Lord of The Rings Review (1 Viewer)

[BrianShort]

There are 2 new absolutely glowing reviews up at
www.aintitcool.com One of them is pretty detailed so if you're wondering exactly what's changed, you could probably find your answeres there... I just sort of skimmed that one though. Also, someone in one of the talkbacks there said he heard a rumor that Peter Travers (Rolling Stone) is calling it the best movie of the year. From the early reviews coming out, I wouldnt be surprised if that's true.
Brian

 

[Steve Christou]

Wow, thanks for the reviews guys, I can now breath a huge sigh of relief, looks like the film is gonna be humungous, great great news, I can't wait to see this, a great end to a so-so movie year.

P.S.Haven't seen Harry Potter yet, not sure I want to see it, Rings is the one I've been waiting all year to see.

 

[Heinz W]

Mark, or anyone who has seen the film, would you consider it worthy of two or three viewings? More??
If the film is as good as early word has it is it not possible that it may find itself in a similar, though on a concededly smaller scale, situation as Titanic did in December of '97? With the smooth sailing of virtually no competition for awhile and, presumably, a decent screenplay that makes the viewer want MORE from the near three hour running time bodes well indeed! I can't wait to see this!!

 

[Max Leung]

Ron mentioned that women at the screening did not like the movie. Any ideas why this is the case? Not enough romance? No obvious big-name hunky actors? Not enough female characters? Too violent? Not enough soap opera drama?
I'm curious to know what the female population in general thought of the LOTR books. Perhaps most women find the darker material off-putting, compared to Harry Potter's light and whimsical fair? Perhaps PJ's work is so close to the books that this impression is preserved in the film?
Maybe LOTR is a guy-only phenomenon? If so, it has no chance of having the legs of Titanic.

 

[Kami]

I'm curious to know what the female population in general thought of the LOTR books. Perhaps most women find the darker material off-putting, compared to Harry Potter's light and whimsical fair? Perhaps PJ's work is so close to the books that this impression is preserved in the film?

I know plenty of females who love Tolkien. My girlfriend's one of them! We're both anxious to see it but she thinks I'm a little TOO crazy about it

 

[Seth Paxton]

Adam, that might be because you are running around dressed up as Gandalf. Just look at that sig picture, do you go to the store like that.
If Pete Travers calls this the best film of the year that would be mighty impressive. I would doubt it at this point but you never know I suppose.

 

[Tanya_G]

I recently read both Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter, and am female. I did not enjoy either series much, although I enjoyed LotR more. Lord of the Rings had excellent settings, but few unique characters - Sam and Frodo were the only that stood out. However, it left a lasting impression, and I may reread it. Harry Potter was incredibly easy to read, but also easy to forget due to the lack of unique characters and interesting plot.

Having said that, I'll note that my English teacher, who is female, enjoyed LotR and is currently reading Harry Potter, which she says is charming.

As for the LotR movie, I am looking forward to seeing it.

 

[Chris Dugger]

Let me just add this.....

Telling you more would be a disjustice to everyone here.

I for one, am glad I was able to see this film without any pre-reviews.

PLEASE.... Ignore the hype.... Ignore the temptation of reading reviews on LOTR.

Just see it....

It IS the film event of the ERA.

It does not cheat.

Dugger

 

[SteveGon]

Well, that's good because I certainly plan on seeing LOTR! By the way, I've never read the books so I'll be going in completely unaware of what's going to happen. Or should I read the books first?

 

[Max Leung]

Good to hear that chicks dig LOTR too.
I'll have to admit, typically men are more vocal about their passions than women. Which of course doesn't mean women can't like the same things!
It's been a few years since I last read LOTR. I've read the series 3 times already, but my memory has never been good. So, this movie should be a great recap for me.
If I had never read the books before, I would hold out until after I saw the movie. That way, I can see the movie on its own terms, and not sullied by preconceived notions about how it SHOULD be.

 

[Charlie_M]

It IS the film event of the ERA.

No offense intended, but what a mixed message!

 

[Dominik Droscher]

Let me just add this.....
Telling you more would be a disjustice to everyone here.
I for one, am glad I was able to see this film without any pre-reviews.
PLEASE.... Ignore the hype.... Ignore the temptation of reading reviews on LOTR.
Just see it....
It IS the film event of the ERA.
It does not cheat.

Yeah Cris, this is not very helpfull in ignoring the hype. My expectation meter after reading your comment is 4% higher now (at 137%).

 

[Ivan Lindenfeld]

Max said: "Maybe LOTR is a guy-only phenomenon? If so, it has no chance of having the legs of Titanic"
Which is almost exactly what my wife said when I told her about Ron's review. There is no romance in LOTR. My wife loves sci-fi and fantasy. She even likes fantasy movies that I think are not very good (Willow). She'll like it.
But as far as it having the legs of a "Titanic?" Not too likely. Although repeat business from people that like that sort of thing should be high.
I for one know that Ron tends to gush a little about good movies so I adjust for that and with that fudge factor in place LOTR: FOTR is really, in TrueIvan(c) rating an 11 on a scale of 1-10.

