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

[BobH]

I have read the Ring several times as well as The Silmarilion, Hobbit and other Tolkien works.

I was essentially breathless throughout most of the film. It was hard to find something to criticize because I was busy being awed.

I agree with those that argue that this is Jackson's art work and doesn't have to perfectly represent Tolkien's. It couldn't anyway. As Ebert points out, (in his unfair review) the book was more focused on the hobbits and their soft little life style in a horrific world.

That being said, I am still confused by some changes Jackson made and wonder why he made them. It would seem that Tolkien's story is quite solid and the changes I refer to seem unecessary and a bit jolting. Someone not as familiar with the book wouldn't notice them, so this doesn't really take away from the excellent movie. But why?:

1. Saruman's role is significantly expanded and his offer to join with Gandalf against Sauron is skipped. Jackson's partial view of Saruman's motives seems weaker than Tolkien's. I must say that I expected Saruman and Gandalf to suspend themselves in mid-air (ala Matrix). Whew!

2. I accept the Arwen addition, especially since she has such a small role in the Ring but is expanded upon in the Silmarilion. It seems a little "Hollywood" but not bad.

3. The interplay between Gimli and Legolas was so good in the book that I really missed it here.

4. The scenes in Rivendell were rather overdone. It seems that ALL locations had to be spectacular? Elrond seemed a little angry rather than wise. More "Hollywood" it seems. The Council in the book is a slow point, so I suppose Jackson improved on it, in essence.

5. Several plot points were re-done too many times as if the audience wouldn't get it the first time. The kingship of Aragorn, for example. I will assume that his ascension will be big-time in the Return of the King, so why so much here? A good surprise lost.

6. As someone else pointed out, Elendil was betrayed by the Ring, rather than just ambushed. The Tolkien version would have made more sense. Since Jackson points this out twice, I assume he just wanted yet another "person turned evil by the Ring." Not very subtle.

Based on the postings here, it seems that most people have not read the book so they won't be bothered by these things. It is encouraging to see all the " . . . now I will go read the books . . ." comments. Enjoy!

I had a hard time waiting for this, and expected much less. Now I need another excuse to skip work and go see it again . . .

Punchline? My favorite book comes to the big screen and isn't skewered!! I'm a happy camper.

 

[Patrick Sun]

Hmm...I've never read the books.
I really wanted to LOVE this film, but I came away with a gentle fondness for it instead.
For me, pacing is something that a great film gets right, and I didn't think the pacing was right in this film. Perhaps it was the source material, perhaps it was the director's choice. Either way, I found the film to drag in more just just a few spots, and some of the wonderment of the locales left me restless after a while.
Don't get me wrong, I think set design, and the landscape of the journey that we are shown was very well done, there was some really imaginative CGI work on full display on the screen.
I had some problems with the lack of tension and urgency in the film. It was languid when it might have been better if it were a little more manic.
Another thing that bothered me, probably more than someone who's read the books, was the character development. The main problem is having 9 characters in the FOTR, it's a difficult job to imbue life into all of them, while also pushing the story along. Such is the limitation of cinema versus a book. And you add in all the characters that they meet along the way, and it gets pretty confusing to know who's on Frodo's side, and who's got another agenda.
Also, there just too many male characters crying in this film! I found myself not really connecting with any of the characters in this film. I felt like a cousin twice removed from the interactions between the characters.
While the achievement in cinema is something that'll set the standard for fantasy films, I will be one of the lone dissenters and give this film a lowly 3.5 stars, or a grade of B+.

 

[Chuck C]

I share the same sentiments as you, Patrick...
Also, I didn't think the musical score was engaging, and the comic relief was almost no where to be found. I loved the cast, esp. Agent Smith, Magneto, and Rudy . Legolas, Aragorn, the dwarf, and Boromir were sweet too. For a guy who isn't a huge fan of medieval wizardry and gobbins, LOTR was fun at best.

