Review: Return of the King

Average:

Your Views: Responses

Paul Morris on January 7th, 2004
Brilliant! Powerful performances from all the main actors, stunning backdrops and awesome special effects combine to make this film the best of the trilogy. If they ignore it at the Oscars this time round there's no justice. Can't wait for the extended version next Autumn to complete my collection

Keith in Bristol on January 6th, 2004
I have to confess I haven't seen the film yet, but despite having lost count of the number of times I have read the book, I am not discouraged by the tirade posted by "Disgusted" above. So, the film does not faithfully follow the text. That's to be expected. Not even the Radio 4 play stuck faithfully to the book. Certain sacrifices had to be made in order to get it to work on film and appeal to those who were new to the story as well as the "cult". I am, therefore, looking forward to seeing it. Peter Jackson did a fine job with the Fellowship (I did not miss Tom Bombadil; I thought he was a waste of space, and happily skipped those chapters half the times I reread the book) and the Two Towers (okay, he took some artistic licence, but we all wanted to see more of Faramir and the Elves, right?), and I expect more of the same with ROTK.

Dickie on January 6th, 2004
RE: Barry Norman critic. I went to see ROTK last night and nobody in the audience that I spoke to wanted it to end. It was gripping all the way through and I was sort of dissapointed when it finally ended, not because it wasn't a good ending but because it is the last LOTR film. It couldn't have been cut down to 1 1/2 hours as without the scenes in between the fighting scenes, the film woudn't make sense! Peter Jackson has really done the book justice with these films!

The Essex Goddess on January 6th, 2004
Well, maybe they have changed the whole script/story, but is it entertaining? I thought that all 3 films were great, my dad thought all 3 were great and so did my mum. We've all read the books. Get a life and take them what they're meant for. ENTERTAINMENT!

ROBERT on January 6th, 2004
I have not read the books of LOTR...But have enjoyed the three films so much as to say....The BAR of film making has now been raised to a new high of entertainment....of which others will find hard to equal. I salute all concerned in the making of these 3 movies...the battle scenes just blew me away . The quality of film making has now moved onto a new level!

Lost in Pride on January 5th, 2004
Before i went into the cinema to watch FOTR, i knew nothing about the LOTR world. I hated reading books, always felt like homework. I went to watch FOTR with my friends, and within 2 mins i was sucked into this new world. Never before has a film hit me so hard. As soon as i came outa the cinema all i kept shouting at my friends was "holy crap, thats the best film ever!" I went in with no expectation just thinking its some 3 hour fantasy film, but my god it was one hell of a rollercoaster ride. ROTK was just magical, my heart was pounding throughout the film, so times many i had to hold back the tears. Some people have said the ending was too long, well i think it was perfect, i wanted to know everything that happens to the characters. I felt so sad after the film knowing the story ends here. Bring on the ROTK extended edition DVD!

Barry Norman on January 4th, 2004
This film is ok. I wouldn't say it's excellent because it's not. Fantasy lovers, LOTR fans, you will like or love this, but the rest of us out here, it may not be our cup of tea. (although undoubtably some will like it). The battle scenes are excellent and without a doubt the best part of the film, but it's the inbetween bits that seem to drag somewhat. This is especially so when you come to the end of the movie and find yourself praying for the next screenshot to be the credits. The cinema I was in had an echo of sighs each time a new scene started when the film had ended, almost as if the director had been trying to squeeze every last drop of this film out of the book. To sumerise this, I would say that this film tells a 1 1/2 hour story in just short of 3 hours. This is not to say it's crap, it isn't, but there are many scenes dragged out way too long. Maybe if they stuck to the battles and told the story in an adequate time instead of the length they do it in it would be an excellent film.

Jess Pow on December 30th, 2003
Absolutely Brilliant. Peter Jackson really did this film justice. the special effects were superb, the scenery in the more mellow parts of middle earth (e.g: not mordor) were breathtaking and elijah wood really gave it his all in the 3rd installment. andy serkis who played gollum really stole the show and the fighting scenes were great. okay, so the film went on a bit, but it led up to all the media hype displayed before. if this film doesnt win an oscar, i consider the world mad. brilliant. although i have read the books, it doesnt matter whether the film leaves out important stuff, would you want to sit and watch the whole book being played out? no, so just leave it as it is. as in the words of david brent, this is an excellent film, FACT!

