Rating: 
Summary: Talk About the Soundtrack, NOT the Movie
Review: All of the reviews I read on the page about the Soundtrack reviewed the MOVIE, instead! At least, the ones I bothered to read.
Concerning the SOUNDTRACK, Rosenman's score compares VERY favorably to Howard Shore's scores for Peter Jackson's films. I actually prefer Rosenman's score over Shore's for one simple reason ... there are tracks on THIS soundtrack that I can hum along with. They're MEMORABLE, compared to Shore's.
Now, don't get me wrong ... I LIKE Shore's three soundtracks ... just not as much as I like Rosenman's. It's just that there are few tracks on all three of Shore's works that I think to myself, "You know, I'd really like to hear such-and-such track (May It Be, Gollum's Song, and Into The West being notable exceptions)." Very few of the tracks evoke a memory or an emotional response from me, by which I gauge an exceptional soundtrack. Rosenman's soundtrack DOES!
Best Tracks being: Mines of Moria, The Battle In The Mines: The Balrog, Riders of Rohan, Helm's Deep, Dawn Battle; Theoden's Victory, and Mithrandir.
Shore's LotR Soundtracks would get 4 stars each. Rosenman's, 5 stars.
Just my take on the matter. I hope it helps.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Adaptation for LOTR Fans
Review: It has always been much to my disappointment that this seminal work by Ralph Bakshi continues to be dismissed. In the months leading up to Peter Jackson's re-take on "Lord of the Rings," it's time to appreciate the achievement of this 1978 film. As a huge fan of the JRR Tolkien novel (I have read Lord of the Rings 5 times), I have always held a special place for this film. It captures the dialogue, look, characters. It's dark and haunting. Superbly voiced. A remarkable score by Leonard Roseman. Entertainment Weekly recently, in its insensitive review, criticized the animation as "cheesy psychedelic backgrounds and shoddy rotoscoping (in which live actors are filmed and then drawn over)." It is to be noted that this "cheesy" technique is being used in Richard Linklater's upcoming "Waking Life," already being hailed as a "groundbreaking achievement." It's time to appreciate this film as a remarkable adaptation and as a groundbreaking piece of filmmaking.
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 valiant early effort - give it a chance!
Review: Although it is inevitably overshadowed today by Peter Jackson's magnificent films, Ralph Bakshi's animated version of "The Lord of the Rings" is actually quite good. For one thing, the screenplay is a superb adaptation of roughly the first half of the tale (part II never materialized, thanks to financial difficulties) - it is intelligent and literate, simplifying the plot where necessary but not diluting it too much. The voice work is outstanding (notably John Hurt as Aragorn and William Squires as Gandalf), and Leonard Rosenman's score ranks among the finest of its era. I'm sure that Bakshi's decision to capture a fair amount of the action via "rotoscoping" (tracing over live-action images) was motivated, at least in part, by financial considerations, but in all honesty I can't see how he could have done some of the big battle scenes otherwise (not much computer animation happening in 1978). In any case, if you view the film with an open mind, you'll find that the technique distracts far less than the hard-liners would have you believe. For me, anyway, it cannot materially diminish the quality of such a fine adaptation of Tolkien's unforgettable novels. Of course, Peter Jackson's films are in an entirely different league, but I still regret the fact that Bakshi never got to finish his version of the story. I think his vision was and is a compelling one, and I'm sorry he never got to see it through to its conclusion.
Rating: 
Summary: The Lord of The Rings Cartoon movie
Review: I saw this movie for the first time a couple of weeks ago. Having read the books numerous times and seen Peter Jackson's movies, I have mixed feelings about Ralph Bakshi's movie. On the positive side, it's clear that he tried to capture the spirit of the film. A lot of the dialogue is taken right from the books and he captures the main storyline fairly well on what was clearly a limited animation budget.
On the other hand, many of the creative decisions Mr. Bakshi made were very strange. For example, why does Aragorn wear a skirt the whole time? Why does Boromir wear a ridiculous viking horn helmet? Why is Sam portrayed as being mentally challenged? And why do the Ringwraiths walk around like cripples? Seriously, why would you be afraid of these Ringwraiths when you could outdistance them by simply walking quickly. The pronunciations are often wrong. Balin is pronounced "Bay-lin" for example.
