Description

The final battle for Middle-earth begins. Frodo and Sam, led by Gollum, continue their dangerous mission toward the fires of Mount Doom in order to destroy the One Ring. Aragorn struggles to fulfill his legacy as he leads his outnumbered followers against the growing power of the Dark Lord Sauron, so that the Ring-bearer may complete his quest. ... Read more

Reviews (941)

The new "King" of film
The heavily-anticipated film adaptions of J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings" began in 2001 with THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING, a truly extraodinary film. In 2002, it was continued with THE TWO TOWERS, which topped THE FELLOWSHIP. And now, in 2003, we have THE RETURN OF THE KING - a film which rules all others. Here, ladies and gentlemen, is a serious candidate for best movie ever made.

The first part of the film is actually taken from the novel of "The Two Towers". We find Pippin (Billy Boyd) being taken to Gondor by Gandalf (Ian McKellen), who hopes to prevent war there by counselling stubborn, angry Denethor (John Noble). At the same time, Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), Legolas (Orlando Bloom), and Gimli (John Rhys-Davies) lead King Theoden's (Bernard Hill) men into battle.

Meanwhile, as they approach the outskirts of Mordor, Frodo (Elijah Wood) and Sam's (Sean Astin) friendship is tested as the scheming Gollum (voice of Andy Serkis) leads the two into a trap. All looks dark for the forces of good.

RETURN OF THE KING goes beyond words. Adventurous story, terrific acting, perfect direction, flawless visuals - it is a perfect film. Peter Jackson has done an outstanding job of bringing Tolkien's beloved fantasy tales to the screen. I can think of no one who could do it better.

Howard Shore once again contributes the film's score. He creates here music that is more beautiful than the previous two films', much less forceful, with the exact feeling of hopeless surrounding it as is with the movie's characters. This is almost certainly Shore's best score.

The acting is terrific, better than the first films, if such a thing is possible. We see more of the characters which were paid lesser attention to in the previous installments. Gollum's character is almost completely re-done.

There is no doubt that about 90% of the people who see this movie will shed a tear or too. There are some dramatic, emotional moments to the film, but most of the crying going on will just be because we've come to the end of a magnificent, beautiful journey - which has become one of the most important in cinematic history.

THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE RETURN OF THE KING is a triumph of modern moviemaking. It goes past the previous two, seemingly unbeatable films to become a serious candidate for the greatest film of all-time. It is sheer brilliance. The Lord of the Rings has been a beautiful experience. It is sad it has finally come to an end. At least it has an ending fit for a king.

The first masterpiece of the trilogy - astonishing!
It goes without saying that I have not been a huge fan of the LOTR series at all. The first film is corny and overdrawn, and most of The Two Towers suffers from what many middle sections of 2-hour movies do - the 2nd act drag. Only at the end of The Two Towers do Frodo and Sam and the gang really feel like they're becoming fleshed-out characters and not just action figures charging a castle wall. If you look closely at the end of Towers, it's Sam's speech to Frodo about the possibility of them becoming legends that the movie begins to whisper of what's to come, and what has come to pass in The Return of the King is...well...astounding. I tell you, reader, if you're not terribly fond of The Lord of the Rings, it is the compelling, deeply-moving final film that shows of what director Peter Jackson is truly capable.

Actor Andy Serkis's Gollum has been a joy to watch ever since he appeared on screen in Towers, even despite constant ribbing by Saturday Night Live and the fact that, yeah, he does sound a little silly when he menacingly screeches "My preciousssssssss!" every few minutes. The Return of the King takes a moment to bring additional depth and meaning to Gollum's character by showing his first discovery of the ring even before "The Return of the King" logo graces the screen. Luckily, Gollum is not the only character in the film that is made into a living, breathing, three-dimensional being and not a comic book caricature. The whole film seems to take on a lush, heavy air of true dramatic consequence that seemed to be holding back before.

Frodo and Sam are ever-so-closer to reaching Mordor; Aragorn is coming ever-so-closer to his destiny as, well, look at the title; and (in the most inspiringly great plot move of the film) Merry, Pippin, and Eowyn show their capacity for uncanny acts of heroism they've had in them all along. In addition, Gandalf kicks more Middle Earth butt like he was born to do while protecting Pippin (who is thought to have the ring), and the time for the final battle for the Middle Earth comes nearer by the minute. It seems like a lot is going on, but this third film is remarkably the easiest to follow and also the most accessible. The third film also has a few huge advantages that work in its favor: (1) it actually has an end (and what an ending!), (2) the characters have had more than 6 screen hours to develop, so they're at their peaks here, and (3) the tension leading to that do-it-or-die moment is worth two years of waiting. It's more obvious than ever by King that all three movies are just one big movie chopped into three parts, but that means that this is the equivalent of a no-holds-barred, all-the-stops-out, slam-bang finale of a 2-hour movie -- and that's exactly what it feels like.

The Battle of Helm's deep looks like nothing compared to the steadily-climaxing action of The Return of the King. Unlike some of the scenes in the first two films, the action seems to have a purpose here, and this reviewer will admit - I alternated between tears and the giddy excitement of a schoolboy throughout most of the movie. I'm sure that will be a common reaction. At the same time, Frodo's greed for the ring, and how it affects his relationship with Sam reminded me of The Treasure of the Sierra Madre. Elijah Wood is no Bogie, but he certainly can conjure up that all-encompassing greed when he wants to. I may get annoyed when he says "Mr. Frodo," but Sean Astin's Sam is really a standout character here - he's kind of been the 2nd string sidekick in the past two, but he actually gets the honor of carrying the film to its remarkably quiet and moving finale even after displaying his prodigious talent as a young actor in the tense Mordor sequence. This may sound like a blanket comment, but everyone is simply fantastic in the film - even when they've been not-so-much earlier.

