Customer Reviews

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King [VHS]

5 star:		(870)
4 star:		(97)
3 star:		(62)
2 star:		(23)
1 star:		(46)

 

 

...wow. That's all I can really say for this film. It was inspirational, beautiful, heartrenching, and captivating, making this film amazing. Jackson truly outdid himself for Return of the King. The hopelessness and pain Sam and Frodo are experiencing as they struggle to destroy the Ring is so wonderfully done that you truly feel as if you are with Sam and Frodo as they struggle to climb up the mountain. The love and friendship between the two is so moving that it seriously brought tears to my eyes, and I *rarely* cry.

The acting was simply superb in this film, especially Sean Astin (Sam) and Viggo Mortenson (Aragorn). As always, Miranda Otto was wonderful as Eowyn, as were Billy Boyd and Dominic Monaghan as Pippin and Merry. The movie flowed exceptionally, and despite its lengthy time, there was not a moment that I wasn't captivated by Tolkien's vision of Middle-earth. One of the lines that stands out the most to me is during the moment when Sam and Frodo believe they are going to die while Mt. Doom is erupting is, "I'm glad to be with you, Sam. Here, at the end of all things." Another beautiful scene is when Aragorn, crowned as the King of Gondor, bows down to the hobbits, telling them, "You bow to no one." The heartfelt emotion expressed really does make this film the greatest of all three.

As always, the everpresent rivalry between Gimli and Legolas is there, providing comic relief. Surprisingly, Merry and Pippin do not provide any humour other than at the beginning of the film, and are a very chief point in the plot. The two are separated for the first time since the triligy began and must mature, which largely develops their character. The lovable Smeagol has now once more become the treacherous Gollum; though in the beginning Smeagol pleads against his darker side, the Ring takes control of him, adding to the list of enemies.

Fans of the book will happy to find that Shelob is in this movie; in the books it was originally in the second. Also, the Sword that was Broken is in the film as well, while in the book it is carried by Aragorn in all three. Peter Jackson also remains faithful to the warrior side of Eowyn, which is touched upon in the second film. Though the Houses of Healing were cut out, hopefully they will be in the extended DVD version of the film.

I really can't do this movie justice. It's impossible to explain how I felt both times I saw the movie as I saw the struggle of Frodo and Sam. This movie isn't just a war-movie, or a fantasy movie; it's a movie about love and trust, finding hope in a world that has none, about companionship and fighting until the very end. All three and a half hours of this film is exceptional, and will surely be a classic for years to come.

With the release of The Return of the King, the magnificient journey begun over two years ago is now over, and that is a bit sad. I never read the books by Tolkien and was not all that interested about all the hype over the release of the Fellowship of the Ring. After I saw the first movie I became hooked. The Return of the King is probably the best of the three, although I really loved the Fellowship of the Ring.

This movie refocuses on the importance of the hobbits,especially Sam and Frodo, after all it is up to them to destroy the ring thus defeating the dark lord Sauron and all his minions. By the way, Sean Astin's performance in this movie is superb. After I first saw the Fellowship of the Ring I realized why I became a sort of convert to these movies; they deal with themes that are more than relevant to the real world. Courage, sacrifice, fear, loyalty, betrayal, etc., are all part of what makes these movies so appealling. People can look at these movies and get out of it what they want or they interpret, but I can clearly see a lot of Christian symbolism in the characters and the themes I just mentioned.

The epic struggle between good and evil comes to a stunning climax in this movie with some of the greatest battle scenes ever brought to film (especially at the siege of Minis Tirith) even though so much of it is computer generated. But remarkably this movie tugs at the heart strings as well. The actors truly gave it their all with real emotional performances. Though the ending may have been predictable even if you did not read the books, it still has quite an emotional ending. I realized that the fellowship was over, the story complete, and it was quite sad. These have been some of the greatest movies ever brought to film. When it's all over you realized how much you felt for the characters and how exciting the adventure had been. A movie that can do this is a great movie.

Bottom line, it may be a while before we ever see anything like these movies again. We can thank the film's producer, a talented crew and a great cast for bringing us a great movie that has become rare in Hollywood these days. As an afterthought, I would have liked to have seen Christopher Lee's character brought to a conclusion. I've read where his scenes will probably be included in the DVD edition, but it should have been included in the theatrical release, but that's just my opinion. Any other minor complaints I may have don't really matter.

