nofreelist.com
keyword
 
reviews (a to z)# a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z

home :: latest reviews :: reviewer profiles :: statistics :: diary :: links

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)

  Directed by: Peter Jackson
Written by: Phillipa Boyens, J.R.R. Tolkien
Starring: Sean Astin, Orlando Bloom, Billy Boyd, Bernard Hill, Ian McKellen, Dominic Monaghan, Viggo Mortensen, John Noble, Miranda Otto, John Rhys-Davies, Andy Serkis, David Wenham, Elijah Wood
Links: The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King on the IMDb, Official site, Buy the Book, Buy the Soundtrack, Buy Posters
Genre: Drama

This movie gets: 8.83 (6 ratings)
nofreelist.com Ranking: Ranked 27th of 187 movies (2 ratings minimum; see full chart)

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003) is also mentioned in pearly's review of 50 First Dates (2004), pearly's review of Hidalgo (2004), mino's review of Love Actually (2003), pearly's review of The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002), pearly's review of The Old Man Who Read Love Stories (2001) and pearly's review of Three Dollars (2005).

"Dammit, why couldn't I have hated it?" - a review by em_fiction

At last, I did it. I finally did it. It only took me three whole months, but I did it. Sure, I had to have three mates drag me, but I still did it. And, um... there might've been the odd kick and scream in there as well, but nevermind that, I still managed to survive. That's right, I finally saw The Return of the King. Yeah, I know, it's about friggin' time, but before you do give me any crap about that, keep in mind that 27 year-old mino saw The Shawshank Redemption (1994) only a little less than a decade after it was released, so it's only fair that you give him shit about that as well.

I'll just start straight off by announcing my verdict: no, I didn't hate it. As a matter of fact, it wasn't that bad. To an extent, maybe even good. I know what you Ring lovers are thinking. You're thinking "why does this tasteless, narrow-minded, try-hard reviewer reckon he is so superior that he feels that he must announce his opinion as if it was some sort of long-awaited apocalyptic countdown?". I'll tell you why: it's because you're wrong. There are several genres that will create an obvious polarity in the audience, and fantasy is probably the main one. And I think, since I didn't give them all superly dooperly high marks, that sticks me over on the other side of the fence. Thus, for positive feedback to come from a lad who isn't big on make-believe stuff, I say that I've well earnt the right to word my verdict as something unexpected, even though it may sound snobby.

Not that I've reviewed the first two Lord of the Rings instalments, but if you were attentive on the pages you would've noticed that I gave them each 7 out of 10. A 7 is generally accepted as a good rating, but for some reason people always come up to me and say "You gave Lord of the Rings a seven? Only?? Why did you hate it so much? You must hate everything then, clearly since you only gave it a seven!" etc. Bloody hell, that is so frickin' annoying. A 7 out of 10 is a good rating. That means I liked it. Yes, it's hard to believe, but it's the truth.

Since I can't be bothered punching up reviews for the other instalments, and since I'm already doing this now, I might just sort of compact my justification for all three into this review (if i could, I'd get mino or pearly to stick a "see review of Return of the King" right next to "em_fiction" under "ratings without reviews" on the The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001) and The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002) pages, but I seriously doubt they will). First Fellowship: I haven't read the books, so as much as I want to believe that my repulsion from these films is merely because I don't like fantasy, everyone disagrees, unanimously saying that it's because I haven't read the books. Despite that, I still won't bother with the books, because I know for a fact that I simply cannot get into any sort of fantasy, at all.

Anyway, my lack of background knowledge, on top of my lack of interest, made Fellowship a rather difficult narrative to follow, especially with such alike characters and names (you might not think so, but believe me I got confused). I wasn't completely lost, I did have a general idea of what was happening, but in all honesty I didn't actually care what was going to happen next. I didn't like Two Towers for basically the same reasons, except with more characters, and also a vastly overrated battle scene.

Generally speaking, I just wasn't interested in the story, the characters and all the other make-believe fantasy stuff, so I found it utterly difficult to stay focused. This is why way too many parts in Fellowship and Towers dragged on and on for me, so yeah, you could say I was bored almost to death. So why did I give them such 'good' ratings? Because the filmmaking was absolutely brilliant. The sets, the effects, the scenery, the costumes, etc. were all done to stunning perfection, so in terms of visuals, I was heavily satisfied. So I guess, even though I was bored, the visuals still kept the film rolling.