 

[James_Kiang]

Went to see it with my brother, my best friend, my nephew, and two of his buddies. 4 of us really liked it, 1 thought it was good, and my nephew did not care for it much at all. FYI, I have not read the books while my nephew has most recently; my brother and friend have as well, though some time ago.
I was hoping to be immersed in this world and love the film, but I only came out of it liking it a great deal. Something was missing. Many of my companions mentioned the length. Personally, while it did have some slow moments, I had no problem with that. I felt the time was used to define the characters. I would have to say that repeating the Sauron sequence as they did felt a bit awkward to me.
The special effects were for the most part excellent. There were times the height effect was very obvious, though nowhere near as bad as in Willow. Some of the Ring effects seemed out-of-place as well. Other than those, I can't think of anything I'd complain about. Strangely, my nephew thought the orcs looked terrible while I found them to be some of the best creations I've seen on film of that type.
The action sequences were very exciting and entertaining but I did feel they were a bit chaotic and tight. In other words, it was a little hard to follow everything that was happening which diminished the danger in those scenes for me.
This is not a complaint as much as it is an observation. I seem to recall people disliking the sweeping cgi shots of different locales in movies like Mortal Kombat or Dungeons & Dragons but Jackson did make use of similar shots in this film. Again, not a complaint - I thought they looked good.
So, overall I would have to rate this movie a solid 8, possibly a 9; maybe when I see it a 2nd time it'll be more clear. Acting was well-done throughout and the action was entertaining. Some will have problems with the length and pacing.
One last thought (and again, keep in mind that I have not read the books): If the next 2 movies are also 3 hours long, that means either there is a lot more to the story than I have figured out (a good thing) or it really slows down (maybe not a good thing). 364 (or so) days to find out...
EDIT: I wanted to mention the score. I have been listening to it pretty much non-stop while in my car for the last couple of weeks. Knowing what scenes go with which pieces of the soundtrack will help me appreciate them more. Still, I feel the score in many parts could have been emphasized much more to have a bigger impact.

 

[nolesrule]

I went to see the movie with my wife, my cousin, a friend and his girlfriend. Only my friend's girlfriend hasn't read the books.

I thought the film was a magnificent adaptation of the first part of the Lord of the Rings. The whole film carried the essence of Tolkien's work. Fellowship of the Ring is merely the set-up. Character development does not really take place in the FOTR book, and is not in the film. I expect we'll see it in the next too movies. Same can be said for the sense of urgency (or lack thereof throughout most of the film).

The use of Pippin (and to a lesser extent Merry) as comic relief was great. I'm not ure where one of the other reviewers got the idea that there was no conic relief.

The Saruman changes and Arwen additions create a greater sense of purpose than in the book regarding those characters. I had absolutely no problem with them.

Casting was spot-on. I kept looking for Ian McKellan underneath the hat and beard, but all I could find was Gandalf. His final scene in Moria nearly got me choked up. Sean Astin as Sam was superb. His scene near the end, trying to swim after Frodo is what got my wife breaking down in tears. You really got a sense of his loyalty, and not wanting to break the promise he made to Gandalf.

The cinematography style is not usually my cup of tea, but as I got used to it, I started liking it.

I'd have to give it 4.7 out of 5. I plan on seeing it again this weekend, probably again in January and then once more when they tack on the Two Towers teaser, whenever that happens.

EDIT: Forgot to mention...I really liked how the chapter titles were incorporated into the dialogue throughout the film.

 

[Joe Wong]

WOW!!

4 out of 4

Starring: Elijah Wood, Ian McKellen, Viggo Mortensen, Cate Blanchett, Liv Tyler, Sean Astin, Billy Boyd, Dominic Monaghan, John Rhys-Davies, Orlando Bloom, Sean Bean, Ian Holm, Christopher Lee

Director: Peter Jackson

Time: 178 mins

Brilliant. Peter Jackson has done what no one thought was possible. He has taken one of the biggest-selling books of all time and created a movie version that's worthy of all the hype and expectation. The Lord Of The Rings is not just the granddaddy of all fantasy epics, it is a cult sensation that has sold some hundred million copies worldwide since its publication in the 1950s. The book is so huge the movie has been split into three instalments, to be released one year at a time. And at a reported budget of some $300m for all three chapters, it's one of the biggest gambles of all time as well. But it is worth every cent, as the first film, The Fellowship Of The Ring, is one of the best, if not the best, of the year.