LORD OF THE RINGS: THE RETURN OF THE KING should win the Oscar for best picture, and for three reasons: first, it was easily the best big-budget film of the year. The only films that I believe rival it in quality are small budget films: LOST IN TRANSLATION and AMERICAN SPLENDOUR. Sometimes independent films can pull upsets, but I really don't expect them to this year. Second, except for the independent films, there isn't a lot of competition this year, unlike the past two years. Many of the films that were expected to vie for the Oscar have been greeted with some fairly negative reviews, like COLD MOUNTAIN, or mild indifference, like THE LAST SAMURAI. One of the better-reviewed films of the fall, MASTER AND COMMANDER, is a very good adventure film that possesses no obvious advantages over THE RETURN OF THE KING. Third, the Academy has a tendency to correct past neglects. Sometimes this can lead to tragic results, such as 1940 when Jimmy Stewart received the Oscar for Best Actor for THE PHILADELPHIA STORY, to atone for his having not received one in 1939 for MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON. The tragedy lay in the fact that Stewart's best friend Henry Fonda therefore failed to win for his near legendary performance as Tom Joad in THE GRAPES OF WRATH, one of the greatest performances in the history of American cinema. But in 2004, I expect LORD OF THE RINGS to justly win not merely for the excellence of the third installment of the saga, but for the overall greatness of the three films.

The LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy is unquestionably one of the most successful cinematic treatments of a beloved work of literature the movies have ever seen. I know there are purists who would not have been satisfied by any conceivable film version, and that there are others who are more justifiably bothered by the omission of Tom Bombadil or the schizophrenic treatment of Gollum, but I think anyone willing to cut the movie even the tiniest bit of slack should be able to grant to the great achievement that this movie turned out to be. Of course, ironically it was only the growth of CGI technology that made the filming of this fantasy of lost ancient past possible. Twenty years ago, it would have been inconceivable that Treebeard could have been so satisfyingly come to life. Or Gollum. Or seeing hobbits, humans, elves, dwarves, wizards, and orcs all onscreen at the same time. I can honestly say that there was not a moment that I was consciously looking at special effects rather than balrogs or giant flying eagles or gigantic walking trees.

But all of this could be a kind of criticism--namely, that the success of the film depends merely on technology--if it weren't for the fact that the movie succeeds on multiple levels. The art design is the most memorable I can ever remember. I'll forever think of those beautiful pins for the capes that Frodo and Samwise wear all the way from Rivendale to Mordor. The makers of the film got more things right than they needed to, perfecting more detail than anyone could possibly have noticed. Without great acting, however, all of the technology and special effects and art and set design would be a royal place setting for junk, but fortunately the film was both marvelously cast and wonderfully acted. There might have been one or two casting decisions I might have questioned, but by and large the cast was stellar, a few so magnificently that it difficult now to see anyone else in that role. When the film was first announced, much of the debate was over who would portray Gandalf, and I remember some people being upset that not only was Sean Connery (the early favorite) not cast but an openly gay actor in the role instead. But it is now almost impossible to imagine anyone but Ian McKellan in the role. So many smaller roles made the film work, like David Wenham as Faramir (seen only a couple of years ago in the role of "Audrey" in MOULIN ROUGE), or Ian Holm as Bilbo, or Sean Bean as Boromir, or Cate Blanchett as Galadriel. The only weakness in the movie is one that probably couldn't be overcome (and one that Peter Jackson has acknowledged in interviews): Sauron. What can you do with a bad guy who is merely a giant flaming eyeball? Just not much potential to do much more than what they were able to do.

Peter Jackson deserves a special academy award for serving as the creative force that turned THE LORD OF THE RINGS into one of the great experiences in the history of cinema. Most of all, he deserves enormous credit for making all the technology subservient to the story, and not the other way around. The great battle for Minas Tirith might have devolved into a mere showcase for stellar special effects, like many moments in the past two STAR WARS films have, but not once did he lose touch with the human element, not there or at any other point.

Any review of "Return of the King" has to start from first principles: First, the books are too long to make into a movie, even a trilogy. Second, not everyone has read the books, or liked what they read. Sad but true. Third, of those who have read and liked the books, only a few of us have them mostly memorized. So any successful film production must take into account that parts of the books must be dropped, that the story has to be interesting and accessible to those who haven't read the trilogy, and that the movies must still honor the trilogy for those who have read - or memorized - Tolkien's life work. Those are the realities; we must judge the movie on those realities.

You can quibble over some very minor details, but Peter Jackson's telling of Return of the King balances these principles masterfully. Compression? Yes, of course. When Aragorn and Legolas lost the horses at the entrance to the Paths of the Dead, how, I asked myself, were they going to cross the hundreds of leagues from Erech to the Anduin? Excision? Yes, of course. The confrontation of Gandalf and Saruman. The confrontation with the Mouth of Saruman. The Houses of Healing. Imrahil. But the book trilogy is just too long to fit into three manageable movies. The absolutely critical scenes are all there. The story line is not lost or compromised. I will never know if it appears choppy to those unfamiliar with the books, but for me the compressions and excisions did not seriously detract.