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King is a compelling tale of redemption and heroism, and in a way, it has redeemed itself through this smashingly fantastic film.Yes, it does slip in a few moments (most notably at the very end, when it could end about 6 different times, but give Jackson some slack - it had to be hard to let go of it), but I really don't feel it was detrimental to the end result of the movie at all. The last 20 minutes or so, even when it's doing the ending fakeouts, it's a tearjerker - not only for what it means for the third film, but for what it means for the trilogy as a whole. I found myself smiling through being choked up at the end in one of the great scenes of the whole 10 hours of the epic: a group of people (I won't say who, for it might spoil things for those die-hard fans out there) sit around a table in a tavern clutching their ale and simply sit in silence. They've been through so much that words won't work. At times, I wonder if words will even work to describe what a great feat of American filmmaking The Return of the King is. I can give only this: Congratulations, Peter Jackson, you've made a masterpiece. Grade: A

The crowning touch to an amazing trilogy!!
The only bad thing I can say about this movie is that it's the last one. Oh yeah, and it isn't the extended version DVD. I had to buy this movie even though I knew a better version was coming out before Christmas; it's just too good to wait that long. Although I loved the movie, I did have one complaint: the whole Saruman plotline is wrapped up in a really odd way. (Peter Jackson promises that this will be rectified in the extended version.) The extras on this DVD aren't anything special, but I don't buy DVDs for the extras. If you loved the first two Lord of the Rings movies, you'll definitely love this one too!!

A Masterpiece Beyond Description
It is impossible to fairly credit the genius and masterpiece that this movie is in a few short words. Each movie in my opinion, has been better than the last, making for an epic third movie.

To begin with, the acting. People have said that the acting in each of the three movies has never been exceptionall, hence only one Oscar nomination to an actor/actress out of all three movies, (That was Ian McKellan FOTR.) However in this third installment there are several actors who must be recognized for their achievments, namely Sean Astin as Sam, and again Ian McKellan as Gandalf. Sam's incredible acting with his relationship with Frodo draws sympathy and emotion from me every time I see the movie. And Gandalf, with his several stirring speeches, both mostly to Pipin, are a a great acting performance worthy of recognition. Honorable mention must also go to Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn and Bernard Hill, who plays Theoden extremely well.

Next a look at the visual aspect of the movie. In a sense of the natural beauty of the film, it is incredible. All three films incorporate a level of beauty and grandeur hard to find in many films. New Zealands fresh and exotic landscapes are always present throught the film, and can often take ones breath away. One scene in particular is that of the lighting of the beacons, as Peter Jackson takes the viewer on a spectacular ride over snowy mountains and sweeping valleys. The shot itself is not only a testiment to the amazing cinemetography and editing of the movie, but also the amazing beauty of New Zealand that is presented through the entire film.
However as with the first two movies, The Return of the King's visual aspect relies not only on New Zelands beauty and Peter Jackson's camera moves, but also upon the amazing digital and visual effects that are integrated seamlessly throughout the movie. The Weta Digital visual effects team that brought to life such creatures as Gollem and Treebeard, have created the benchmark by which all visual effects will likely be judged from here on. Their ability to make a digital thing like Gollem who exists in a computer resonate emotion and feeling is a work of true genius. The visual effects shine not only in the obvious areas such as Gollum, but in the subtle effects that can barely be noticed; shadows formed by digital creatures that aren't there, lighting effects that create a mood in the scene that is otherwise non-existent. All of these things have been worked together so will with the real-time footage and acting, that you end up never knowing what is real and what is digital.

Everytime I watch the movie, I never am bored. Peter Jackson has made a perfect blend of drama, emotion, action, even some humor and romance, that the movie never grows old. Scenes such as Faramir's ride towards Osgiliath and death, the charge of the Rohiram upon Pelennor fields, the last battle in front of the Black gate, while Frodo and Sam struggle up Mount Doom, just to name a few, are beautifully done and are implanted in my mind forever.

The Lord of the Rings trilogy, which ended with this rousing finale, has created a pop culture phenomenon that will no doubt last for many years to come. If you haven't seen by all means must buy or rent this DVD. If you have, then I suggest the same thing, buy it. You won't be sorry you did.

I WATCH THIS WHEN I CANT FALL ASLEEP
NOPE, I JUST DONT SEE HOW PEOPLE LOVE THIS MOVIE. BUT I TELL YOU THIS THE THE HOLLYWOOD MEDIA FAVORS THIS MOVIE ALOT, AND SO DO THE PEOPLE FOLLOW.WELL PEOPLE ARE DIFFERENT I GUESS.BUT I WALKED OUT OF THE THEATERS ON THIS ONE. WENT TO WATCH A BETTER MOVIE.GOOD SPECIAL EFFECTS THOUGH. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The extended edition of The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers adds 43 minutes to the theatrical version's 179-minute running time, and there are significant, valuable additions to the film.Two new scenes might appease those who feel that the characterization of Faramir was the film's most egregious departure from the book, and fans will appreciate an appearance of the Huorns at Helm's Deep plus a nod to the absence of Tom Bombadil.Seeing a little more interplay between the gorgeous Eowyn and Aragorn is welcome, as is a grim introduction to Eomer and Theoden's son.And among the many other additions, there's an extended epilogue that might not have worked in the theater, but is more effective here in setting up The Return of the King.While the 30 minutes added to The Fellowship of the Ring felt just right in enriching the film, the extra footage in The Two Towers at times seems a bit extraneous--we see moments that in the theatrical version we had been told about, and some fleshed-out conversations and incidents are rather minor.But director Peter Jackson's vision of J.R.R. Tolkien's world is so marvelous that it's hard to complain about any extra time we can spend there. The first two installments of Peter Jackson's trilogy have established themselves as the best fantasy films of all time, and among the best film trilogies of all time, and their extended editions have set a new standard for expanding on the already-epic films.--David Horiuchi ... Read more

Reviews (1869)

Stupendous!
"They don't make movies like that any more." This is reference to Cecil B. DeMille's spectacular remake of THE TEN COMMANDMENTS. I mention one of the few universally acclaimed film epics of all time because with THE LORD of THE RINGS-THE TWO TOWERS,
Director Peter Jackson has staked unchallengable claim to motion picture immortality. Visually the movie is staggering in technological excellence. It seamlessly combinines sweeping photographic grandeur with superlative integration of CGI and modelwork(Claymation & Superdynamation)that humbles even the work
of IL&M, and would have made Ray HarryHausen proud.