Fantasy movies have rarely been critical or box office successes, unlike science fiction, its close relative in the genre of imaginative storytelling. I'm not talking about mythical tales like Jason And The Argonauts, or even fantasies masquerading as sci-fi, such as the Star Wars universe. I'm referring to those stories with a mediaeval theme, filled with knights and warriors, lovely damsels, wizards, magic, and horrific creatures. The closest Hollywood has come to a full-fledged fantasy movie of this ilk was (1996's weaker Dragonheart notwithstanding) George Lucas' Willow, way back in 1988. Even then, a slow first half and muddled narrative drowned its prospects and probably set the genre back some ten years. So it was a bit of a welcome surprise when two of this year's most anticipated films would be the movie adaptations of literary juggernaut Harry Potter And The Sorcerer's Stone and, of course, The Fellowship Of The Ring.

We all know how well Harry has done since its release a few weeks ago. While generally considered a very faithful adaptation of the book, it was thought to be sterile and lacking a bit of heart and soul. This has been reflected in its rapidly declining box office after a mammoth $90m opening weekend. At one point it looked like it could have topped $450m in North America, but now it looks like it might just reach only $300m. With The Fellowship Of The Ring, its longer length and more adult tone may have hindered its box office take in the long run. But judging by the interest, the media coverage, the advertising tie-ins, and the long lines at the cinema today (pretty much all the shows at the multiplex were sold out), it wouldn't surprise me if it did similar business to Harry, if not more.

I read The Lord Of The Rings back in 1985, straight after its precursor, The Hobbit. I loved The Hobbit, but thought The Lord Of The Rings had, if it could be possible, too much description. Heresy it might be to say this, but it seemed like every time we came to a new place or location in the book, Tolkien would unleash two or three long pages of description. I'm all for vivid scenes and amazing landscapes, but those long paragraphs wore me down after a while and slowed the narrative on more than one occasion. It is a very imaginative and self-contained work, definitely, with all those different races and languages, the history, and even the hobbit family trees. But those lengthy descriptions! Suffice it to say I liked The Lord Of The Rings, but I wouldn't be what you call a huge fan.

This first film instalment of the novel, however, has emphasised the best parts of the book and removed some of the extraneous chapters, like the Tom Bombadil encounter (which, as far as I remember, didn't have much bearing on the main quest anyway). Director Jackson hasn't reined himself in like Christopher Columbus did for Harry Potter, and made some minor changes to the narrative that works well for the screen. Some, like the expanded role for Arwen, the female elf, may have been done to increase the potential female viewership, but it doesn't hurt the movie in any way (Arwen has been heavily promoted on TV ads, but she still only has about fifteen minutes of screen time, in total). The Fellowship Of The Ring is not a perfect adaptation, but it comes very close. In my mind, only three movies have equalled or bettered the book on which it's based - The Silence Of The Lambs, The Exorcist, and The Godfather - and The Fellowship Of The Rings deserves to be in this elite class.