 

[Dana Fillhart]

Okay,
What I am most concerned about -- and it's been the biggest impetus for wanting to see this movie above any other in my short 31-year lifespan thus far -- is ...
Does this movie capture the essence of what a epic fantasy novel is?
Willow tried, but fell far short. Conan the Barbarian took an excellent stab at it, but the storyline didn't entirely contain some key elements of what I would consider "true" epic fantasy (I'll not elaborate right now on what I felt those missing elements were from Conan). Star Wars is an epic fantasy, but its setting also detracted from that feeling of a "true" fantasy feel. Many other movies had some of those elements but lacked the vastness of scope required for an epic story -- Excalibur is a prime example. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, believe it or not, I felt actually did capture some of that wonder and magic -- only, though, in its first hour; it then "fell apart" in the second half, reverting into a more usual Hollywood mystery/action movie.
Some examples (other than Lord of the Rings) I would consider as "true" epic fantasy storytelling: The Dragonlance saga (the first two trilogies) by Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman; The Wheel of Time novels by Robert Jordan; the Shannara books by Terry Brooks; the Thomas Covenant novels by Stephen R. Donaldson; the Krondor novels by Raymond E. Feist; The Chronicles of Narnia by C.S. Lewis...so many more I could mention, but those should suffice to give a feel for what I mean by "true" fantasy.
What I'm hoping to get from Fellowship of the Ring is two-fold: The first seems (based upon the reviews I've read thus far) a given -- an immersion in an epic fantasy land, with powerful evil foes and unlikely heroes. The second, though, is what concerns me most:
Does it have that feel of magic to it? I don't mean, is there a wizard shooting off fireballs every ten minutes, I mean...will I feel as enchanted by this movie's depiction of Elves, Dwarves, and other non-human races as I feel every time I play a Dungeons and Dragons campaign? Will I get goosebumps when I see Rivendell? Will I be entranced by the sight of the Elves, and when I hear their language spoken (as envisioned by Tolkien and translated by Peter Jackson)? Does the acting of each of the races feel right? I think those who have a love of the type of fantasy stories I listed above know exactly the type of experience I am hoping to attain when I go see this movie.
If Fellowship doesn't capture this essence, that doesn't mean that I cannot enjoy it immensely, it only means that my hopes for translating that "true" fantasy novel onto the big screen will only be delayed.
Here's hoping, though, that this one does it, and does it well!
Thanks for those here on this forum who've seen and reviewed the movie ... aside from my concern above, you've definitely upped my anticipation level at least two orders of magnitude!

 

[Kami]

In case any of you haven't seen yet, it's official and Peter Travers HAS called LOTR the #1 movie of 2001
http://www.theonering.net/perl/newsview/2/1007004676

 

[Max Leung]

I know what you mean about the "magic", Dana. I also felt the Harry Potter movie lacked it too. I'm having a hard time recalling movies that had a real fantasy feel to it. I'd rank Conan as having it (but the sequel didn't come close). Dark Crystal had that feel to it too.
What do you think of the Belgariad series by David Eddings (a silly diversion that calls itself fantasy )? Or Barbara Hambly's fantasy series (I can't recall the name at this time)? And Zelazny's Amber series?
Now, what I find interesting is that I get the same feeling with some science fiction work...Asimov's Foundation series, Frank Herbert's Dune series (well, except the last two books...ugh), some of Iain Banks' science fiction work, and even early Greg Bear and Gregory Benford. They invoke that same feeling of "magic" in myself too.
Now if only I had the expository skill to describe this feeling. Bah, not being an artist sucks.

 

[Dave Smith]

Interesting that of Peter Travers' top 10, 7 of them are released this month!

 

[Craig S]

In case any of you haven't seen yet, it's official and Peter Travers HAS called LOTR the #1 movie of 2001

I'd call this FAR from official. There's a separate thread discussing this "list", go there to see why some of us are questioning this.

 

[BrianShort]

A bit OT here, but if you enjoyed these books, you simply MUST check out The Song of Ice and Fire series by George R. R. Martin. The first 3 books currently out are A Game of Thrones, A Clash of Kings, and A Storm of Swords. Some of the best epic fantasy I've read, because it's gritty, and because it really isnt like your standard fantasy (the only real race is human, there aren't elves or dwarves, etc, and magic isnt a common presence like it is in your standard Dungeons and Dragon book.

Some examples (other than Lord of the Rings) I would consider as "true" epic fantasy storytelling: The Dragonlance saga (the first two trilogies) by Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman; The Wheel of Time novels by Robert Jordan; the Shannara books by Terry Brooks; the Thomas Covenant novels by Stephen R. Donaldson; the Krondor novels by Raymond E. Feist; The Chronicles of Narnia by C.S. Lewis...so many more I could mention, but those should suffice to give a feel for what I mean by "true" fantasy.

 

[Trace Downing]

Max;

I think your thinking of Barbara Hambly's "Winterlands" saga. The third book, AFAIK has yet to appear. Dragonsbane is the first book.