*** Official "LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING" Review Thread (1 Viewer)

[RichM]

Saw the movie the other day and really enjoyed it and will see it again. It was a very good adaptation of the books and really hooked you into the world of middle earth.

As for the timeline issue, I can see where it might of caused problems for some, but I noticed a couple of things that let you know significant time had passed.

1. Bilbo aged quite considerably since we last saw him.

2. Gandalf recalling how he was saved from tower.




Probably other hints I didn't notice.

My only disappoints were that they didn't make a big deal about the "Sword that was broken and then reforged", as well as the naming of the sword. And the way they shortened the Lothlorien scenes. Now I have noticed on some of the "Making of the Fellowship" shows that there are scenes that did not appear in the movie. So I'm hoping for a longer director's cut when the DVD comes out.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Click Link Removed for my :star: review.

 

[MichaelG]

I really liked the movie like most others. In my opinion there was a few CGI shots that weren't neccesary (although there are no real spoilers here I will black it out anyway).

long shot of them running in the Mines of Moria, and the second pan into the earth where the Urak Hai was being created, and lastly some things during the Wizards fight (oh yeah, and that face on Bilbo!)

The first two mentioned shots in particular I felt were repetitive and already handled previously. Except for that pretty much the rest of the CGI was good and not over-used. That was the one thing that I was afraid of before seeing the movie, too much special effects shots.

As for the story, and the acting... I was happy with how it was presented. I thought that the opening naration was effective. The acting was good, Sean Bean's performance especially. The three hours did go by without feeling like three hours, as my jimmy legs girlfriend can attest. At the movies end it just made me want to see the next episode in the trilogy even more than I was anticipating the first. That in itself tells me that it was a good movie, if I didn't feel that way it would most likely be due to a lackluster first movie.

I really hope that the second movie is as good. I would give it 4.25 out of 5. I will be seeing this again next week.

 

[Henry Carmona]

great

 

[JaleelK]

I felt LOTR was about a hour too long, the action was spotty, it was too much dialog between action scenes,the story was kind of incoherent and a bit complex, especially for those who haven't read the book. This movie was a touch of Gulliver,Snow White, Dungeons and Dragons with a full compliment of elfs,dwarfs,leprechauns,Liliputians etc. The acting was average at best, no one really stood out in the movie that you can say done a great job of acting. While watching this movie I really didn't know what to make of it, I don't know if I was watching a movie or tripping like when I used to get high. Watching LOTR was like being on a mind altering drug. Also, the ending was kind lame with two boys or hobbits hugging and crying like little girls, that was soft, how are you going to fight demons and evil magicians and be like that.

One thing I will say about LOTR is it was spectacular visually, great eye candy even though it seemed to be dreary at times and colorless, the movie succeded big time at taking you into another world and going on the fantasy ride and because of those strong parts about the movie I have ot say it was average.

The movie was OK, but if anyone thinks LOTR come anywhere near any Star Wars movie in any category, including EP.1 is beyond me. LOTR can't touch Star Wars, Star Wars has and appeal to most people of this planet, LOTR will only appeal to a segment of the population. LOTR is very limited and not nearly as expansive in it story telling than anyone of the Star Wars movies.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Members,
Don't bother responding to the post above this one. I will delete all comments that are not a review of this film. Furthermore, let's just accept the above negative review for what it really is because it's not worth any of your valuable time spent responding to it.
Crawdaddy

 

[Paul Jenkins]