Jackson also had to find a way to make the movie accessible to those who have never read the books. Those challenges included finding some way of demonstrating the pure evil of the One Ring. Those who have not read or do not remember the books don't know Tolkien's extended descriptions of what Frodo was experiencing. A movie maker's tools for making that introspection into exposition are pretty limited. The opening scene between Deagol and Smeagol brilliantly reminds viewers of the absolutely corrupting influence of the one Ring. Only by watching every character be tempted by the Ring, and watching many of those tempted succumb, can strangers to the Trilogy begin to know what Frodo was experiencing. The books are full of other, equally challenging problems for a scriptwriter and a director. Jackson handles them all quite well.

But Jackson also brought his own talents and imagination to the story. Is there anyone who wasn't transfixed by Jackson's invented sequence of Faramir's doomed charge on Osgiliath while Pippin is made to sing for Denethor? It's the difference between merely filming the book and making a movie. Jackson's additions range from brilliant to interesting; none of them detract from the story.

Finally, Jackson had to preserve the attention and respect of the sizeable minority of us who cherish the books. Speaking for myself, that moment came when Jackson had Aragorn turn to the crowd after his coronation, and recite, in Elvish, the words of Elendil when he came to Middle Earth. No subtitles; no explanation. Obviously, that line was for hard core fans alone. Having Aragron chant the lines was just icing on the cake.

Brilliant special effects. Superb unity of plot, theme, and character across the three movies - compare Isildur's half smile when he declines to destroy the Ring at Elrond's urging with the look on Frodo's face at the penultimate moment. And the knife's edge balancing of these principles. This is an excellent adaptation, nearly flawless. Highly recommended.

Give this movie a chance. sit down, let yourself be immersed into the lands of middle earth, and feel for the incredible characters (especially billy body and sean astin). ignore the hollywood hype, the stupid jokes about wizards, hobbits, elves, the commercialism of this trilogy and even the eleven academy awards (which i am very very happy about, by the way). i've heard backlash from people calling it boring, long, "gay" (frodo and sam; merry and pippin), and predictable. i didnt understand and it angered me that people would be so naive and immature about it. they say, there's a billion characters, a billion places, and nothing makes any sense. it's pointless and insignificant because its about made up people in a made up land. it's not real because nothing of it exists...nobody cares. it'a about a short guy with hairy feel who tries to destroy this little ring.
if you let it, it will truly inspire you. it has the power to move and touch your heart in a way you'll never forget. watch how war, corruption, greed, and hatred destroys...and how it changes the most innocent of beings and who they become. watch true, pure, and completely unconditional love. perhaps those who didn't enjoy it doesnt know how it feels to know that you're going to lose in the end, but still finds the strength to go on. perhaps they don't know how it feels to love someone so much that you would give your life to save them. times have changed. the great legends of swords and honor and bravery have passed into the present day in which we kill for money and jealousy, in which we lie and cheat, and soldiers die far from home without a clear reason or cause. lord of the rings bring back a time when men would follow their kings into death, when friendship and brotherhood was a bond so strong and powerful, when people dont care about fame or fortune, when they lived and fought so that the peoples after them could live in peace. fairy tale, perhaps. but heartbreaking nontheless. and the story is timeless- "even darkness must pass". watch their eyes and their tears and the undying hope. THAT, my friend, is what the lord of the rings is about. you tell me nobody cares...I care.

"glad to be with you, Samwise Gamgee. Here at the end of all things" - Frodo

Even with a thousand plus word review, I can never even begin to explain the sheer power and the scope that "Return of the King" really is. The final chapter in this great and apocalyptic trilogy is by far the darkest and most riveting of the three LOTR movies and in my opinion, the pinnacle of filmmaking in just about every way you can look at it.

In this epic finale, Frodo Baggins, his companion Samwise Gamgee and their guide Gollum, also known as Sméagol continue on their quest to reach Mt. Doom and destroy the ring by tossing it back into the fiery chasm where it was made. The power of the Ring though has become so strong that it is now causing Frodo's unraveling, his friendship with Samwise is becoming strained from the stress of resisting the Rings power, and Gollum and Samwise are coming into major conflict with each other and Frodo, already carrying a huge burden, has the choice of either going with Sam's or Gollum's advice. However, Gollum secretly has devious plans of his own. Meanwhile, Sauron's massive armies now launch a swift and brutal assault against the Race of Man's remaining refuge Minas Tirith and their remaining king Denethor II, driven mad after knowing of the death of his son Boromir, shuts himself off from the outside kingdom. Sauron is gaining power by every passing minute but the ultimate fate of Middle Earth lies in the hands of one Hobbit, which is Frodo Baggins who is becoming increasingly influenced by the Ring and also is facing decisions to listen to Gollum or his longtime friend Samwise Gamgee who has been coming into fights with Gollum.

