extras that have been traced and animated. The orcs look fake with their rubber faces and burlap-sack clothes. Some of Tolkien's story points are not covered or skipped (i.e. the gifts that Galadriel gives to the Fellowship). The best thing about Bakshi's RINGS movie is the voice casting. The characters sound like I imagined them to sound. The character designs are pretty good as well, although Aragorn and Boromir look too "Viking-like" for my tastes. Bakshi has been fairly true to Tolkien's descriptions, though. It is unfortunate that the film ends with the battle of Helms Deep. I have read interviews that seem to say that Bakshi ran out of money. Therefore,the ending isn't really a planned stopping point in the story: more like Bakshi simply ran out of money and had to stop there. THE LORD OF THE RINGS (Bakshi version) is not a terrible film. It has some really good moments. And Bakshi's animation experiments are to be commended. However, it's not all that great either and suffers in its story telling and entertainment value. Here's hoping that Peter Jackson's RINGS trilogy gets it right!
Rating: 
Summary: Leonard Rosenman at his absolute best...
Review: I've heard the soundtrack to Peter Jackson's "The Fellowship Of The Ring" by Howard Shore today; the latter doesn't even come close to capturing the feelings, moods, textures, and themes that Rosenman's score to the 1978 Bakshi version of "The Lord Of The Ring" achieves. Quite frankly, every Rosenman score I've ever heard has strong similarities to his score for "The Lord Of The Rings"--both scores before and after, with choice repetition of bits and pieces here and there. "The Lord Of The Rings" oddly enough seems to be a culmination of the best of Rosenman's characteristic passages. There are definite themes throughout this score that are emotive and memorable, and are strongly characteristic to the scenes and characters they are employed by.
For the most part, Rosenman's score is busy and loud and stirring; but there are times when he uses a more delicate touch. The music is a combination of orchestra and chorus, drums and percussion, and eerie sounds. Rosenman does deliberately borrow a strong melody from Gustav Holst's "The Planets" (Jupiter) for the chorale passage "Mithrandir" that the Lothlorien Elves sing, but I don't hold this against him, as the melody works splendidly. At times, Rosenman's score does sound a bit "tinny" and cold; but overall the music achieves its goal in complementing the film, and creating passages that are more than mere background music.
Rating: 
Summary: Missing item
Review: There isn't much I can add to the already formidable commendations for this DVD.
Like all of the other reviewers, I grew up with this fine work by Ralph Bakshi. Needless to say, the release of this item got me very excited.
However, I was quite disappointed by the misleading listing on the DVD cover. The DVD was described as containing a theatrical trailer when none was included.
I have yet to discern the reason for this.
Needless to say, I feel quite cheated by this discrepancy.
Rating: 
Summary: Incomplete, but captures the spirit of the Fellowship
Review: I recently watched Rankin and Bass's animated version of "The Hobbit" (which was my favorite Tolkien book as a kid), and was very dissapointed that it hadn't held up well as I remembered it. So with low expectations, I watched Ralph Bashki's 1 1/2 parts of "Lord of the Rings" which I didn't remember as fondly as "The Hobbit" and I was pleasantly suprised. It was nowhere near as true to the books as the "Hobbit" was, but it effectively captured the spirit of the first book and a half or so of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Yes, there are huge gaps in plot, little characterization and long, boring fight scenes. The rotoscoped animation was distracting as often as not, but the movie conveys the magic of middle earth, the excitement of the fellowship coming together and the dark terror of Sauron's minions very well. Anyone whose read the books can follow along well enough to enjoy it for what it is - an uneven yet enjoyable take on a roughly two thirds of the greatest fantasy ever written.
Rating:
Summary: A Very Under-rated Movie
Review: Ralph Bakshi made this film too soon. Let's be honest here, 1978 was too early for such a subtle blend of animation and real action acting, not to mention a glorious sound track that defines the movie as a classic from beginning to end. We weren't ready for this film in 1978, it was too intellectual, too clever and too much for an audience used to films that didn't go over an hour and a half. Another minus is that it doesn't follow Tolkein's book in the way perhaps it should but it gives a good rendition of the story, and the characters of Frodo, Gandalf, Legolas and Gimli are well represented. I was a bit disappointed by the portrayal of Aragorn but John Hurt's voice certainly made up for that shortfall. The animation is superbly done; the grainy texture that divides the real actors from the animated ones also helps create a sort of three-dimensional setting that makes Middle Earth more believable. Add to this a good dollop of action, humor and romance and you have a wonderful film that really should have been made in the 1990s. Golum for example is wonderfully camp and creepy, and Sam Gamgee bumbles along but shows fortitude and courage in the most surprising places. The Ring Wraiths are quite terrifying, and their high pitched wailing chills your bones, as does the scene where Frodo is caught between the world of the shadows and the world of real people. Balroc and the Orcs are truly terrifying, and Gandalf is magnificent as the only wizard who understands the real danger than the "one ring" represents to all of Middle Earth. The scene-stealer for me is the great Eagle Guyiere lifting Gandalf from the top of the mountain where Saruman the White has imprisoned him. Look out also for the part where Frodo tries to flee to Rivendell, mortally wounded by a Ring Wraith's poisonous sword. There is so much in this film, and it is such a shame that it has been overlooked for so long. Like everyone else I am looking forward to the new Lord of the Rings film but Ralph Bakshi's animated classic will remain forever in my heart as the first attempt to make Tolkein's world come to life in a very unusual way.