my 2nd viewing review, hopefully appropriate for this topic
---
I went to see FOTR again the other day for the 2nd time to see if my B+ rating was correct. Short answer, it was close, a B on second viewing, lost a little on subsequent viewing...
Longer answer:
On the second viewing, the acting of McKellen, Lee and Mortensen were very good as I remembered. McKellen in particular was the best part of the movie and carried it to the B rating I give it. Without him, the movie would sink to a C+ or lower (more on that later...)
The acting by Tyler, Weaving and Blanchett was bad to horrendous. Tyler in particular was very flat and had the worst scene in the movie w.r.t. the Ringwraiths chase and her 'wonderful' speech across the river. Perhaps Weaving was my own fault, I couldn't separate him from the Matrix, his mannerisms and tone were so similar...
The story had the following problems for me:
-> The Ringwraiths were supposed to be kings and great warriors, were they not? You'd never know if from the movie, they were incompetent and only menacing in the opening scene with Frodo. After that they were shown as weak and completely laughable, with 6 or so of them not able to get/kill Frodo (sholder stab from 3 feet, come on), and then getting bested by Aragon very easily. Then, they couldn't run down Arwen in the chase scene, getting close until she whispers in the horse's ear (in a bad edit clip btw). Then, magically, they are massively behind Arwen who has crossed the river, and they STOP for some unknown reason because she stopped and then the wonderful water crushing... Then, they completely DISAPPEAR from the rest of the movie, replaced by equally incompetent super-orcs. Baffling...
-> Pacing - Jackson didn't do well with the passing of time and the pacing of events through that time. After the first viewing I was convinced it was me given all the praise that people were heaping on it, so I was particularly looking for this and what I missed the first time. I didn't miss anything, he didn't do a good job w.r.t. pacing and time evolution in the film, IMHO.
-> The dwarf hall after the escape from the cave troll and orcs. The fellowship is surrounded by thousands of orcs who then leave because the Balrog is coming. Nice timing...
-> The Balrog versus Gandalf 'battle'. What battle? They didn't do much of anything sans for a few choice words from Gandalf and a collapse of a bridge. Not very epic or exciting, especially on 2nd viewing... Given this wonderful battle, why did the orcs' flee? The Balrog is an overblown part of this film that people swoon over, IMHO.
-> Jackson's infatuation with swooping, repeating camera shots. Trying to make it epic-feeling I suppose...
As I alluded to above, the film lacked any sense of epic battle and/or struggle to me. The battle scene at the beginning was very short and simple. The aforementioned ringwraiths were pathetic. The Gandolf/Saruman battle was a bit laughable with break-dancing wizards floating around the screen. The fellowship battle with the dwarf hall orcs and cave troll was the best of the film, but it was also comical in spots, especially the troll-riding CGI and Frodo playing hide and seek behind the pillar. The Balrog battle that wasn't. Then, the "super-orcs", bred for battle and which would have appeared to number in the thousands, appeared to number in the tens during the battle sequences. Easily killed, no real sense of them having any capability to defeat anyone in the fellowship sans the comic-relief hobbits. Speaking of, the end 'charge' by the comic-relief hobbits after Boromir was killed was equally silly, IMHO.
So, those are my negatives in the movie, all of which bring it down to the B rating. Still an entertaining movie and worth seeing, here is what I really liked about the movie:
Gandalf - great acting and delivery by McKellen. He really seemed to be an old wizard. His facial expressions and speech were impeccable and worthy of any supporting-actor nod if I've seen one. Great actor in a great role.
As said before, Lee and Mortenson gave great acting performances.
Legolas was a great character and Bloom did a good job with his performance as well.
Story - the story itself is one for the ages, the one ring, the corruption of those that carry / pursue it, etc. I particularly liked the fellowship formation, with Frodo the only one seeing what the ring was doing, and in subsequent parts of Frodo/Boromir/Aragorn towards the end. I wish the character development would have been deeper on this story line and less elsewhere.
Moria and The Shire - I liked the way that WEKA created Moria and the Shire, both very good use of CGI, models and other items (like the weathered axes, books, tombs, decayed bodies, etc.)
In summary---
I really think this film missed what could have been one of the most epic and exciting movies in history. It was a good film, but not great, IMHO.
I'm hopeful that Jackson can do better with the subsequent films.