Thematically, the story is truly grand and has raised film making--again--to the level of Mythological. Those familiar with Tolkien's literary epic--with rare exception--have been astounded by this director's monumental artistry in cinematically incarnating one of the greatest "stories" ever written.The cast(humans;creatures; monsters;)is brilliantly essayed.(Sean Astin deserves particular recognition as Frodo's "guardian" friend, SAMWISE). The complex plotting is clearly delineated;and ACTION(quest development;battles; epic romance interludes)ranges from apocalyptic to majestic. THE LORD of THE RINGS-THE TWO TOWERS magnificently continues what was begun in THE FELLOWSHIP of THE RING. Peter Jackson has created a unique work of film making that is both artistically wonderous and breath taking entertainment.It is a stupendous achievement.(10 Stars)

Incredibly, once again, Peter Jackson does the impossible
From gliding through the Misty Mountains and reliving Gandalf's battle with the Balrog to the Battle of Helm's Deep, the climactic scene of The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, I think that, even though Frodo Baggin's (Elijah Wood) quest is still unfulfilled, a group of hard-working New Zealanders have once again created an epic adventure confection of a movie, full of fantasy, courage, imagination and flair. J.R.R. Tolkien would not have been disappointed.

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, since is a continuing of a story, doesn't stop to introduce us to the quest or the characters from the first part, The Fellowship of the Ring. Beginning right where the first left off, Frodo (Elijah Wood) and Sam (Sean Astin) must continue their quest to Mount Doom and destroy the evil One Ring. Hunting them done is the rascal Gollum (Andy Serkis) but promises to lead them in to Mordor secretely. In Fangorn Forest, captured hobbits Merry (Dominic Monaghan) and Pippin (Billy Boyd) escape from the Orcs and are rescued by Treebeard (voiced by John Rhys-Davies), an ancient ent.

Meanwhile, Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), Legolas (Orlando Bloom) and Gimli (John Rhys-Davies) enter the country of Rohan. After the miraculous return of Gandalf (Ian McKellan), the four see King Theoden (Bernard Hill). But the king isn't doing too well. He's doing practically everything his servant Grima Wormtongue (Brad Dourif) is telling him. Wormtongue is in league with Saruman (Christopher Lee) and therefore is kicked out of Rohan. Aragorn, Gandalf and Theoden must discuss Rohan's plans to counter Saruman and Sauron.

Saruman is preparing for war, as we've also seen in The Fellowship of the Ring. He has been crossing orcs with goblins, breeding the dreadful Uruk-Hai to launch against Men of Gondor and Rohan. Gondor has it's own problems holding off Sauron's evil army. It all comes down to Saruman against the country of Rohan: A war of 10,000 Uruk-Hai against hundreds of Rohan people. Can Men claim a victory against Barad-dur and Orthanc, the union of the Two Towers?

The Two Towers, for me at least, had a quicker pace and sharper sense of movement than the more-episodic Fellowship of the Ring. Peter Jackson easily presents a film that will keep your attention for the full three hours. In many ways, The Two Towers is a much livlier film than it's predecessor. It takes a deeper look into it's character's own problems, dreams and future, covering many subjects: The war for Rohan, the war for Gondor, the war for the ents, and possibly the most important, the fate of the One Ring.

If The Fellowship of the Ring was a beautiful-looking movie, The Two Towers easily surpasses it visually. With the use of a program called MASSIVE, Peter Jackson and company takes flawless computer animation and simplistically adds it to real-life to create a stunning world. The Battle of Helm's Deep is one of the most memorable scenes of all time, while it uses a fantastic blend of live-action and computer animation. I say it's already got the Best Visual Effects Oscar in the bag. Not just because of the CGI, but with the camera trickery to make the hobbits small and the great backdrops.

I am appalled by the number of reviewers saying that this isn't faithful to Tolkien's book. Everyone should know that books and film are two different media, and should be treated as such. Many things in Tolkien's story would've gone horribly wrong on screen. As Peter Jackson said, if you were to film LOTR page by page, faithful to everything, what you would get is a mess. Many don't realize that what works in a book will NOT work on film. Be happy that you actually have a LOTR movie. Many filmmakers would not have been up to transferring Tolkien's story to the big screen. Jackson did make a few unnessesary changes, but he's a brave filmmaker to actually take on LOTR and still make something this good. Quit whining.

It might need a bit more humanity, but I'd say the chemistry between characters is much more alive and vivid in The Two Towers than with The Fellowship of the Ring. The relationship shared by Gollum and Frodo, or more importantly, Gollum and Sam, works wonderfully. Aragorn trying to convince King Theoden to go to war and the characterization involving Gimli was exceptionally. The Return of the King will see a lot more of this.

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers continues Tolkien's trilogy with very few missteps. It is on every count as good as the first, and in many ways, even better. It could possibly be the most sinister film ever, a banquet of monsters and beasts. It's doing so much better at the box-office than the first, and it easily surpasses it in spectacle. It's still unclear how it will do at the Oscars. Being a sequel, it might not get nominated for Best Picture. However, I'd say it has already sweeped the technical awards. It certainly deserves it.