Vicky on December 30th, 2003
Great,magnificent, stupendous film - as were the first two. To Jim Butcher - having read the book many times, all the characters are as I imagined them, and MORTENSEN IS ARAGORN - I doubt any other actor would have done the part more justice.

Kean McAllister on December 27th, 2003
The Fellowship Of The Ring was brilliant, The Two Towers was inspiring and The Return Of The King is the breathtaking conclusion to the best fantasy book series ever created.

Neil Clowrey on December 24th, 2003
The first time I saw the Lord of the Rings film was in fact the second instalment in the cinema. My mate said I would love it and after about half an hour of feeling like a fish out of water, I was engrossed. I immediately sought out the DVD of the first and watched that, then rewatched the second at the cinema and waited with impatience for a year for the final instalment. I was extremely impressed with the final film and loved every minute. I loved the imagination of the story/setting and the talent of the actors. The sheer size and scope of the battle scenes were truly astonishing and I was left flabbergasted on several occasions due to the sheer power of the scenes being presented to me. I too feel the ending was somewhat longwinded but then, putting it into context, after watching 9 hours worth of film you don't particularly want an instant ending! Overall I'd rate it 9.5 out of 10.

Joe on December 23rd, 2003
Amazing!!! As with many of you, i have been a fan for years, and i'm so impressed with the way Peter Jackson has tackled the story. Return of the King is just amazing, and as for the bits missing, my favorite scene in the whole story was missing from the two towers (when gandalf stands before isengard and annonuces he is Gandalf the white........), instead this is done via King Theoden. however, this really didn't effect the films for me, as so many of my childhood visions have been realised. All i can say about Peter Jackson is; lets hope new line and the other film company get the rights thing sorted sooner rather than later, cause i need to see the hobbit!!!! and i'm not sure i can go a crimbo without some tolkien anymore! merry christmas all ps. will anyone else join me in saying how glad they are that Tom Bombadil was dropped! pointless character, and a single blotch one of the best books ever written!

Jim Butcher on December 22nd, 2003
Must admit I've still to see it, but just know I'll love it and rediscover my love of the cinema blockbuster after the disappointment that was the Matrix Revolutions. The funniest thing is the latest round of reviews from some of the broadsheet press (eg. The Independent) who feel they simply MUST criticise the film in the wake of an unprecedented shower of glorious write-ups. One bloke even tried to label Jackson "insensitive" for the film's portrayal of the "men of the west", who Aragorn addresses in his rousing pre-battle speech, saying it draws uncomfortable parallels with the west's attack on Iraq!! Trying to label the film as racist - some writers really need to lighten up. Pure criticism for the sake of it - see it, love it. My one thought - would Daniel Day-Lewis, originally in the frame for Aragorn, have been better? Not that Mortensen wasn't great, just that Lewis is the Daddy, especially after his Bill the Butcher performance.

Alaglindeiel on December 22nd, 2003
Having been a fan of the books for numerous years, I was looking forward to each of the films in turn - and astounded I was with the making of them - superb pieces of work, simply mind-blowing. A loving fan has a lot of fear when a great book becomes a movie, simply becuase the slightest thing could ruin them - however Peter Jackson and Co. Did a brilliant job with the movies. Yes many scenes were left out, but you have to remember that not everyone has had the pleasure of reading the books - and so things had to be changed (although some may seem unnecessary), PJ had to make the film viewable to people who were NOT previously fans of the books. Not forgetting he has made the extended versions for our benefit where alot more scenes were added, and indeed are much more like the books. The films were based on the books. They could have cut alot more scenes that would seem pointless to people, but they were left in! Tom BOmbadil, was a scary creature and I for one prefer he was left out of the films, he was unnecessary to advance the films and Id prefer to leave him up to my imagination! Not everyone can be happy though - but im proud that I have experianced the making of this amazing books, into astounding films, im very much pleased I witnessed the films as they were first realeased, and go down in history. I would say to you Disgusted, like another person has said (sorry I forget your name), to give them a second chance, and try the extended versions which are more fan based - and if you then do not like them - then fine. Remember PJ and Co have made there version of how they have seen the books - it wont suit everybody. But anyway the film overall - 9/10!