The story in The Lord Of The Rings is epic but fairly linear. There is a quest where the heroes must journey from from A to B, and numerous nefarious creatures are out to stop them. I believe in the years after it was published, there have been better and more entertaining fantasy novels (The Belgariad, The Riftwar Saga, and Memory, Sorrow And Thorn are three that come to mind), but Tolkien's masterwork was the one that started and inspired them all. Set on the imaginary continent of Middle Earth, the opening narration tells of an evil ring forged by the Dark Lord, Sauron, who desires to use its power to rule the whole world. After Sauron is defeated in battle, the ring is lost, found, and passed to Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood), a hobbit, one of a number of different human-like races on Middle Earth. The ring is no ordinary ring - it can make the wearer invisible, and can seduce anyone into wanting to own it and wield its power. When the great wizard Gandalf the Grey (Ian Mckellen) discovers the true nature of the ring, he leads Frodo on a journey to the east, into the heart of Sauron's land, Mordor, to destroy the ring in the volcanic fires of Mount Doom. Together with fellow hobbits Sam Gamgee (Sean Astin), Pippin Took (Billy Boyd) and Merry Brandybuck (Dominic Monaghan), the mysterious human ranger Strider (Viggo Mortensen), the proud human warrior Boromir (Sean Bean), the lithe elf Legolas (Orlando Bloom), and the feisty dwarf Gimli (John Rhys-Davies), this Fellowship of the Ring holds the fate of Middle Earth in their hands. The minions of Sauron, however, including hooded wraiths on horseback and huge armies of goblin-like orcs, are in hot pursuit.

Jackson, a New Zealander who is better known for his low-budget gore-fests like Bad Taste and Meet The Feebles, has done a magnificent job in translating Tolkien's vision to the screen. Using his scenic homeland as the backdrop for many of the locations, plus a mixture of innovative sets and computer-generated images, he has brought places like Hobbiton, Rivendell, and Isengard brilliantly to life. Snowy mountains, foreboding mines, enchanting forests, and long, winding rivers are a feast for the eyes, making The Fellowship Of The Ring even more of a visual wonder than Harry Potter's many eyecatching delights.

Jackson has kept most of the book's important moments in the movie, including the Flight to the Ford, the Council of Elrond, Lothlorien, and the Bridge of Khazad Dum. To those who haven't read the book, some of these scenes may seem a bit episodic and even confusing, especially the part featuring the Mirror of Galadriel, but I feel Jackson has chosen the right balance between action and exposition. There has to be enough story and "slower" moments to flesh out the rich histories of the lands, the people, and the characters, in order to add more resonance and relevance to the many action scenes. This is one reason why I'm happy the movie is almost three hours long - anything shorter and Jackson would have had to excise or gloss over more scenes. I would also have felt cheated, like in the recent TV mini-series adaptation of The Mists Of Avalon, a novel that is as long as The Lord Of The Rings but was condensed to only four hours. Obviously, Jackson couldn't add too much more, or else the pace would have slowed and the film would have ballooned to a lot more than three hours.

Speaking of action, The Fellowship Of The Rings has plenty. While the early part features numerous exhilarating moments with knives and swords and chases on horseback, it is the later adventures featuring the full fellowship that are even more exciting and awe-inspiring. The companions encounter avalanches, attacks by armies of orcs, and even a giant cave troll. My favourite sequence in the entire book is the lengthy journey in the Mines Of Moria, and the way Jackson has envisioned the setting and the non-stop action blew me away. And my favourite chapter, The Bridge Of Khazad Dum, is just the way I imagined it. Though I remember the events in the chapter fondly, seeing everything actually on screen had my heart pounding. This scene is absolutely sensational and worth the price of admission by itself.

Given The Fellowship Of The Rings is the first of a three-part novel, the finish of the movie is necessarily cliffhanging in nature, similar to the non-conclusive endings of The Empire Strikes Back and Back To The Future 2. Jackson excels in conveying the poignancy of the many momentous decisions made in these final few moments, something I don't remember feeling from reading the book. I must extend many kudos to Jackson and fellow co-writers Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens. About two hours into the film, I was happy to give the film 3.5/4 - the movie was very good up to that point but just lacked some emotion. The final hour, however, throws so much at you that you feel exhausted at the end. The pain of loss, the fear of failure, and the desire for power are all featured prominently in the climactic twenty minutes of the film. The cliffhanging finish could have been awkward, but it is turned into a triumph. It leaves us satisfied, yet wanting more.