This is the best of the three!!
Usually, the second movie in a trilogy is the weakest. It doesn't have the freshness of the first movie or the finality of the final movie. The Two Towers, however, is the exception to the rule. For lack of a better phrase, it rocks!!! The extra material included in this extended version DVD really fleshes out the movie. After you watch it you'll wonder why Peter Jackson left it out; it makes the movie complete. The fight scenes at Helm's Deep are great, and you forget that a lot of what you're seeing is computer generated. Several new characters are introduced, but you feel like you've known them all along. The best part of the movie is the addition of a Boromir/Faramir scene. Of course, I could be biased. I love Boromir (Sean Bean). This movie is a cinematic masterpiece. It's great!!!

Excellent
Not just pasting in deleted scenes, this version was assenmbled from scratch with additional material that add to the depth of this movie. THIS is the version to buy for watching at home.

You haven't seen LOTR until you've seen this!
OMG! I love this movie so much, I never put it back in the case...it's always in the dvd player. If you at all liked the original theatrical version, you HAVE to get the extended version. The addded footage completes the story and fills in character developement. And you HAVE to listen to the cast commentary. Dom and Billy are hilarious. And the bonus disks are well worth the money. Forget that...added Viggo footage makes it WELL worth it. Plus, the box is beautiful. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The greatest trilogy in film history comes to a grand conclusion with the extended edition of The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King.Not only is the third and final installment of Peter Jackson's adaptation of the works of J.R.R. Tolkien the longest of the three, but a full 50 minutes of new material pushes the running time to a whopping 4 hours and 10 minutes.

One of the scenes cut from the theatrical release but included here, the resolution of the Saruman storyline, generated a lot of publicity when the movie opened, as actor Christopher Lee complained in the press about losing his only appearance.It's an excellent scene, one Jackson calls "pure Tolkien," and provides better context for Pippin to find the wizard's palantir in the water, but it's not critical to the film.In fact, "valuable but not critical" might sum up the ROTK extended edition.It's evident that Jackson made the right cuts for the theatrical run, but the extra material provides depth and ties up a number of loose ends, and for those sorry to see the trilogy end (and who isn't?) it's a welcome chance to spend another hour in Middle-earth. Some choice moments are Gandalf's (Ian McKellen) confrontation with the Witch King (we find out what happened to the wizard's staff), the chilling Mouth of Sauron at the gates of Mordor, and Frodo (Elijah Wood) and Sam (Sean Astin) being mistaken for Orc soldiers.We get to see more of Éowyn (Miranda Otto), both with Aragorn and on the battlefield, even fighting the hideously deformed Orc lieutenant, Gothmog. We also see her in one of the most anticipated new scenes, the Houses of Healing after the battle of the Pelennor Fields.It doesn't present Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen) as a savior as the book did, but it shows the initial meeting between Éowyn and Faramir (David Wenham), a relationship that received only a meaningful glance in the theatrical cut.

And for those who complained, no, there are no new endings, not even the scouring of the Shire, which many fans were hoping to see.Nor is there a scene of Denethor (John Noble) with the palantir, which would have better explained both his foresight and his madness.As Jackson notes, when cuts are made, the secondary characters are the first to go, so there is a new scene of Aragorn finding the palantir in Denethor's robes.Another big difference is Aragorn's confrontation with the King of the Dead.In the theatrical version, we didn't know whether the King had accepted Aragorn's offer when the pirate ships pulled into the harbor; here Jackson assumes that viewers have already experienced that tension, and instead has the army of the dead join the battle in an earlier scene (an extended cameo for Jackson). One can debate which is more effective, but that's why the film is available in both versions.If you feel like watching the relatively shorter version you saw in the theaters, you can.If you want to completely immerse yourself in Peter Jackson's marvelous and massive achievement, only the extended edition will do. --David Horiuchi ... Read more

Reviews (60)

Latest Details On ROTK: Extended Edition
Not sure why there's such a vacuum of information available here on ROTK- the platinum extended edition release.

Its no secret that Peter Jackson has finished the version - and that it contains a whopping 65 minutes of additional footage that was cut from the theatrical version, putting the final movie at four hours and ten minutes. Awesome!

Apparently there was some rumor that New Line Cinema was going to cheap out on the special effects for the extended release version - and go with a cut-rate American outfit instead of the New Zealand firm they've worked with on the prior two films - but this was just that - a rumor, as far as I've been able to obtain.

New Scenes from the book to appear in the extended release version include the following: Confrontation with Saruman at Isengaard in which the Palantir is acquired (tossed out tower by Wormtongue), Parley with the Mouth of Sauron outside the Black Gates, Merry pledging his swoord and allegiance to Theoden, Sam and Frodo, disguised in Orc garb, marching with (and then escaping from) Orc Troop in Mordor, Eowyn and Faramir meet in the Houses of Healing in Gondor, and finally, a scene in which Aragorn reveals himself to Sauron in the Palantir.

All in all, good stuff. The only liberty it sounds Jackson has taken with the material is that Saruman is killed in the confrontation at Isengaard - falls to his death from the tower - rather than simply cast from the order, stripped of his power and humiliated by Gandolph, as the book. We can certainly live with that, can't we?

The KING of the Entire Trilogy
I loved "The Return of the King" in the theater. I thought it felt much different than the previous films, with more humor, more story, and definitely more battle sequences. Some people might wonder why I gave the film 4 stars. Well, it's because I didn't enjoy the ending. After the Mount Doom sequence, I think the film gets pretty boring. But, it is a great movie.

In this Extended Edition, we will see the death of Saruman, which was covered up in the theatrical release with a few cheesy lines from Gandalf and Treebeard. We will also see a pledge scene from Merry to King Theoden. There are many other extended sequences, including a song from Arwen (which makes the White Tree of Gondor grow), a new Palantir sequence where Aragorn reveals himself to Sauron, and a Houses of Healing scene revealing the romantic backstory between Faramir and Eowyn.