Hamar on December 21st, 2003
I first read the book during the early '70's, and have re-read it many times since. Peter Jackson deserves great praise for bringing his interpretation of the book to the big screen in three magnificent episodes. The first two films were excellent, the final film is an unsurpassable epic. If it doesn't sweep the boards at the Oscars I would have to conclude the awards panel is made up of Orcs & Trolls.

Lee Holden on December 21st, 2003
After seeing the Return of the king last night. All I can say is this is the best one! Its a lot darker than you are expecting. Some of the book is missing however the extended DVD version will cover this for 98% of fans. The best bit with this film is the telling of gollum story which looked like it was going to be missed with the first 2 films. This film is more like the Followship of the Ring than than the Two Towers and shows it in the depth of emotions. And it may also give you nightmares. Peter Jackson even brings more music into this film which was the only thing that Ralph Bakshi unfinshed version did better.

meg on December 21st, 2003
not impressed. Have read books over and ove since the first time when I was 16, and have awesome respect for THE STORY...am not a purist. I was okay with the changes in Fellowship and the two towers, but P.J. goes to far in this one. Frodo and Sam's relationship shuld not have been tampered with, the Men of Gondor had very very few horses and the most upseting bit was that bit about Gandalf and pippin talking aout what happens when you die. Where did that come from? How could you leave out Faramir nursing Eowyn back to health and put that death talk in? A big disappointment. I will not see it again. He got two things EXACTLY right, though... Minus Tirith and everything the riders of Rohan did....

Roebuck on December 20th, 2003
In response to "Disgusted Lord of the Rings Fan", I have never yet seen a movie that mirrors the original book/novel to which it was based, and that include many of "Shakespeare's" works. Personally I feel that Peter Jackson has made an excellent portrayal of LOTR with minimal detraction from the original JR Tolkien works, which may not have transfered to the screen with the excellence expected from the written word. I have read LOTR many years ago, and was struck by the slight differences from my imagination of some of the characters to those portrayed in the movie's, although Peter Jackson portrayal of the characters were well within the spirit of the novel, and in some cases, provided more depth to indvidual characters. I await the Extended DVD and possibly a cinematic adaptation of the "The Hobbit"? Who knows, we can hope

Martin Anderson on December 19th, 2003
I am speechless. On 3 occasions I cried. I feel sad that I shall have to wait till November for an extended DVD release. I am in awe of Peter Jackson. I avoided reading the books because I found them too heavy going, but as a lifelong Legend of Zelda fan, the films have drawn me into this world...

andrew (clever 14 year old) on December 19th, 2003
probably the most epic film i have ever seen, however the corn fest at the end was far too long, but i do think that the films were probably allowed one of these due to the length of the three films and also the lack of proper objective endings in the first two films. Noone has any right to say that these films dont deserve oscars and i think that they are tremendous filmmaking achievements, so i challenge any moviegoers to say a deserved bad thing about these films.

Karl on December 19th, 2003
Disgusted Lord of the Rings Fan, whats your problem. I've been a huge fan for years, and a film maker. There is no way this could be any better. Think so - get ou t there and do it yourself. Peter Jackson will go down in history as making the greatest film adaptation of the greatest trilogy ever.

Peter White on December 19th, 2003
Well just got back from seeing it and all I have to say is....BRILLIANT! The Return Of the King is a piece of cinema magic and history, once of the best films I have ever seen. The first hour or so is a little slow but that is needed to fill in some of the gaps and move the story on from the Two Towers, the middle is just pure adrenaline with some of the best battle scenes ever put on film (not to mention the scary Shelob!) and the ending is pure gut renching emotion. Peter Jackson has done the story proud and done the impossible, completed a trilogy that every other film maker said could not be done. Return Of The King is a geat way to wrap up the films and in my view is on of the best films ever produced. Bring on the Hobbit!