With nine Fellowship members and many others, The Fellowship Of The Ring could almost be forgiven for having a bunch of paper-thin characters we don't really care about. The truth is, while lesser characters like Arwen, Galadriel, Elrond, and even Legolas and Gimli, are not developed as much, others like Boromir and Strider are impressively fleshed out. Of course, the hero, Frodo, is noble and courageous, yet very frightened about what is happening and what he must do. Talented young actor Elijah Wood does a good job as Frodo, relaying the despair, the fear, and the desire to do what's right for the Fellowship. The other hobbits, played by Sean Astin and relative newcomers Billy Boyd and Dominic Monaghan, are by turns comical, clumsy, lovable, and loyal. Ian McKellen as Gandalf is what I expected the wizard to be: old and frail in appearance, but a very powerful companion to have. McKellen's measured, stage-trained voice is perfect for the part. The other major participant in the story is Strider, played by Viggo Mortensen. He is also what I imagined the character to be: mysterious and brooding, yet ready to defend you with his sword at all times. Mortensen, who I'm not usually a fan of, brings the right amount of gravity to this difficult role.

Sean Bean, who has been memorable as villains in Patriot Games and Goldeneye, is also very good as the proud yet tormented Boromir. The character plays a pivotal role in the film's finale, and Bean conveys his many mental and physical struggles perfectly. Topping off a brilliant cast are the elven-featured Orlando Bloom as Legolas, the stocky John Rhys-Davis (Sallah in Raiders Of The Lost Ark, but almost unrecognoisable here) as Gimli, Hugo Weaving (The Matrix) as the wise Elrond, Ian Holm (The Fifth Element) as the bumbling Bilbo Baggins, Christopher Lee as Saruman the White, and the two female characters: Liv Tyler, beautiful and beguiling as Arwen; and Cate Blanchett, majestic as Galadriel.

It has been a long gestation period, but the wait has been worth it. The Fellowship Of The Ring is an amazing experience, filled with humour, nobility, heartbreak and heartpounding terror. Guided by a director at the top of his form, most fans should be very pleased with the vision on screen. Initiates into the world of Middle Earth may miss some of the nuances, but there is enough passion and spectacular sights in this three hour extravaganza to please. I can't wait for the second instalment, The Two Towers, to arrive in cinemas next year. May the days till then pass quickly.

Joe

 

[Dean DeMass]

Saw it last night and I was really hyped for this film. Does it live up too all the hype? Damn right it did! Everything about the film was incredible. Gandalf was my absolute favorite and Legolas was my wife's favorite. She just loved all of the Elves. See Sam swim after Frodo at the end was a great scene and seeing Strider being called a King was also very emotional. But the scene that made the most impact to me was the look in Gandalf's eyes right before he falls in the mine...... tremendous. I also agree with the poster above who mention Frodo's line at the end of the council meeting. "I just don't know the way." Wonderfully done. Fellowship is my favorite film of the year. Oh, and the Orcs were fantastic looking.
I give this film :star: :star: :star: :star: :star: out of 5.
Can't wait to see it again.
BTW, was anyone else waiting for Elrond to say..... Mr. Baggins.
-Dean-

 

[Lou Sytsma]

Well I have been to Middle Earth and back! For that Peter Jackson I thank you.

I'm still trying to sort out my feelings about this and if push came to shove I would rank it a 4 out of 5. It's a very good movie but doesn't quite reach the level of greatness.

The changes to the story were fine. I had no problems with the SFX. All in all, the look of the film was tremendous. The opening battle was awesome!

There are 2 areas of the film that did bother me though. As others have mentioned - the time scale was totally off. Segments that tooks months seem to be happening in days or hours. This probably attributes to the pacing problems others have mentioned.

The second and more bothersome to me was the edit style used in some of the battle sequences. Most notably the cave troll sequence. Way too close in and tight. I couldn't tell what was happening. Pull back a little please! This was repeated throughout many of the battle sequences and diminished the impact IMHO.