Another scene that will be added is the confrontation at the Black Gate between the Mouth of Sauron (played by Bruce Spence) and our heroes. Also, an awesome battle sequence between Gandalf and the Witch King will be added and the death of Gamling on Pelennor Fields will be able to be viewed, along with a scene where Frodo and Sam (disguised as orcs) escape a column of orcs marching to Cirith Ungol on their final leg of the journey to Mordor (this is the stupid "Where There's a Whip" scene in the Rankin/Bass "Return of the King").

As for the special features, Peter Jackson will proabably include his usual documentaries, the commentaries by all of the cast members, a few pre-viz and photo galleries, along with a special easter egg of an MTV "Lord of the Ring" spoof (as he has done before with "The Council of Elrond" parody with Jack Black and the MTV Awards Gollum acceptance speech).

All in all, this Extended Edition of "The Return of the King" will be a great way to end the Special Edition series. I look forward to watching it.

An amazing cinematic accomplishment
I think these films have done an EXCELLENT job of capturing the essence of Tolkien's writings. Once I read the Silmarillion I was completely drawn in. Vividly imaginitive and truly epic story-telling. The films stay true to these themes even with the changes done in the story! I really don't mind them. The Extended DVDs are a must for any fan of Tolkien! I'm anxious to get the third one! For me the Return of the King is THE best film ever made.

Best of the BEST!
The entire LOTR Trilogy is out of this world!! Return of the King is definitely the BEST of the BEST!!!!!!!!!! I have read the books hundreds of times and I waited for the movies with great anticipation! Peter Jackson and everyone involved with LOTR did extremely well. Return of the King proves, without a doubt, that the best can only keep getting better!

awesome feat of wonder
These films are incredible. I feared the worst (I couldn't imagine how anyone could make these books into film without totally screwing it up, but Peter Jackson and his team did it and did it superbly). I've read the books about 5 or 6 times + the appendices (one has to read the appendices to appreciate the films) + the Silmarillion. Yes Jackson did indeed deviate from the film at different points, but frankly, to do a film that perfectly follows such a long and detailed story would have made for some incredibly long boring film stretches. In other words, what works in a novel doesn't always translate well in film (i.e. Stephen King's "The Stand" Great book, lousy movie). Different form of story telling. Jackson and crew did a tremendous job in staying true to the basic story and if certain characters are missing (like Tom Bombadill)it's because they weren't central to the tale. I noticed the changes, but I wasn't offended by them. I am amazed. Have purchased both extended versions of FOTR and TT. I wait with anticipation for ROTK extended edition (when will it be out? Tell them to hurry). ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

As the triumphant start of a trilogy, The Lord of the Rings: TheFellowship of the Ring leaves you begging for more. By necessity, PeterJackson's ambitious epic compresses J.R.R. Tolkien's classicThe Lord of the Rings,but this robust adaptation maintains reverent allegiance to Tolkien's creation,instantly qualifying as one of the greatest fantasy films ever made. At 178minutes, it's long enough to establish the myriad inhabitants of Middle-earth,the legendary Rings of Power, and the fellowship of hobbits, elves, dwarves, andhumans--led by the wizard Gandalf (Ian McKellen) and the brave hobbit Frodo(Elijah Wood)--who must battle terrifying forces of evil on their perilousjourney to destroy the One Ring in the land of Mordor. Superbly paced, the filmis both epic and intimate, offering astonishing special effects and productiondesign while emphasizing the emotional intensity of Frodo's adventure. Ending ona perfect note of heroic loyalty and rich anticipation, this wondrous fantasycontinues in The Two Towers (2002). --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (3438)

An astonishing masterpiece.
Considered both as fantasy adventure and as an adaptation of a beloved literary classic, Peter Jackson's film of "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring" sets new standards for cinematic excellence. Everything about this film feels exactly right, from the casting to the screenplay to the special effects. The last are amazing, putting to shame anything George Lucas has come up with, and yet they always serve to advance the story; unlike Lucas, there's never any hint that Jackson is merely playing with his toys. Jackson shows great respect for Tolkien's text, but not slavish devotion. Certain characters--such as the lovable Tom Bombadil and Frodo's poisonous Aunt Lobelia--are missing, and Tolkien would be chagrined to find that the little poems and songs he loved to write are nowhere quoted. But if Jackson gives short shrift to Tolkien's whimsy, he more than makes up for that by giving us Tolkien's intensity, pathos and moral vision absolutely undiluted. Above all, Jackson never forgets that Tolkien's chief emphasis was always on the characters he created. Jackson casts wonderful actors to play those characters and--again unlike Lucas--he actually allows them to give performances. How wonderful to find the great Sir Ian McKellen, a uniquely commanding and charismatic actor, as Gandalf, or the charming and touching Elijah Wood as Frodo. You can go straight down the list--Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn, Sean Astin as Sam, Ian Holm as Bilbo, Cate Blanchett as Galadriel--and find nothing but perfection. This is one of the very few big-budget blockbusters that unqualifiedly deserves its success, and all we can do now is look forward with excitement to the release of "The Two Towers" in 2002 and "The Return of the King" in 2003. Like the books they came from, these three fillms will be cherished by future generations.

The Wonders of Middle-Earth
The fate of Middle-earth lies in the hands of Elijah Wood in the grand fantasy epic "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring". When the forces of evil storm the mystical realm of Middle-earth to reclaim the Ring of the Dark Lord, Sauron, the brave Frodo (Elijah Wood) and the wizard Gandalf (Ian McKellen) embark on a quest to destroy the One Ring that could doom the land. With the help of a fellowship of good friends and powerful allies, Frodo faces incredible dangers and the fierce minions of the Dark Lord. "The Fellowship of the Ring" is an astonishing epic tale of good versus evil. Director Peter Jackson delivers the wonders and emotional intensity of J.R.R. Tolkien's classic with such stunning amazement. The movie includes exceptional performances by Viggo Mortensen, Elijah Wood, Cate Blanchett and Ian McKellen as the wizard Gandalf. It also contains amazing special effects, beautiful backgrounds and a superb music score.