For me, ROTK was definitely the best one. I think that the first two films, along with a lot of helpful narrative dissection from mates and also the neverending articles, discussions and relentlessly high ratings on IMDb have somewhat helped prepare me for this instalment. For once, I actually knew the characters beforehand, and I knew what was going on, so that made everything a hell of a lot easier to follow. The battle at that Gondor castle thingy place (with the catapults) was absolutely awesome and completely shreds the Helm's Deep battle from Towers into a thousand bits. I also found that the suspense and emotion in this one tended to be conveyed a lot more accessibly than it was in the others, but maybe that was just because I was better prepared for this one. Either way, I liked ROTK a lot more.

The cast do a great job, I think there's been enough said about them in the other reviews. It was pretty cool seeing our Aussie locals like Miranda Otto and David Wenham playing these mystical characters. Both Viggo Mortensen and Elijah Wood play great lead protagonists. And only now do I understand why Sean Astin received the most votes for Best Supporting Actor on IMDb's Best of 2003 Poll (although still, in my opinion, Tim Robbins was still slightly better in Mystic River (2003)). Also, it's great to see Orlando Bloom get little screen time, because I'm sick of him.

Before I call it a break, I might just mention the 11 Academy Awards. As much as I wanted Lost in Translation (2003) to win Picture, Sofia Coppola to win Director, and Bill Murray to win Actor (which is a completely different story) I knew that if the Lord of the Rings trilogy didn't win at least once, heads would roll.

I'm actually pretty pissed off with myself. I'm supposed to be, as I have been labelled, a Ring hater. Shame on me. Well, it was far from the best film of 2003, but at least I enjoyed it. I was originally thinking about giving this a 7 and dropping the other two to 6, but I thought that might've been a little harsh. It was a good film, far better than the other two, and although it will never ever reach a 9, let alone 10, it just scrapes, by the skin of its teeth, an 8.

em_fiction gives this movie 8 out of 10.
Review created on Sat 6 Mar 2004

"Bladder-busting excitement." - a review by freddy

You've heard everything about ‘LOTR’. You've seen the first two. You've probably got at least one of them on DVD for Christmas. Now all you really want to hear from me is: how good is The Return of the King? Well, if these assumptions are true, chances are that you've already seen the third instalment of the series, possibly twice.

If you haven't: well, frankly, it doesn't hold too many surprises. Frodo makes lots of pained facial expressions and overcomes many obstacles to get to Mount Doom. Gollum/Sméagol turns out do be 100 percent evil and talks to himself. Aragorn becomes king and woos the ladies. Legolas flings off more arrows than could possibly fit in his quiver and hitches a ride on an elephant. The dwarf with the beard whose name escapes me is the subject of numerous jokes.

I'm not saying this isn't a good movie. I'm just saying, yeah yeah, just finish up and lose the ring before I go to sleep! You see, this puppy goes for 200 minutes. Whoa mama. You really need to plan your fluid intake for 24 hours before seeing it. And hope that you don't get someone who kicks the chair behind you. Over three hours of that could turn anyone homicidal.

But back to the film itself. Look, it's good and everything. New Zealand as Middle Earth looks great, the battle scenes are enormous in every sense, Gollum looks scarily real. Sound familiar? That's because that's what you could say about the previous two films. So basically, this one doesn't offer much more than those, except that it ends the whole caper. Thankfully.

The ending, however, is probably the worst part of the film. Without giving anything away about the plot, it drags and drags and drags some more. And from what I hear, it's not too faithful to Tolkien's book either, which always takes away some of the credibility.

Anyway, go see it if you have to, just don't have a coffee beforehand.

freddy gives this movie 7 out of 10.
Review created on Mon 19 Jan 2004

"The war rages in New York" - a review by citizenjoe

The last installment of The Lord of the Rings completely enthralls you in every way. I have just seen The Return of the King in New York.

As I write this review, an army of Orcs is flowing down Third Ave. I can see them outside my window.

In the sky above, fearful dragons swoop low and devour innocent bystanders.

At the intersection of Broadway and Fifth, beneath the shadow of the Flatiron building, a fierce battle rages between the armies of Mordor and the horsemen of Rohan.

The great open spaces of Central Park have been taken over by encampments where battalions from both sides ready themselves for war.

While this occurs all around me, two small hobbits and a third (identity undisclosed), have been reported missing. The papers, news bulletins and talk amongst the city's dwellers centres on one question: "Can the fate of Men be entrusted to one so small, so frail?"

I know their location.