Stuart Britton on December 18th, 2003
I came to this film not having read the book but having seen the previous two films on the day of their respective releases and being the owner of extended versions of each of the first two films. As a piece of cinema, it is absolutely brilliant. The audience in the cinema where I saw it was engaged and held in rapt attention from start to finish. The auditorium even had reasonably young children (with their statutory adult for this 12A) and they were quiet from beginning to end, and they weren't sleeping. It was a rollocking good tale told in a rollocking good way within the confines of its medium. As a piece of cinema, it was great. I have yet to read criticisms of the BBC's radio adaptation (which Jackson claimed he listened to when making the film) but even there the story is slightly abridged. I think 'Disgusted' will have to accept that when a book - any book - is adapted for the screen (big or small) the tale changes to fit the medium from its purist form. The Lord of the Rings is not beyond being changed, though. The book was the subject of some revision from its first publication by the author himself, having been in receipt of missives from readers. And in view of the fact that the tale bears some resemblence to an Icelandic saga or some other legend of old, it rather suits its genesis to have it jazzed up a bit from time to time. Good stories never stay exactly the same, they evolve. As has this

ben on December 18th, 2003
perfect, did the book justice and was not drawn out at all

Jake in Idaho on December 18th, 2003
I just saw it last night, and as far as I am concerned, Hollywood can stop making films, because I don't think I will EVER be this excited to see a film again. I have read the books about 40 times, and the changes made in the cinematic tellings are necessary. Pacing is the key to film making and it is done brilliantly in all 3. I have read countless reviews where overly nerdy fans are griping about the parlay at Isengard being cut.... Boo hoo! In response I have to quote anothwer reviewer: You have just been given the biggest feast you ever going to get out of a film and you're bitching about the crumbs that fell on the floor. Buy the DVD. Your crumbs have been gift wrapped for you.

Lisa on December 18th, 2003
Saw it last night and thought it was magnificent. The beginning of the film dragged a little. And the ending was quite drawn out. But they had to stay relatively true to the book and not give it a happy for everyone perfect ending. The fight scenes were fantastic, it was shot so well. My only complaint would be that we saw less of the characters such as Gimli and Legolas, although the jokes the 2 of them have (throughout the whole 3 films in fact) made the whole cinema crack up laughing!!

Andy T Twig on December 18th, 2003
RE: Disgusted Lord of the Rings Fan I admire you for standing up to an unstoppable tide of praise, your quest for literary perfection matches The Fellowship's fool's hope. Unfortunately, unlike Frodo, you are alone. If you took any time to look into the craft of this film, and the love that Jackson, his writers, cast and crew, have for Tolkein, then you'd discover that the rich tapestry of Middle Earth is indeed present in all three pictures. Your accusations of commercialism whiff of ignorance and spite. Your Gollum-like preciousness over Tolkien's story is clouding your judgement. Please go and see it, for your own sake.

Rachel, London on December 18th, 2003
I think Jackson has done incredibly well. The three films have been a joy. Some scences were breath-taking. At the end of the performance last night, the audience clapped. Enough said.

Avid Fan on December 18th, 2003
Absolutely Brilliant. The best one yet.! Peter Jackson has really done the books justice with this one. Tokiens visions have been wonderfully interpreted and are portrayed brilliantly on screen. The battle at Minis Tirith was beutifully directed, and with the wonderful CGI effects it has become one of the best battles ever to be seen on the big screen. The attention to detail is wonderful, with the designers not even missing the slightest little thing to help make the wonderful set designs all the more realistic. The actors have once again performed brilliantly, with Elijah Wood and Sean Austin portraying the two friends battling it out to save Middle Earth from the Evil Lord Sauron. The troubling times that these two fiends endure together even brought a tear to my eye. A wonderful story - Lord of The Rings: Return of the King is the one to watch!

Mitch on December 18th, 2003
I have just seen the new Lord Of The Rings film and all i can see is it was great. The ending was quite good but i thought it was dragged out a bit. Compared to the others it was amazing. This is the MUST SEE FILM THIS YEAR!!!