 

[Bruce Hedtke]

Most of Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring really lies beyond me. I haven't read the books, really knew nothing of what was in store...I merely knew it was directed by Peter Jackson and the previews looked inspiring. With that in mind, I must confess being quite absorbed for the first 2 hours. The action scenes were of a jaw-dropping and mesmerizing scale-epic and sweeping, while the dialogue scenes and "slow" moments kept the film on track and its heart beating. But, the third act spiraled into sentimentality and pointless meandering. Too many dragged out scenes that more or less seemed like add-on material. While the scale of the final third was still huge and its scope engulfing, it just labored on and on. The first two hours were so engrossing and filled with awesome spectacles that when the last hour collapsed into just a pedestrian film, it stole alot of the spirit and power from the rest of the film. That's too bad because the first 2/3's of the film were as good and as exciting as I've seen this year. Or in the last few years, for that matter. This one really got hurt by the weak ending.
Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring :star: :star: :star:
Bruce

 

[Mark-W]

I loved this movie.
I have seen it twice so far, and am heading
out in 5 mintues to see it again.
For the record, I love all the swooping camera work.
That is just Peter's style. Like it or not.
Kinda like saying you don't like Citizen Kane
because of the "odd" camera angles.
I am a HUGE Star Wars fan.
I even have a true SW Geek's Darth Vader mask
sitting just to the left of this monitor.
BUT, this film has captured me as if I have become
a ringwraith. While comparing trilogy's and deciding
which is better is about as pointless as arguing
about one's personal spiritual beliefs, I may very
well find my self a bigger fan of this trilogy by the
end of the holiday season of 2003, than Mr.Lucas's
space opera.
Mark

 

[Michael Silla]

Just saw it for the second time tonight. What a great movie. Visually and sonically, it "raises the bar." This past weekend I went a bought myself another copy of Lord of the Rings (According to the guy at the book store it's a 6 volume set without the Hobbit - NOT A TRILOGY). This is a book that I haven't read since I was 12 or 13.
Although It will probably color my imagination, I'm sure I'll enjoy the book that much more.
Question to others. I saw the both movie in DTS (first) and Dolby Digital (second). Is a movie like this released in both formats commonly?. I won't bother saying which one I liked best .
Michael.

 

[Chuck Mayer]

Michael,

It is actually one story divided up into 6 Books. It was originally intended to be a single novel. The publishers "requested" three books, so Book I and II became FOTR, III and IV became TTT, and so on and so forth.

To ensure I meet all requirements of this being the REVIEW thread, I will post a further continuation of my review:

What made this film sing was the acting. A lot of good words have been said regarding the cast, but it really is top-shelf. In a fantastical film, that quality grounds the movie, allowing the audience to become emotionally involved, and ensuring the story seems authentic. While beating this dead horse, Sir Ian is masterful in his role. His winks, nods, smiles, and eye contact completely define his role. He embodies Gandalf, and it really is a tremendous performance. He has done much great work, but he will likely be remembered for this role above all others. I have dragged myself to the theater 4 times, and each time I am mesmerized by this treat of a movie. Again, the best part remains knowing there are hours of the adventure left to discover on-screen.

Take care,

Chuck

 

[Dome Vongvises]

Decided to look for negative reviews of movie to see what would pop up. Only two or three, but what do they know?
Fellowship of the Ring
Overall Score: A

- characterizations
- faithful to book
- CGI visuals

- wasn't long enough
- not so faithful to the book
Meh, you've heard most of the stuff already. I just decided to drop my feelings on the subject.
As a side note, much of the criticisms from people who don't like the movie say it's either too long, or they felt like everybody was a pu**y.
Quotes like
"I thought these were tough guys? All they ever did was run instead of stand and fight. What a bunch of pu**ies!!!".
Tells you the kind of movie critics I hang around with.

 

[Josh_Hill]

Post deleted by moderator.
How can we say it any more clearly? NOTHING OTHER THAN A REVIEW IS TO BE POSTED IN THIS THREAD.