These 2 things pull it down, from the 5's or 10's others are giving it, it for me.

Even though most people probably know that this is the first part of a trilogy most people in the theatre reacted negatively to the ending. A Part 1 or a To Be Continued somewhere in the title and ending sequence may have alleviated some of this reaction.

Still PJ has done a truly amazing job at creating Middle Earth.

The movie requires more than one viewing. The first time you are so busy reconciling differences internally that your focus is lost. I plan to see this several times more. That is not something that could be said about Harry Potter.

 

[Jeff Ashforth]

I cannot think of enough superlatives to describe this film. It is quite simply one of the most breathtaking experiences I've ever had in a theater.
Not since The Empire Strikes Back have I felt such awe. Congratulations to Peter Jackson for creating a world so genuine and beautiful that I still can't get some of the images out of my head. Absolutely stunning.
I think the power of the ring was very effectively conveyed. It was great to see how it's power corrupts all.
Of all the actors in this film, I was most impressed with Elijah Wood's performance as Frodo. You could see the torture in his eyes and almost feel the heaviness of his heart. He did a fantastic job being the emotional center of the story. When he is happy, you are happy. When he is scared, you are scared. I definitely felt his emotions during the entire film in a way that did not feel like manipulation (Spielberg anyone??). Very well done.
The effects work was interesting. While not always photo-realistic, it gave me the sense that I was looking at a beautiful painting come to life. It fit the subject matter perfectly. Some of the shots left me in awe, mouth agape. My personal favorite was the effect when Frodo is wearing the ring, very powerful.
Finally, the music was moving and I thought very appropriate. The sound effects were earth shattering, I'm sure there are going to be some angry neighbors and blown out subwoofers when this gets released on DVD!! The bass was so powerful at times I felt my clothes vibrating!!!
I give The Fellowship of the Ring :star: :star: :star: :star: :star: out of :star: :star: :star: :star: :star: !! It exceeded all my expectations and I could not have enjoyed it more.
Cheers.

 

[Kenneth]

I got to see it last night, finally. I would give it a 9/10. The only thing that prevents me from giving it a perfect score is it felt too compressed. Since Gone with the Wind clocked in at close to 4 hours, I would have loved to see Fellowship of the Ring follow suit. With a little less compression I think that FotR would be a perfect movie. Hopefully we will see extended cut's after the trilogy is completed.

Kenneth

 

[Brad_W]

I miss this movie. I can't wait until we're together again.
:star: :star: :star: :star: :star: /:star: :star: :star: :star: :star:

 

[Paul Jenkins]

I give the film a solid B+ rating. Not great, but good entertainment for the $. The film wasn't the magical piece of cinema I was expecting.

It felt like 3 hours to me, and that is not a compliment. The pacing just didn't seem right, slightly off. I haven't read the books for many years, so I wasn't influenced much by them regarding the story, I took it as it came from Jackson without comparing it to the book. Still, there were too many lingering scenes, too many repeat shots, and inconsistent pacing. Character development was shallow at best, I would have enjoyed it more had they stuck to less scenes and more fully developed the characters we do meet. The end of the film also was slow, the end battle not really a battle at all but a skirmish. I could have sworn they had thousands of orcs ready to go, it looked more like a hundred or less. Not what I expected coming out of Samuran's labs...

The visuals were well done, but nothing earth shattering, and the CGI was not as great as people had made it out to be, IMHO. The initial battle was well done, but was short and lacking because it occured as part of a narration and there was no involvement. The battle scene(s) in Braveheart, for example, were much better.

On the good side, I thought Gandalf and Saruman were great in their roles, McDermand and Lee were perfectly cast. Elijah Wood was very good as Frodo and just seemed like a hobbit should seem. I also thought John Rhys-Davies as Gimli, Viggo Mortensen as Aragon, and Orlando Bloom as Legolas were very good. Those characters really seem to BE their characters. The others were either good, marginal or less than stellar (I put Liv Tyler and Cate Blanchett in that less than stellar category.)