"The Lord of the Rings: the Fellowship of the Ring" is certainly one of the best DVDs of the year. The splendid fantasy adventure is presented in standard full screen format. The DVD has marvelously flawless picture quality and a great 5.1-EX Dolby Digital sound. If special features are a must then this DVD is a welcome addition to any collection. Its supplemental material includes numerous behind-the-scenes featurettes, trailers including a preview of the upcoming "The Two Towers", a music video, DVD-ROM extras and impressive interactive menus. Overall, "The Fellowship of the Ring" scores an "A".

Awe-struck
I'm still reeling from this film! The performances, costuming, props and special effects, direction, and cinematography are astounding. There were times whilst viewing this film when I was on the edge of my seat or grabbing my seat to hold on; times when my heart was pounding; times when I was moved to shed a tear by either sadness or greatness. The movie captures every part of human emotions, wraps them all up, and unleashes them at the viewer at an almost rapid pace; which can, at times, be a bit too much. The Fellowship Of The Ring is a very strong, very powerful, visually stunning, and entirely emotive film. And I give top marks to WETA for the highly notable achievement of creating a thoroughly credible height ratio effect for the Hobbits and Dwarves in regards to the taller races of Middle-earth. Brilliant!

However, as much as I was stunned by this film, the screenplay and adaptions were absolute rubbish! In my opinion, Mrs. Jackson and anyone who worked with her should be fed to the Balrog, along with Peter Jackson himself for allowing it. Their were changes in characters and character, aspirations, and events. Tolkien's dialogue was rarely followed. Some reviewers say this doesn't deter from the story. It does deter from the story! That's exactly what it does. How difficult is it to follow a story and dialogue that has already been written? Editing is one thing and is understandable when approaching a big screen adaptation with time constraints, but arrant changes to a story are not. This I find unforgivable. In addition, no Fatty Bolger playing up appearances in Frodo's new house in Buckland; no Willow The Wisp; no Tom Bombadil; no Barrow-wights; no Rhadaghast The Brown, and very little attention payed to the Hobbits' stealth from and cat and mouse games with the Black Riders in The Shire. In addition, very little of Tolkien's dialogue was covered. The Fellowship Of The Ring is mainly dialogue, and takes place mainly in The Shire. What happened to Peter Jackson's boasting about how closely he was going to follow Tolkien's story? With all its faults, Ralph Bakshi's film follows Tolkien's story and dialogue more closely than Jackson's version does! Jackson is either pandering to his own ego (or his wife's), or just trying to make the film(s) appeal to more people than just Tolkien fans; and the only reason for the latter would be money.

Aside from the above criticism, I was very annoyed by WETA's cheesy computer-generated Cave Troll and Balrog. This garbage belongs in a video game, not an important epic film. What ever happened to employing the talents of real artists like Ray Harryhausen or Jim Henson's Creature Shop? Is it just me, or are today's film makers relying too heavily on computer-generated effects, and using the words "can't be done" or "not within the budget" as a scape-goat to seeking alternative ways of creating effects, like the filmmakers of old had to do?

However all scrutinising aside, The Fellowship Of The Ring is an overwhelming cinematic experience, and one which should not be missed by anyone; with the exception of pre-teens, to whom this film will only terrorise. This is a tremendous Christmas present, and I thank Peter Jackson and everyone involved in its creation for it. It's difficult to believe that there are two more films of this calibre to follow. I look forward to their release, as well as a few more viewings of The Fellowship Of The Ring.

In closing I'd just like to say that Tolkien fans have still not been given a definitive screen version of The Lord Of The Rings. In fact, the only way I believe it would be possible to remain faithful to Tolkien's story and (even edited) dialogue, would be to make a complete mini-series for non-commercial television; basically, a visual accompaniment to the long BBC Radio production. Perhaps one day someone with enough integrity and who cares enough will.

If I could give this more than five stars, I would!!!
"We can make them longer, stronger, better!" When Peter Jackson said this about the extended DVD versions of the films, I'm sure hordes of movie fans disagreed. They were WRONG!! The Lord of the Rings trilogy is quite possibly the best thing that's ever happened to the movie industry, and these extended version DVDs are the best things to ever happen to DVD players. This first installment was great in the theater, but the extended version is better. Several things are explained in greater detail, and you can't tell where new material has been inserted. It's flawless, from the acting to the music to the scenery. I can't say enough good things about this movie. Oh yeah, the extras are nice too.

Will be remembered as one of the best films of all time....
Without repeating the reviews of the rest listed here....I can say that the extended editions add more texture to the story and the documentary DVD's give you more background and understanding of the story.

It made me want to read the books to see what the films couldn't touch upon ...the poetry and descriptions of middle earth are very much on target. I really hope that Jackson gets the chance to do the Hobbit. It would be a crime if it wasn't adapted by him in the very near future. All I have to say to the film makers is ..Lets see the Hobbit before the actors become unavailable to produce the film! ... Read more

Amazon.com

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers is a seamless continuation of Peter Jackson's epic fantasy based on the works of J.R.R. Tolkien. After the breaking of the Fellowship, Frodo (Elijah Wood) and Sam (Sean Astin) journey to Mordor to destroy the One Ring of Power with the creature Gollum as their guide. Meanwhile, Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), Legolas (Orlando Bloom), and Gimli (John Rhys-Davies) join in the defense of the people of Rohan, who are the first target in the eradication of the race of Men by the renegade wizard Saruman (Christopher Lee) and the dark lord Sauron. Fantastic creatures, astounding visual effects, and a climactic battle at the fortress of Helm's Deep make The Two Towers a worthy successor to The Fellowship of the Ring, grander in scale but retaining the story's emotional intimacy. These two films are perhaps the greatest fantasy films ever made, but they're merely a prelude to the cataclysmic events of The Return of the King. --David Horiuchi ... Read more

Reviews (1869)

Stupendous!
"They don't make movies like that any more." This is reference to Cecil B. DeMille's spectacular remake of THE TEN COMMANDMENTS. I mention one of the few universally acclaimed film epics of all time because with THE LORD of THE RINGS-THE TWO TOWERS,
Director Peter Jackson has staked unchallengable claim to motion picture immortality. Visually the movie is staggering in technological excellence. It seamlessly combinines sweeping photographic grandeur with superlative integration of CGI and modelwork(Claymation & Superdynamation)that humbles even the work
of IL&M, and would have made Ray HarryHausen proud.