The Journey has been a long one. One reporter in the English "Financial Times" described LOTR as the greatest Trilogy of all time. This is understatement of the highest degree. There is no other "great" trilogy. Star Wars (1977), which is the only real contender, is no longer a trilogy.

Peter Jackson has said he always wanted to LOTR because of the climax in the third story.

He does the story justice in every sense. The themes of war, struggle and friendship are beautifully interwoven.

For all its spectacular special effects, amazingly choreographed battles, exquisite visuals, it is essentially a human story about the true meaning of friendship. It's a about a struggle to reach a goal that only succeeds because of it.

I just recommend you see it in a good Cinema with a big screen. Don't wait for the DVD. The effect it leaves is indescribable.

I will now have to leave and face the hordes outside. Someone has opened the door and the stench of rotting flesh has filled my nostrils. Will it ever leave?

Without drawing attention to myself, I make sure the ring around my neck is hidden and then quietly head for the door.

citizenjoe gives this movie 9 out of 10.
Review created on Sun 28 Dec 2003

"Epic" - a review by andy-j

Seriously... after the magnificent first two chapters of the Lord of the Rings movies, was there ANY doubting that The Return of the King would deliver? The final much-anticipated film in the trilogy has arrived, and it somehow manages to eclipse its predecessors in every way. Thanks to Nicole and Paul's generosity, I was invited along to an early screening of The Return of the King, and witnessed the film with an audience of many other loving and devoted LOTR fans.

The Return of the King doesn't bother trying to fill us on what happened in the first two movies - it (quite rightly) assumes that we're up to speed with it. It opens with an excellent piece that provides the background on Gollum - a fantastic way to start the film which allows the audience to further identify with him. From here, the story picks up from where it left off at the end of The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002). Sam and Frodo, accompanied by Gollum, continue their journey to Mount Doom in the heart of Sauron's stronghold in an effort to destroy the ring. Meanwhile, Gandalf and Pippin rush to defend the city of Minas Tirith while Aragorn, Legolas, Gimli amass an army to aid their fellow country. I will not talk much about what else actually happens storywise - suffice to say that it is easily one of the best aspects of the film and that I was absolutely captivated throughout its entire 200 minutes. Not having read The Return of the King, I really don't know how closely this follows the book, so I cannot make any comment. I can say though that it is obvious that Peter Jackson, Fran Walsh and Phillipa Boyens have polished the script until it shone, pouring a huge amount of love into it while respecting J.R.R. Tolkien's timeless work.

One vast improvement I noticed over The Two Towers is that The Return of the King doesn't try to push things forward on us at a million miles an hour (which was really much more of a problem with the theatrical cut - not the extended edition). Instead, it allows for things to take their time, giving overall better pacing, more emotional impact and giving characters a chance to develop. The film benefits incredibly. Nonetheless, there were some rather unnatural leaps - Aragorn's journey into Ered Nimras springs to mind. I've no doubt that this will be fixed in the extended cut.

The storyline involving Sam and Frodo really ramps right up from The Two Towers and becomes terribly exciting. At one point I looked down at my chair and noticed that I had unconsciously started to grip my seat. The relationship between the two is pushed even further into the forefront and provides for some truly memorable and emotional moments. Both Elijah Wood and Sean Astin are stronger than ever before here. They really went the extra mile to deliver some truly intense moments.

If, like me, you thought the battle scenes in The Two Towers were the Best Thing Ever, you'll be absolutely blown away by the enormous battles that take place in The Return of the King. This time around the film gives the audience reason to feel a heavy emotional tie to the fighting, achieved through the incredible pacing and absolutely inspiring pre-battle speeches that not only inspire those fighting, but also the audience. The crowd at the cinema cheered and clapped and yelled, something I had never witnessed before. The battles are improved in every possible way over The Two Towers. For a start, they take place during the day, there are a bigger variety of creatures involved, there is more at stake, and the cinematography is even more overwhelming. In fact, there were parts where there was just so much happening on screen that you couldn't possibly see everything that was going on. Instead, I just sat back and enjoyed the feeling of being utterly overwhelmed. It adds incredibly to the enormity and impact of what you're witnessing.

The rest of the special effects are, as usual, top notch. Shelob is absolutely amazing, Aragorn's army is a breathtaking sight, the Oliphaunts, wargs and Nazgûl are faultless, and once again, Gollum is a triumph. There are some minor quibbles but I won't even mention them because I got over them in a second. Combined with the excellent make-up, costumes, props and sets, it draws you into the world of Middle Earth, never once giving you reason to question what you're witnessing.