The story is one you want to follow and continue with, and the ending sets up the second story well, but left a lot of the audience flat, especially after the long running time. The overall mood in the theater I was at seemed to be what most have reported, som people really liking it, some not liking it much, but the majority thinking it was a bit long, but a good movie that people should see for themselves...

 

[Gruson]

I saw it last night.

I have never read the books and I thought the movie was AWESOME! I plan on reading the rest of the books now because I cannot wait to see what happens!

It was just one exciting thing after another. I was really into all of the characters, especially Legolas and Strider.

I did not want the movie to end!

My only complaint was with the score (soundtrack). There was no real theme to the movie. Don't get me wrong, I loved the movie but I wish there was more of a theme, one you could hum when leaving the theater.

Anyway, I would give it 5 our of 5 stars.

I cannot wait to watch this on my home system!!!

BTW, I saw Harry Potter and HATED it. This is MUCH better than Potter!

 

[Joel Mack]

I give the film a solid B+ rating. Not great, but good entertainment for the $. The film wasn't the magical piece of cinema I was expecting.

Thanks, Paul. I was feeling very alone in holding that opinion, myself.
I think I let my expectations run away with me...

 

[Jerry Gracia]

Great film.
:star: :star: :star: :star: (4/4)
My only gripe was with the filming format used...SUPER 35 for this sweeping epic tale??!!
Talk about grain...this film would have looked soo much better if it was shot in the anamorphic format.

 

[Dave Smith]

Let me say up front that I loved the movie, for all it's faults (which are legion). I'd give it a 9/10. But I'm going to spend most of this talking about the stuff which I didn't like.
The Bad
The worst thing in the entire movie: Bilbo's "ring monster" morph as he grabs for the ring in Rivendell. What, the hell, was that. Just awful. Almost ruins the entirety of his character for me. The only thing needed here was Ian Holm, adding Gollum eyes and teeth is just...
I was really unhappy with the way Merry and Pippin were introduced to the journey to Bree/Rivendell. In the book, there's the conspiracy between themselves and Sam, and they leave with Frodo out of friendship. Here it's just to get away from a bloody farmer. You don't even get the feeling they know Frodo in any sense other than as acquaintances. Having said that, I did like their status as comic relief, they were always described as "pranksters" in the book and I thought it worked pretty well overall.
Not entirely sure that the Ringwraiths were scary enough. Having the hobbits just run around them to the ferry felt wrong. They should have been paralysed with dread.
Why was Gimli talking up Moria before they got there? Contact was lost with Moria years before, and they all should have known SOMETHING bad had gone down there. That's why they were arguing about whether to go there or not. If they thought Moria was OK, what was the argument for not going? The dwarves smell bad?
The duel of the wizards... bit lacking in subtlety wasn't it? Two of the most powerful beings in Middle Earth and they slam each other into walls. And what was up with the plastic rotating Gandalf? That had to be one of the worst effects in the movie, which brings us to...
Bad CGI. Legolas jumping onto the cave troll. The long shots of the fellowship running through the hall at Moria, and then out of Moria after the Balrog. Bilbo's Kodak moment mentioned above. They all looked awful. Plus some of the medium hobbit shots were obviously using midgets or kids, and the proportions were all wrong.
Galadriel's "All shall love me and despair" moment... much the same as Bilbo's transformation. Overwrought and overdone. The voice especially was badly thought out, I could barely understand her and I knew the script
The truncation of Lothlorien in general. This was the way to soften Gimli a bit, when he comes to see the elves for the sorrowful and magical beings they are instead of a bunch of annoying tall guys in tights. Wasn't even touched on.
The Good
OK, that's it for the bad stuff. The rest (about 90% of the movie, hence the 9/10 mark was AWESOME.
Acting was perfect throughout, for every character, even the bit parts (Barliman, Isildur, hell, even Arwen was OK). Loved the stairway scene in Moria (except maybe for the dodgy CGI at the "lean forward" bit). Aragorn and Legolas were especially amazing.
My favourite scene in the movie was immediately after Gandalf falls. The rest of the fellowship run, and Aragorn is left stunned, wanting to do something, with orcs sniping at him with arrows from the other side of the chasm. Eventually he turns and runs up the stairs in John Woo overcranked slowmo. And it was cool
The last 20 minutes, from the Argonath (amazing) to the end credits was just perfect. Boromir was great. And the Aragorn-Lurtz duel got a great reaction I'm glad they didn't name Lurtz in the movie too, makes him just a bad ass orc instead of a "character".
Hopefully the next couple of movies will have less stuff cut out. In terms of the number of events, I think the most stuff actually happens in Fellowship. For the other parts you can tell the story in broader strokes and it should work fine.
For all its faults, this WAS The Lord of the Rings. And I have to love it just for that.