This movie is the longest of all of the three, coming in at a grand length of 3 hours and 17 minutes but even then, as the movie ended, I did not want it to end. If there is anything that occasionally pokes at my side, it's the omission of Saruman's fate. I originally have passed the news of it off as just media pap but sadly, his demise has been omitted from this movie and I was really eager to see how it happened but we may not be seeing it until the extended edition of this movie comes out. Other than this omission, "Return of the King" is just about as perfect as movies can go. This movie blows any of the Star Wars, and Harry Potter movies right out of the water and into orbit around the earth. Those are great trilogies but nothing rivals the multiple dimensions of the Lord Of The Rings novels that Tolkien created. He created entire languages, entire landscapes and different races of human beings ranging from Elves, to Dwarfs, to Orcs, and the Race of Man, along with countless others too.

All of the characters were excellent but there are two I especially want to take note of. Samwise Gamgee to me felt more like just a sidekick to Frodo Baggins but on here, even amidst the setbacks he has gone through, he comes off as being every bit a hero as much as Frodo himself. The other one is Miranda Otto as Eowyn. Eowyn, who was asked to stay behind by her uncle King Théoden, she however defies orders to stay behind, disguises herself and becomes a woman warrior like no other character in any other movie. I would go far to say that she even beats out Ellen Ripley from Aliens as the greatest woman fighter in movie history.

The late 1970s and early 1980s animated screen adaptations of the novels were awful in my opinion as the hobbits looked more like giant coconuts and Gandalf and Saruman looked more like bearded figures from bad Christmas Cartoon outtakes. Those animated versions failed so miserably at bringing the novels to life that they turned many away from the series. On the other extreme, Peter Jackson's adaptation of these three novels though, he brings the images that I had imagined from reading the books right onto the big screen. There are some occasional areas where he deviates from some of the story elements but overall, no movie series has ever been so faithful to their books the way Lord of the Rings has and "Return Of The King" does the best job at it.

I stated in one of my reviews on the last movie "The Two Towers" that that one was what had the most substance of them all but now I have to contradict that as this final epic installment in the trilogy is by far the greatest of them all and not only to best but also the most heartbreaking masterpiece that has ever been made. This whole movie trilogy will never be surpassed again in any of our lifetimes, if ever, and Peter Jackson has already sealed his status as a directing legend. I have never cried at the ending of any movie the way I did with "Return of The King". Not even "Titanic" from years back broke my heart the way ROTK did. It really brings to mind just the exact things that our world seems to be going through right now, the evil forces of terrorism are moving, corruption in corporations is rampant, and the forces of good who aim to counteract these problems seem to be scattered and in shambles but hope always remains for a better future. As the elves left Middle Earth to the race of men as the Age of Men dawned, I really cannot help but say that if the age of Man continues to this very day, according to Tolkien's timeline, I feel saddened at what man has done to the Earth since the end of the Third Age.

Anyhow, go and see this movie. You will never experience moviemaking on an epic scale like this ever again in your lifetime. You will cry, you will laugh, many emotions will come up. I guarantee it.

This isn't so much a review (I am writing one soon) as a short response to certain individuals who believe The Lord of the Rings films to be racist.

The colors of black and white have been used to symbolize many things, and yes at times they represent evil and good - "black" symbolizes darkness and the unknown while "white" represents clarity and light. In this case, skin color is a non-factor.

If anything, this film series turns the notion of white and black as good and evil on it's ear, because the villainous Sarumon was a "White" Wizard before Gandalf became so...and it's his evil army that bore the mark of the "White Hand of Sarumon" on their faces and armor!

Obviously the African American Film Critics Association didn't detect any racism when they chose Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King as the best film of the year, and neither should anyone else!

About midway through watching ROTK, I realized that I was witnessing a milestone in movie history -- a movie that like Birth of a Nation, Citizen Kane and Star Wars, will one day be looked back on as a turning point in cinema history. Even those who don't like LOTR will acknowledge that it has suddenly changed what is possible on the silver screen. For an amateur student of film such as myself, that alone made the movie worth watching.