 

[Oscar]

Ok here is my review:
THE LORD OF THE RINGS:THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING. :star: :star: :star: :star: :star: out of :star: :star: :star: :star: :star:
I was not one of those kids who used to read a lot.
I mostly readed artsy books like Moby-Dick and loved them.
So because of that i was never interested in Lord of the Rings.
I began to hear of Lord of the Rings in the Summer of 2000, when i was reading the Cinescape magazine and it had an interesting story.
So then i discovered that this book was considred a classic so i readed them and i loved them.
So, i went to see the film. But i wont compare the book to the film as i feel that its inappropiate.
But LOTR has never been such a thrilling experience since the first Star Wars film.
Is just amazing. It exceeded my expectations.
The acting was great, the SFX was great and the storyline was compelling.
But the film does have a few very minor flaws:
1:Near the end it starts to drag. It seems to go on forever, but that does not ruin the experience.
2: Camera work on the final battle: The introduction to the orcs was a bit corny too much closeups and too much strobe camera work.
But aside from that the movie is perfect and its probably the best Fantasy film of all time

 

[Lou Sytsma]

Having seen the movie 4 times now felt it was time to revisit my original review and revise it. Initially I gave it a 4 out of 5.

Now I would give it 4.5 out of 5. My initial quibbles about some of the intight camera work during the action sequences no longer bother me as much.

The only pacing issue would be the journey down the Anduin before reaching the Aragonath. This is really the only restless moment in the movie for me.

Beyond that - this movie is truly a classic and will become more so as the other 2 movies are released.

In light of recent offerings seeing this movie again made me realize it has raised the bar. The fusing of story, acting, SFX, music, cinematography is unparalleled.

I eagerly await the next installment.

 

[Allen Skurow]

So solly. This review incorrectly appeared in TWO wrong threads.:b Here it is by unpopular demand:
(Please keep all sharp pewter figurines away from the monitor.)
'Hope you like Elijah Woods blue-eyed mug and looking at portentous jewelry. His contemplative close-ups and endless shots of the ring in his mitt seem to make up a hour of this yawner alone! And no, I didn't read the books, but movies have to earn your interest - not just assume it after stultifying evil-honor-ring-earth-prophecy speech number twenty six. And what the hell is up with these four members of the lollipop guild, two guys and a grandpa being able to trash platoons of orcs, undead horsebacked specters, and a snarling clan of rabid, pig-faced WWF rejects - not to mention a sea monster, giant ogre, and your garden variety flaming demon from hell! Even the usually dependable Howard Shore disappoints with a annoyingly predictable score that is equal parts psuedo-heroic, bomball, you'll be shifting in your seat, looking around the theater, or just stifling yawn number sixteen praying for the next action scene to take you out of your doldrums.
And by the way, all those byzantine tomb walkways two hundred feet over molten lava...gee, you think ancient builders of underground architectural marvel could have thought of tossing up a handrail or two?! Hmm...must have been beerthirty...

 

[Claire Panke]

Yaawwwn...Some people are blind to magic and deaf to enchantment.

Oh...and I liked Elijah Wood a lot.

Peter Jackson has long been one of my favorite directors. LOTR/FOTR is that rarest of rarities, a popular success that does juctice to its source material. While certain details of the book have been dropped, rearranged or changed slightly for dramatic structure, FOTR is absolutely true to the spirit of Tolkien.

Jackson gets both the major themes of LOTR and literally thousands of details from the book exactly right. Moreover, unlike many of his contemproariess, he knows that the special effects are there to serve the story and the characters, not the other way 'round. What a joy to watch a film that takes chances, that doesn't stoop to the lowest common denominator.

Wonderfully written, perfectly cast, beautifully acted, lavishly scored, staggeringly shot on location in New Zealand - the time and attention lavished on every production aspect of FOTR boggles the mind. From the armour and weaponry to the costumes and sets, this is a film crafted with passion, made by fans for fans, yet equally appealing to the average moviegoer who doesn't know Middle Earth from the Middle Ages.

FOTR has no peer in current fantasy film. Is it perfect? No. But it doesn't need to be - its minor flaws don't detract or distract in any significant manner.

At last a film experience that will thrill you - and you won't have to check your brains at the door.

Extended DVD out soon. On to TTT.

My score: 9.75 out of a possible 10.0