There is a deep vein of emotion running all the way through this film and it adds massively to the audience's involvement in the storyline and the way they relate to the characters. It is what sets this film apart from its predecessors. A simple look exchanged between Sam and Frodo brings tears to your eyes as you feel a part of the incredible burden that they shoulder and the bond that they share. Éowyn's incredible bravery, Denethor's truly horrible misery, Gandalf's touching belief in the hobbits - all of these provide some tearjerking moments.

I briefly mentioned the acting of Elijah Wood and Sean Astin, yet I haven't even mentioned the stellar job that the rest of the cast do. Viggo Mortensen is as solid as ever, as are Orlando Bloom and John Rhys-Davies. John Noble as Denethor is absolutely wonderful, Ian McKellen is once again totally brilliant as Gandalf, and Miranda Otto comes into her own. The two remaining hobbits, Pippin (Billy Boyd) and Merry (Dominic Monaghan) are even more charming than ever. Yet another faultless aspect of this amazing film.

I could keep going on and on, but I think you get the idea.

The Tolkien family voiced strong objections to having The Lord of the Rings brought to the screen, claiming that a film would never do the book justice and would soil its name. How would they know for sure? Likewise, there are plenty of fans out there who are such sticklers that they complain non-stop about the liberties that Peter Jackson took with the storyline. I'm glad that not everyone in this world is so cynical and stuffy. Every single person who was involved in The Return of the King has done the world a huge favour by bringing us this movie. To them I say thank you for making the best movie I've ever seen.

andy-j gives this movie 10 out of 10.
Review created on Fri 19 Dec 2003

"Oh. My. God. Yes." - a review by mino

OK, I'm going to try and avoid spoilers here, but it's going to be kind of difficult to eliminate them completely. If you haven't seen Return of The King yet, but intend to, you may or may not want to stop reading, depending on how fussy you are. I'm not going to mention anything that you won't know from the books — you have read the books, right? — but don't say I didn't warn you.

Now, not having been to film reviewers' school, I'm not a big one for ‘masterful editing’ this and ‘mise-en-scene’ that and ‘atmosphere’ the other. My idea of a movie review is more like saying, oh, I don't know, ‘Return of The King is a fucking fantastic movie’.

Because, you know, it is. Fucking fantastic with bells on.

Look: I gave The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001) a 10. I gave The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002) a 10. Well, I think when it comes to rating this sucker, I might have to go all This is Spinal Tap (1984), and crank the nofreelist rating system up to an 11. In many aspects, Return of The King makes the first two movies look like Peter Jackson was just practising for what was to come.

The word ‘epic’ is thrown around a lot these days: in the case of the Lord of the Rings saga, it's truly deserved. Sticking somewhat more faithfully to the original books than he did in the first two — though the plot thread with Liv Tyler's Arwen grows even further out of proportion — Jackson has created something that really warrants any epithet you can throw at it.

Not only is it grand in scale — and the main battle scenes make the Helm's Deep battle from Two Towers look like two guys in bathrobes hitting each other with broom handles in a park — it's also very intense. Some of the scenes are (quite literally) breathtaking for their epic scale (the unleashing of the siege engines on Minas Tirith, for example, and the incredible sight of the ranks of Rohirrim charging the Orc lines), but some are equally awe-inspiring just for the way they tell a story (the scene of Sméagol and Déagol that opens the movie, for example). It's not just a massive undertaking, it's a great piece of storytelling.

A few of the annoyances that have grated a little about the previous movies are still there, sure — Orlando Bloom's Legolas executes a stunt nearly as painful as his ‘shield-surfing’ from Fellowship, and some of the characters are made to look a little less noble or heroic in some ways than they come across in the books (Sam and Pippin spring to mind), which will no doubt rankle fans of those characters.

That said, some of the most well-loved scenes in the book, scenes which I think a lot of fans were worried about having screwed up, are handled perfectly: notably the appearance of Shelob, and Éowyn's ‘big moment’, which should help calm down a few of the more rabid detractors.

A true treat in this movie, by the way, is the performance of John Noble as Denethor, a character previously only really seen in the Extended Edition of Two Towers. Noble gives Denethor the perfect mix of arrogance and insanity, and he's certainly the most impressive ‘latecomer’ to the series. The other real standout is Andy Serkis, whose performance as Gollum truly comes into its own as one of the most impressive, computer-assisted or otherwise, I've seen in a long time.