But even ignoring the place that LOTR will have in movie history, this is a stunning film, the crowning achievement to the biggest epic in movie history. Many have asked which movie I like best. But that's a question that's impossible to answer because this is all one glorious epic. Of course, I loved ROTK best because it is the conclusion, the payoff, the finale. We finally get those moment of triumph and tragedy and catharsis that Peter Jackson has been promising us ever since Cate Blanchett's luminous voice whispered in elvish on silver screens across the world in 2001.

Adjectives fail me. This is not just a simple action movie -- although it works wondorously on that level. The Battle of the Pelennor fields is electrifying -- even for someone who's read the book a dozen times. The lighting of the Beacons of Gondor may be my favorite scene in the movie. But what makes this movie stand over the crowd is the emotional story -- the resolution of Arwen and Aragorn's tale (a scene near the very beginning might bring tears to your eyes), the incomparable bond between Sam and Frodo, the tragic heart-rending character arc of Gollum and the apocalyptic climax. If you don't at least get choked up watching this movie, run, do not walk, to the nearest psychiatrist.

The cast is, as always, superb. We expect greatness from Sir Ian McKellan, but who would have though that Elijah Wood, Sean Astin and even Liv Tyler (!!) would bring such emotional resonance to the screen? But the best performance -- one that will unfortunately never be rewarded by Hollywood -- is again Andy Serkis as Gollum. We even get to see him without WETA's digital skin and his performance is no less amazing. Peter Jackson's direction is sure -- bringing grandeour to the action scenes and intimacy to the character scenes. And mention should be made of Howard Shore's operatic score -- that can soar in some scenes and mourn in others. Amazing.

There has been some compaint about the "multiple ending" of the movie. But I liked this. I liked that the movie showed there was a price to pay for what happened, that some wounds never heal. I liked that it eased us out of the stunning climax and let us see that this was just one part of the ongoing tale.

Well, I guess I've waxed rhapsodic enough.

I was crying when the movie ended and for so many reasons. This movie is easily the greatest and most powerful of the three movies in Peter Jackson's future classic legacy "Lord Of The Rings" and will go down into the same category as "Wizard Of Oz", "The Godfather" and "Citizen Kane" as one of the greatest movies that has ever been made.

Perfectly picking up where "The Two Towers" left off, Frodo, Sam and Gollum are approaching ever closer to Mt. Doom in Mordor but Frodo is falling further and further into despair as the power of the Ring is increasing. Meanwhile, Gollum has some nefarious plans of his own that they aren't aware of yet. Meanwhile Minas Tirith, the capitol of Gondor, is under seige by massive armies loyal to Sauron and the dark powers are spreading all over Middle Earth, causing death and destruction in the process.

Time is running out, friendships are tested, powers both good and evil, start breaking down, armies start moving, and the days are growing darker as the fate of Middle Earth hangs by a thread.

This movie is extremely intense.

Arguably the darkest of the three, this brings the epic trilogy to a powerful and tearjerking end.

I cried not only because of the powerful ending but because a great era in moviemaking has come to a conclusion.

But we will someday see this again on the big screen someday and perhaps the extended editions back to back. We'll see....

Until then, go and see this movie right away. You will never experience anything like this again.

Peter Jackson has definitely achieved more than a classic or a cult for fans. This film is perhaps one of the most precious jewels in the history of cinema.

All of the performances delivered, the special effects were dazzling and used when and exactly how it was necessary for keeping the film as more than a mere visual show. A true and powerful drama and fantasy adventure.

The Battle of Pelennor Fields is something Hollywood is going to try (and notice I said TRY) to reproduce for years. And I doubt there can be many faithful adaptations to the spirit of a mythology like this one.

On the other hand, the only thing that bothers me about this DVD is the lack of "Extended Edition Preview" unlike previous Lord of the Rings Theatrical Editions (the announcement with the features in the official page omitted this one). I know I certainly will prefer the Extended Edition (like the first two films) better, and personally recommend these editions over the Theatrical ones.

If you cannot wait until November (or June as some rumors claim over there), or if you are not that of a Lord of the Rings fan and prefer the rough cut that is a Theatrical version compared to the Extended one, then buy this one.

But I still advice people to wait for the Extended Edition which will include scenes like Saurman's fate after a final confrontation with Gandalf, The Houses of Healing where Eowyn's love for Aragorn comes to closure after meeting Faramir, more Pelennor Fields, more Minas Morgul with Sam and Frodo, probably the Mouth of Sauron character, Aragorn confronting Sauron through the Palantir, more of the "Path of the Death" with Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas, Gandalf's confrontation woth the Witch-King, and much more ( - over 40 minutes of additional material! - )