 

[David Oliver]

I also would give it a solid B+, it might make my top ten depending on what else I get around to seeing before the year is over. My complaints...

- It truly plodded along at points, it made me feel like a six-year old squirming in my seat.

- Is there some sort of cosimc connection between Orcs and Imperial Stormtroopers? I mean the Fellowhip basically took on a few hundred Orcs and mostly suffered nary a scratch. Meanwhile dead Orcs everywhere.

- The CGI in parts was distracting, including the CGI used to make the Hobbits small.

- The sweeping panoramic shots were overdone.

But what I did like was the sheer scope and achievenment of the movie overall, the characters and the story were compelling. Excellent performances all around. This movie certainly set high goals for itself and I think it mostly succeeded.

 

[Chad R]

I guess I'll be in the minority on this one, but I wasn't too impressed.
My single greatest problem with this movie were the action scenes. They were poorly choreographed with no sense of geography or beginning middle and end.
For instance, the horse chase between Arwen and the ring wraiths. In one shot the wraith has his hand inches from Frodo, the next shot she was ten feet away. There was not follow through to it.
The fights with the orcs in the mines were random shots of sword swinging. A good action sequence has a beginning (which these did) a middle where you can follow your characters around and know precisely where they are and what they are doing (geography which this lacked) and then a discernable end where we can see how it's going to end, not a troll dying because he was beat up enough.
It seemed that there was only long shots (the fellowship running through the mines) or tight shots, hardly a medium shot.
The rest of the story took ages to tell and very little actually happened plot wise. Most of the characters were underdeveloped and gave little cause to care about their fates. Sean Bean's character had little build up for his 'heroics' at the end. He was basically a two note character, bad or good, no real motivation for either and no grey in between.
For all the glory over the visual effects, very little is done with them. With enough time and money effects can look good, the deciding factor is the creativity with which you use them that sets you apart. The fight with the balrag was uninspired and over before you could blink. It looked cool, but it didn't DO anything cool.
It'll be very hard for me to drag myself to see the next film where I hope most of the meat to the story occurs.
:star: :star: out of :star: :star: :star: :star: :star:

 

[Fred McHugh]

I've read the books, while not a tolkin expert, I love the book. I love this movie, as a casual fan it was perfect. I don't care about differences, if you were not upset after leaving moria than like the grinch your heart is 2 sizes too small. My wife and I loved it. Easily the best film we've seen this year. I can't wait for an extended cut dvd release! I was breathless the whole time, and I know the story. Acting A+ visuals A+ changes to original text A-.

 

[Michael Napier]

I just got back from an afternoon showing. I have to say, this was one of the most incredible movie experiences of my life. I don't remember ever leaving the theater feeling this way before. I have not yet read the books. I did read The Hobbit recently just to kind of get "into" the world a bit.

I felt that every character was suberbly acted and the casting was fantastic. I truly cared about every character.

I can't wait to go see it again.

I hope they do something very special with the DVD release.

-Mike