ROTK is longer than the previous episodes, coming in somewhere around the three-and-a-half hour mark, but in all honesty (and maybe this is my inner fanboy coming out), you really don't notice it. There's very little wasted screentime: the much-talked-about ending is handled rather oddly, and drags a little, but apart from that, there's plenty packed in to the time — and plenty of room for more when the Extended Edition comes out (much like the previous EEs expanded on the elf-vs.-dwarf divide a little, I think ROTK could benefit from some expansion on the animosity between the various sections of Sauron's army, for instance). I also hope to see Bruce Spence's turn as the Mouth of Sauron being retrieved from the cutting-room floor: I was kind of looking forward to that!

Bring on The Hobbit, I say. Hell, bring on The Silmarillion, a set of short films based on Unfinished Tales, Farmer Giles Of Ham, and Letters from Father Christmas as far as I'm concerned. And sign Peter Jackson up now. Oh, and give him a knighthood, or a barony. Or something. Whatever will keep him happy and pumping out films.

mino gives this movie 10 out of 10.
Review created on Fri 19 Dec 2003

"I still want more..." - a review by pearly

With a great stroke of luck (and just a little bit of ingenuity), I scored myself some freebies to an advance screening of The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, so I got to see it before its Australian release date of Boxing Day. And so I sat, in the scorching December heat as though I was sitting on the edge of the ledge above the fires of Mount Doom - and there was no way I was moving to get myself a cool beverage.

Aside from the DVD extended version (about which I will post an update to my review when the times comes), my Lord of the Rings journey is now over. And what a journey: I laughed, I cried, I sat on the edge of my seat for most of yesterday counting down the hours until I was in that cinema.

Unlike The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002), Return of the King does not begin with a recap of the last moments of the tale so far. It's straight into the film, and into an unlikely, but welcome situation with a little bit of back story. This was unexpected, but a refreshing way to get back into the tale.

Return of the King is certainly as good, if not better, than the first two films in the trilogy. With the theatrical release being about as long as the extended versions of the others, director Peter Jackson seems to have decided to keep in some of the breathing room that was not present in the others. The film certainly does not suffer for this decision. There is time to laugh along with all the serious moments, something that I felt was a little lacking in the theatrical release of The Two Towers.

The acting is once again top-notch, with John Noble as Denethor (Boromir and Faramir's dad) being the most notable addition in a major role. The comic duos in the film provided some of the best ear-to-ear grins once again, breaking up the tension from all the battling. First, you have Merry (Dominic Monaghan) and Pippin (Billy Boyd) smoking the pipe-weed they've found in the storerooms at Isengard, and then there's the delightfully funny pair of Legolas (Orlando Bloom, who really is quite gorgeous) and Gimli (John Rhys-Davies), who continue their counting game during the battles.

The other notable pair is, of course, Frodo (Elijah Wood) and Samwise (Sean Astin) - the pair of straight guys. In my opinion, Samwise kicked Frodo's butt with his awesomeness, but I probably just think that because I was a huge Samwise fan whilst reading the books.

And then, there's the rest. Andy Serkis, Viggo Mortensen and Ian McKellen are stunningly good as Gollum/Sméagol, Aragorn/Strider and Gandalf/Mithrandil respectively. But kicking it old-school for the girls was Éowyn (Miranda Otto), who is overall far better than Arwen (Liv Tyler) or even Galadriel (Cate Blanchett) any day. She's pretty good with a sword too.

Probably the most groan-worthy scene of the whole film was the repeat of the shield-surfing bit from The Two Towers. This time, there was no shield, but Legolas still managed to surf his way down something. Honestly, it ruined a perfectly good scene involving Legolas doing some fancy elvish footwork.

This was more than made up for, though, by any number of other sections of the film which literally had the audience applauding wildly. I won't mention what they were here, because they mostly count as spoilers, but suffice to say that there are certainly some pay-offs for all this hard work that the delightful fellowship have been putting themselves through.

My biggest criticism of the film would have to be the ending - not because of its content; that was fine; but more because of the way it was edited. In tying up the ends for all of the characters, there are a series of fades to white or black, during which you are inclined to think that the film has ended. Another scene then fades back in, and after the third or fourth time this happened, it started to annoy me, mainly because this conclusion is meant to be what I've been waiting for, the ending which tells us exactly what happens to the ring, and to its bearer and helpers. Instead of cohesively finishing the story, though, it's a series of stop and starts, which, to my mind, doesn't work. It makes the ending, which should be the most fulfilling part of all three films, drag.