It's almost if Mr. Bakshi make this movie by himself and didn't show it to anyone until he was done. That being said, it's too bad his studio didn't allow him to make a second movie to finish the story. I would have liked to have seen what other strange but interesting elements Mr Bakshi would have added to the story.
Rating:
Summary: The Lord of the Rings
Review: My advice is don't try to compare this movie to Peter Jackson's, visually you just cannot. I remember seeing this movie in California while on vacation. I thought the story capture was good, being a long time Tolkien fan. The animation wasn't as bad as some make it seem. Remember, look at the date on the movie. The voice acting is very good in the film as well. If you are a Tolkien fan, or just a fan of the story, give it a shot, you may very well like it. It's another view or interpretation of Lord of the Rings, albeit with different technology and a smaller budget.
Rating: 
Summary: For the hardcore LOTR fans...
Review: Back in 1978, Ralph Bakshi made an attempt to bring the Lord of the Rings to theaters...in animated form. This version is vastly different from the Peter Jackson films and it is hard to review this version without making comparisons. However since it was made some twenty years before Jackson, I won't make comparisons.
This version is more true to the Tolkien text. The dialogue is quoted directly from the books, including the songs such as Frodo's song about an inn while at the Prancing Pony or Bilbo's song about Tuneveil while in Rivendell. However, the characterizations and themes from Tolkien is not translated very well. All the characters seem to be acting in a vacuum--their only motivation is, "Because that is what happens in the book." While fans of the book may understand it, a contemporary audience who have never read Tolkien might be lost. Also, many of the pronunciations are off (hate to be a nit-picker about these things but I think it is worth pointing out). Saruman is pronounced "Aruman" in the film (probably to avoid confusion with Sauron). Sauron is suppose to be pronounced "sour-on" not "sore-on." Celeborn is suppose to be "kel-e-born" not "sell-e-born." And Edoras is "ed-or-as" not "a-dor-as."
Some of the characters are visualized in ways that can only be described as odd. Boromir is portrayed as a Viking (even his funeral boat looks like a Viking funeral ship). Samwise Gamgee is a squat moron with an overbite. Gimli, for some reason, is the same height as Legolas and Aragorn. And the orcs look like the sand people from "Star Wars."
The "rotoscope" effect is definitely distracting. This is where live actors perform the scene and would later be drawn over by the animators. Unfortunately, the limitations of this technique really shows in this film. The effect looks like an old film after the color has bled out. The live actor's faces come through and looks out of place against the animated backgrounds.
The DVD contains nothing in the ways of extras, even though the video and audio transfer was done rather well. It seems to me to be something the studio quickly packaged so they could make a little more money off the Lord of the Rings craze. I'm giving it 3 stars for its honest attempt and the nostalgia factor. It is certainly something for the die-hard fans to see--an earlier attempt at making a film version of Tolkien's books, but will be a big disappointment to people who only know about Lord of the Rings from Jackson's films.
Rating:
Summary: Not as good as The Hobbit and Return of the King
Review: It doesn't make sense to me that the director completely changed the look and style of animation in this film from The Hobbit and Return of the King. Why didn't they just stick with the same director? A series should have the same look and feel throughout the story. I kept checking the disc cover to see if I had bought the wrong one. The rotoscope animation is completely annoying and distracting. It felt like they were in a rush to complete the film and just stuck the rotoscope animation to complete it. If it was possible to understand the full story without buying this film, that's what I would recommend, but unfortunately it's not.
Rating:
Summary: Entertaining and obviously influential
Review: I remeber watching this movie as a kid and really enjoying it. And I still enjoy it as an adult.
True, it does have flaws like the strange combination of cell animation and rotoscoping, but the story still holds.
Not only this, but Peter Jackson obviously lifted quite a bit of his version of LTRs from these. Some things that were trimmed down from the book for the cartoon version, were also included in the Jackson version.
It's a good film for what it is. My only real complaint is that it goes on a bit long.
Rating:
Summary: not so good
Review: I didn't like this movie...It was kind of boring and the painted on people really looked stupid...I prefer the hobbit and the return of the king animated movie over this one...
|