Thematically, the story is truly grand and has raised film making--again--to the level of Mythological. Those familiar with Tolkien's literary epic--with rare exception--have been astounded by this director's monumental artistry in cinematically incarnating one of the greatest "stories" ever written.The cast(humans;creatures; monsters;)is brilliantly essayed.(Sean Astin deserves particular recognition as Frodo's "guardian" friend, SAMWISE). The complex plotting is clearly delineated;and ACTION(quest development;battles; epic romance interludes)ranges from apocalyptic to majestic. THE LORD of THE RINGS-THE TWO TOWERS magnificently continues what was begun in THE FELLOWSHIP of THE RING. Peter Jackson has created a unique work of film making that is both artistically wonderous and breath taking entertainment.It is a stupendous achievement.(10 Stars)

Incredibly, once again, Peter Jackson does the impossible
From gliding through the Misty Mountains and reliving Gandalf's battle with the Balrog to the Battle of Helm's Deep, the climactic scene of The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, I think that, even though Frodo Baggin's (Elijah Wood) quest is still unfulfilled, a group of hard-working New Zealanders have once again created an epic adventure confection of a movie, full of fantasy, courage, imagination and flair. J.R.R. Tolkien would not have been disappointed.

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, since is a continuing of a story, doesn't stop to introduce us to the quest or the characters from the first part, The Fellowship of the Ring. Beginning right where the first left off, Frodo (Elijah Wood) and Sam (Sean Astin) must continue their quest to Mount Doom and destroy the evil One Ring. Hunting them done is the rascal Gollum (Andy Serkis) but promises to lead them in to Mordor secretely. In Fangorn Forest, captured hobbits Merry (Dominic Monaghan) and Pippin (Billy Boyd) escape from the Orcs and are rescued by Treebeard (voiced by John Rhys-Davies), an ancient ent.

Meanwhile, Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), Legolas (Orlando Bloom) and Gimli (John Rhys-Davies) enter the country of Rohan. After the miraculous return of Gandalf (Ian McKellan), the four see King Theoden (Bernard Hill). But the king isn't doing too well. He's doing practically everything his servant Grima Wormtongue (Brad Dourif) is telling him. Wormtongue is in league with Saruman (Christopher Lee) and therefore is kicked out of Rohan. Aragorn, Gandalf and Theoden must discuss Rohan's plans to counter Saruman and Sauron.

Saruman is preparing for war, as we've also seen in The Fellowship of the Ring. He has been crossing orcs with goblins, breeding the dreadful Uruk-Hai to launch against Men of Gondor and Rohan. Gondor has it's own problems holding off Sauron's evil army. It all comes down to Saruman against the country of Rohan: A war of 10,000 Uruk-Hai against hundreds of Rohan people. Can Men claim a victory against Barad-dur and Orthanc, the union of the Two Towers?

The Two Towers, for me at least, had a quicker pace and sharper sense of movement than the more-episodic Fellowship of the Ring. Peter Jackson easily presents a film that will keep your attention for the full three hours. In many ways, The Two Towers is a much livlier film than it's predecessor. It takes a deeper look into it's character's own problems, dreams and future, covering many subjects: The war for Rohan, the war for Gondor, the war for the ents, and possibly the most important, the fate of the One Ring.

If The Fellowship of the Ring was a beautiful-looking movie, The Two Towers easily surpasses it visually. With the use of a program called MASSIVE, Peter Jackson and company takes flawless computer animation and simplistically adds it to real-life to create a stunning world. The Battle of Helm's Deep is one of the most memorable scenes of all time, while it uses a fantastic blend of live-action and computer animation. I say it's already got the Best Visual Effects Oscar in the bag. Not just because of the CGI, but with the camera trickery to make the hobbits small and the great backdrops.

I am appalled by the number of reviewers saying that this isn't faithful to Tolkien's book. Everyone should know that books and film are two different media, and should be treated as such. Many things in Tolkien's story would've gone horribly wrong on screen. As Peter Jackson said, if you were to film LOTR page by page, faithful to everything, what you would get is a mess. Many don't realize that what works in a book will NOT work on film. Be happy that you actually have a LOTR movie. Many filmmakers would not have been up to transferring Tolkien's story to the big screen. Jackson did make a few unnessesary changes, but he's a brave filmmaker to actually take on LOTR and still make something this good. Quit whining.

It might need a bit more humanity, but I'd say the chemistry between characters is much more alive and vivid in The Two Towers than with The Fellowship of the Ring. The relationship shared by Gollum and Frodo, or more importantly, Gollum and Sam, works wonderfully. Aragorn trying to convince King Theoden to go to war and the characterization involving Gimli was exceptionally. The Return of the King will see a lot more of this.

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers continues Tolkien's trilogy with very few missteps. It is on every count as good as the first, and in many ways, even better. It could possibly be the most sinister film ever, a banquet of monsters and beasts. It's doing so much better at the box-office than the first, and it easily surpasses it in spectacle. It's still unclear how it will do at the Oscars. Being a sequel, it might not get nominated for Best Picture. However, I'd say it has already sweeped the technical awards. It certainly deserves it.