Other than that, though, what a film! Even watching this as a standalone without seeing the first two, you could get the biggest understanding of the complexity and messages of courage, loyalty and triumph over adversity that was conveyed by J.R.R. Tolkien in the original books. It's this amazing story, in whatever form it takes, that people have taken a shine to, and loved well beyond the years after it was written. Seeing this amazingly huge story put into motion is an overwhelming thing; it boggles my mind that a bunch of people can put something like this together.

Now that I've seen Return of the King, I wish that the trilogy was actually a quadrilogy, so that I could look forward to seeing another one next Christmas. Ahh well, hopefully Mr Jackson will sign on to make the film version of The Hobbit, and I'm happy to settle for that.

pearly gives this movie 9 out of 10.
Review created on Fri 19 Dec 2003

Movie review statistics

Number of reviews: 6
Average rating: 8.83
Lowest rating: 7 (by freddy)
Highest rating: 10 (by andy-j, mino)
 
Rating Percentage
1 
 0%
2 
 0%
3 
 0%
4 
 0%
5 
 0%
6 
 0%
7 
 17%
8 
 17%
9 
 33%
10 
 33%

Reader comments

  1. i said about the australian story, that the book is alwas better than the movie, but there may be one exeption to that, the LOTR trilogy. I read the books, and even though i thought they were excellent, you can't really beat the movies of thease. peter jackson went all out on this one, and i praise him for it. if only he could do the Hobbit, i would be so thankful, especially if he used the same people, such as Sir Ian McKellen for Gandalf, and Ian Holm for Bilbo, but i think i am just wishful thinking here.

    Rating given: 10

    A comment from erin on Thu 01 Apr 2004 11:20 #

  2. Rating given: 6

    A comment from jim on Wed 01 Sep 2004 21:41 #

  3. The lord of the rings is one of my best movies i have seen.Some bits are scary but they are only people congratulations the people who made the movies!!!!!!!!

    Rating given: 10

    A comment from Chelsi Adie on Tue 21 Sep 2004 22:20 #

  4. Fantastic film! Possibly the best feast for your eyes and ears ever!

    At least till the EE comes out!

    Rating given: 10

    A comment from Jo on Sat 02 Oct 2004 19:56 #

  5. I love this movie!!!

    Rating given: 10

    A comment from Adri on Sat 02 Oct 2004 20:43 #

  6. crap. i hate crap

    Rating given: 1

    A comment from crap hater on Sun 07 Nov 2004 22:51 #

  7. fuck

    Rating given: 10

    A comment from fuck on Sun 07 Nov 2004 22:51 #

  8. A good joiner for the Fellowship of the ring and the Return of the King. Explains the story and more depth and demonstrates the urgency of the ringbearer (Frodo's) quest more

    Rating given: 10

    A comment from Lisa on Fri 07 Jan 2005 11:56 #

  9. Sorry, above comment was for Two Towers

    Rating given: 10

    A comment from Lisa on Fri 07 Jan 2005 11:57 #

  10. Fantastic! Even if the special effects are seen as outdated in the future the excellent acting and poetic storytelling and messages given will last forever

    Rating given: 10

    A comment from Sumbody on Fri 07 Jan 2005 12:04 #

  11. I love LOTR, all of the movies. They're GREAT!!

    Rating given: 10

    A comment from LOTR luvr on Fri 07 Jan 2005 12:05 #

  12. This one was FANTASTIC

    Rating given: 10

    A comment from A person who knows a good movie on Fri 07 Jan 2005 12:07 #

  13. I wish this wasn't the last! It's too good!

    Rating given: 10

    A comment from Jane on Fri 07 Jan 2005 12:08 #

  14. Pretty damn good!

    Rating given: 10

    A comment from Alex on Fri 07 Jan 2005 12:08 #

  15. I love the Return of the King, Elijahs performance especially. It pulled at strings that have never been touched by film before

    Rating given: 10

    A comment from Hannah on Fri 07 Jan 2005 12:11 #

Those who have commented give this movie: 9.13 (15 ratings)

Add a comment

Your name:
URL:
Email address:
Make public?
Anti-Spam question:To prove you're not a horrible spam-leaving robot, please answer the following question (use numbers):
If I have 11 Best Adapted Screenplay Oscars and win 6 more Best Adapted Screenplay Oscars, how many Best Adapted Screenplay Oscars do I have?
Comment:
Rate this movie:

You may use the <em>emphasis</em> and <strong>strong emphasis</strong> HTML tags. URLs beginning with ‘http://’ will be turned into links. Line breaks will display as entered.