Em on December 18th, 2003
I have just got back from watching it and all I can say is WOW!! I too am a huge fan of the books having read them dozens of times, and yes, bits have changed - but i think this is necessary to put it on the big screen. One is still left with the essence of the books, and I plan to see them over and over again!! FANTASTIC is my review!

Chris in Idaho on December 17th, 2003
Saw the film last night after the extended versions of the first two. Excellent, better than the theatrical versions of the first two, which I enjoyed very much. All the battle scenes were excellent, and the story of Frodo and Sam was very well done. Real Oscar material there. Some parts of the book were skipped or compressed, hopefully the extended version will set that right, a few small changes as well, but overall very true to the text and the spirit of the books. Go see it.

james ( cinema worker) on December 17th, 2003
saw it 2 days ago and thort it was a quality film, dont know how they passed it as a 12a though! all i can say is the end was quite lovey dovey and did go on abit, although i havent read the book so dont know if its like that in it either. its a definate must, beta than the last 2!

Murray-Mint on December 17th, 2003
Disgusted Lord of the Rings Fan, you need to relax a bit. Yes, they have removed the Saruman scenes, but the film seems well paced in the theatrical release. If you feel that passionately about Saruman's scenes being cut out, wait for the extended version. As for Tom Bombadil being missed out, he doesn't really have that much of an impact upon the rest of the book after his final appearance, except maybe for a one-line mention in Rivendell. It was always going to be hard for Peter Jackson to turn this epic novel into a film, and IMHO, he did excellently. The screenplay is good, well paced and tells what is needed. The special effects, although noticable add to the film and don't detract from it. Characters are well developed and expanded upon. In summary, the best film in the trilogy and easily the best film all year.

Joe Stillman on December 17th, 2003
In response to Disgusted Rings Fan, there are few biggers fans of Tolkien than me. The essential truths in LOTR have resonated so strongly for me that I have read the trilogy at least a dozen times over the years, and have read it aloud to my children. I share your reverence for Tolkien's Magnum Opus. But I don't share your view of the films. Having been disgusted by the Bakshi animated debacle (released without even finishing it!), I approached the Peter Jackson version with skepticism. What I found was that Jackson shares our love of Middle Earth, and has gone to titanic lengths to make it real. Would you have preferred to see six disjointed movies instead of three? The filmmakers knew they had to trim the legend in order to tell the tale. But they've left the rich tapestry of background that is such a compelling part of Tolkiens narrative: glimpses of a broader world just outside the frame. Watch the films carefully and you'll see that Jackson and company acknowledge that they've left out whole chapters. For example, in the first film, one hobbit exclaims "A short cut to what?" just as another yells "Mushrooms!" "A Shortcut to Mushrooms" is the name Tolkien gave to a chapter entirely left out of the movie. When Frodo and Sam encounter the Ringwrraith at Osgiliath in the second film, Sam points out that "we're not even supposed to be here!" Of course not Sam, but Jackson had to build the character of Faramir for viewers who hadn't read the book. So he keeps the hobbits with him for longer, without diverting the story line. One of the appeals of Great Art is how the artist makes his point within the confines of is medium. Consider how one of Shakespear's sonnets has all the right number of syllables and lines, and no superfluous words for a cheap rhyme. Unpack some good haiku or listen to a sonata by Mozart. All are great works of art partly because they are created within a rigid pre-defined stucture. And so are Jackson's films. I, for one, will not be joining your boycott. The loss is all yours.

Disgusted Lord of the Rings Fan on December 17th, 2003
I won't be going to see it as they have ruined the story by removing the all important scene in which the main bad guy gets his comeuppance. I have read all the books and have been a fan of them for years, in Fellowship, there was no Tom Bambodil and that was pushing it, but this is too much. It is not Lord of the Rings, this is an abridged version for the kids. It should not have been called Lord of the Rings, these films do not deserve to bear that name. I hope people join me in not going to see this debacle, they have ruined the Lord of the Rings legacy forever. Peter Jackson should never make a film ever again, his upcoming film King Kong probably won't even have King Kong in it, he ruins good stories and turns them into laughable money-spinners. Yours sincerely, Disgusted Lord of the Rings Fan