Rating: 
Summary: Its failures have nothing to do with what was left out
Review: The problem with this film is not what was left out, despite what some might say for ("those Tolkien nuts are just complaining because x was left out") or against it. It's not inevitable that any film adaptation of Tolkien's novels will disappoint. And it seems to me that calling it experimental, ambitious or underfunded is simply making excuses. This film fails on its own merits, and probably would even if it were not cut short. I've never been a great fan of Ralph Bakshi's animation style (Fritz the Cat, Cool World), and this film does nothing to change my mind. In my opinion, the animation is simply poor. The animated characters are not particularly attractive and simply move too much; their gestures are exaggerated and several seem far too touchy-feely to be natural. Abstract backgrounds proliferate where a realistic approach would have been best, I think. The colors are muddy and the film is often so dark that, apart from some dim shapes and glowing eyes, nothing can be made out. Then there are the rotoscoped elements (at the Prancing Pony, the ride of the Nazgul to the Fords of Bruinen, and the battle at Helm's Deep), which, as others have pointed out, do not mesh at all with the other animated elements. A more unified animation style would have helped a great deal. I also find the Leonard Rosenman score dissonant; it doesn't match the tone of the movie and with the storyline. Maybe it's simply because it sounds so much like his score for Star Trek IV (which I also felt was out of place). Maybe I just don't like Rosenman. It's hard to quantify. No screenplay will ever be able to compress a story as dense as this one to a movie-friendly length of two hours, ten minutes without some compromises and sacrifices. The film certainly moves briskly, and covers much ground in little time, but at some cost of understanding. The history of the Rings (the smiths of Eregion, the Last Alliance, Isildur, the finding of the Ring by Smeagol) is presented in one big infodump at the beginning, and references to the massive backstory (Elendil, etc.), are made without enough explanation. It might have been better to jettison them altogether. More problematic is that the characters are not given enough time to develop into something with which we can sympathize. Yet in spite of all this compression, we are treated to overlong, dim, rotoscoped, dialogue-free animation excesses at the Ford of Bruinen and in Rohan. There are also some errors in consistency. Aragorn's sword is shown broken at Bree and in Rivendell, but whole in Moria and afterward; of course it was reforged in the interim (as we know from the books), but if you're going to make a point of it being broken early on, it makes narrative sense to show it being fixed, or drop it altogether. Characters also inexplicably drop the "S" from Saruman's name, but only about half the time! If nothing else, those of you who like this film will be happy to know that the transfer to DVD seems very good.
Rating:
Summary: At long last....
Review: This undeservedly-derided classic gets the DVD release it merits. Quite simply, this film turned me on to Tolkien and the wide worlds of fantasy. The impressive and still-revolutionary visual style defined for me (and later, MERP) what Middle Earth was. Though like everyone else, I am disappointed the second half was never released, what is there is lovely. A concise, understandable telling of this story, from a time when instead of CGI you needed the pen of the animator to bring it to life.
Rating:
Summary: Lost in Middle Earth
Review: Firstly, it is inevitable that any cinematic version of the books of the LOTR series will disappoint its die hard fans as the books are paced unlike any film. Still, they can be fun to watch. But, this one is almost a challenge to watch. The character designs are much more 'real' than the more interesting/other worldly designs of the animated "THE HOBBIT". But, the constant use of 'tracing' from live action onto a cel format never becomes comfortably part of the storytelling. Everytime a traced character appears onscreen you are immediatley reminded that it was created using a different process than the rest of the animation. There are some nice moments (enhanced by a great musical score by Leonard Rosenman) but the storyline becomes misguided... the end is so abrupt and anticlimatic that it looks like they suddenly found them selves out of ink and released what was finished to date... Cross Your fingers for the live action film, now a reality.
Rating:
Summary: Great disappointment for a Tolkien fan
Review: I suppose I was expecting too much. My friends and I were such fans of the movie that we eagerly anticipated it when it first came to theaters (now long ago). We were all greatly disappointed. The animation is cheesy and boring. The images do not remotely capture any grandeur or spectacle nor do the evil minions inspire any fear or loathing. The acting was lame. The adaptation of the story was hideous with gross omissions and many bad choices. The music was the best thing about it, and to be honest, I found it too strident.
Rating:
Summary: The Second is by far the Best
Review: The second movie in this series was done by a different team of animators and, I think, a different director. What a series it would have been had they made all three in this format! This second video is far more artistic and "adult" than the first and, most especially, than the last. The live animation creates an artistic and poignant atmosphere by combining the movements and forms of living actors with the glossed over paints and styles of animation. The story maintains its finer points and does not condescend to a child's level--and, after all, anyone who loves Tolkien knows that this story, with the exception of The Hobbit, is not a child's fairy tale. Frodo and Sam set out with their friends to destroy the ill-gotten ring of Bilbo and upon embarking on their quest, are immediately drawn into evil and danger. The artists of this film capture the surreal landscape and the vagaries of multi-dimensions as Frodo battles the dread-Lord Sauron and his minions--sometimes while leaving the physical plane of existence and emerging in the dream-like netherworld of the ring. This altered plane of existence is easily written in a novel but difficult to convey in a realistic manner on film. The animators master this transition beautifully and without making it appear superficial and cartoon-ish.
The live action of this film brings a viciousness and, most importantly, a reality in movement to the battles which the characters consistently face. This is completely lacking in both the first and the last movies of the series. And finally, Frodo's character displays a much greater depth than ever Bilbo did in the animated video, The Hobbit (which is likewise a good movie, just of a very different level). This movie deserves all of the acclaim and hopefully, the live action movie coming to theatres in December will be at least as well done. The only sadness is when one realizes how wonderful it would have been had all three animated films been done by the crew of the second. Why they reverted back to the Hobbit's creators for the final movie (Return of the King) is beyond me.
| 