This is the best of the three!!
Usually, the second movie in a trilogy is the weakest. It doesn't have the freshness of the first movie or the finality of the final movie. The Two Towers, however, is the exception to the rule. For lack of a better phrase, it rocks!!! The extra material included in this extended version DVD really fleshes out the movie. After you watch it you'll wonder why Peter Jackson left it out; it makes the movie complete. The fight scenes at Helm's Deep are great, and you forget that a lot of what you're seeing is computer generated. Several new characters are introduced, but you feel like you've known them all along. The best part of the movie is the addition of a Boromir/Faramir scene. Of course, I could be biased. I love Boromir (Sean Bean). This movie is a cinematic masterpiece. It's great!!!

Excellent
Not just pasting in deleted scenes, this version was assenmbled from scratch with additional material that add to the depth of this movie. THIS is the version to buy for watching at home.

You haven't seen LOTR until you've seen this!
OMG! I love this movie so much, I never put it back in the case...it's always in the dvd player. If you at all liked the original theatrical version, you HAVE to get the extended version. The addded footage completes the story and fills in character developement. And you HAVE to listen to the cast commentary. Dom and Billy are hilarious. And the bonus disks are well worth the money. Forget that...added Viggo footage makes it WELL worth it. Plus, the box is beautiful. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

The grossest movie ever made, this quintessential splatter film details the tender story of a henpecked boy, his overbearing mum, and a nasty little Sumerian rat-monkey that turns people into voracious zombies. In lesser hands, this ne plus ultra viscera-fest would be so disturbing as to be nigh-unwatchable, but the incredible energy and imagination of director Peter Jackson makes it a first-class guilty pleasure, with plentiful helpings of gallows humor (the scripture-quoting, kung-fu-dispensing priest is a highlight) and a taboo subtext that Sigmund Freud would have loved. Essential viewing for gorehounds and anyone else with a high tolerance for flying entrails. The director would later tone down the gore (but not the manic enthusiasm) for the sublime Heavenly Creatures and The Frighteners. --Andrew Wright ... Read more

Reviews (283)

Dead Alive (1982) d: Jackson, Peter
Stop: If you haven't seen this movie yet, go to your local video dealer and get it right now, and please avoid the R-rated version. This film single-handedly created the Splat-Stick genre with more on-screen gore than the original Evil Dead (1982), and it has become a treasured favorite in my collection. Originally released as Brain Dead (1992) in New Zealand, the title was changed in North America by Vestron to avoid confusion with Adam Simon's (1990) horror / thriller by the same name. Peter Jackson spent most of his $3 million dollar budget on Pork Fat, Latex, Sisal, Polyfoam, Human Hair, Ultra Slime, Hundreds of gallons of maple syrup, and managed to create an amazing comical, gore feast, zombie flick which sent him on his road to stardom. It is great to finally see this classic released in it's original uncut version on DVD. While Lionel [Tmothy Balme] visits the zoo, a legendary 'rat monkey' bites his mother. As days go on the deadly bite turns Lionel's mum into a walking corpse, who zombifies anyone who crosses her path. He hides his secret from the town and his new love by keeping his mother and her recent victims sedated with animal tranquilzers in the basement. When his Uncle Les throws a wild house party, all the guest are turned into zombies. Realizing that things are now getting out of hand, Lionel straps a lawn mower to his body, in a climatic scene censored from most versions carried by the major video chains, he cuts the zombies into pieces with his lethal lawn care equipment. 300 liters of blood were used in this scene alone. A must for lovers of splatter and gore.

Gore Galore and Whole Lot More!
Peter Jackson's Dead Alive is an exuberant roller coaster ride of a movie. I have never, in my entire life of movie watching, ever seen so much gore so enthuasically shown in a film. This movie makes the Evil Dead series look like Disney movies in comparison. Dead Alive is an unbeleviable spectacle of wickedly over-the-top special effects and Peter Jackson's very dark sense of humor. This 1993 Austrailian film, begins as hilarious spoof of Spielberg's Raiders of the Lost Ark and then turns into one heck of homage to Romero's Night of the Living Dead and Sam Raimi's Evil Dead. Once poor Lionel's mother is bitten by a very rare and ferocious rat monkey, she turns into a very one-track minded zombie, and the maddness just gets worse from there. Expect to be impressed by overflowing body parts, squirting ligaments, a holy warrior kicking a## for the lord, zombie sex, zombie babies, blended zombie heads, and one weird Oedipal relationship gone terriably terriably wrong. A must-see for any horror fan with strong stomachs. Dead Alive is unsurpassed in film disgust. The DVD doens't have very many options, but this gem of a cult film is a necessity for those addicted to biazarre, sick, and twisted movies. A horror milestone. P.S. Watch out for the gas emmiting entrails.

Hyperactive
This has got to be one of my all time favorite movies. Camp, blood, ass kicking priests (who turn into lecherous zombies) and hyperative monster babies. It's just awesome. My only complaint is that it's edited all to hell, compared to the original New Zealand release, titled "Braindead."

SWEET JESUS!!!!
First of all it angers me to read reviews that state how it is not at all clever when it comes to the lawn mower scene. Come on, what more would you want from this genre of movies, if you guys dont think this is the least bit scary, rent the Care Bears movie, that might suite your likings. It cant get much gorrier then this, and definately graphic I might add. I will admit that the blood did look like pudding with red dye but thats to be expected. I could not ask for more. Peter Jackson, you rule.

Peter Jackson's Career Is Tainted!
I cannot believe that there are people who love this movie. I cannot even believe that there are people who put it in the so-bad-it's-good category. This movie is just worthless. Yes, if you want to be repulsed, it will probably succeed -- for a while at lest. But for me, by the time the VERY bloody finale arrived, I was too bored by the gallons of fake blood and slimy mucous that resembled vanilla pudding. And no, I did not find the way that the lawnmower was put to use to be funny, either.

If some friend of yours tries to convince you to watch this movie, refuse. And be aware that your friend has no taste. If for some reason you are forced to watch this movie, fast forward to the kung fu priest part (slighltly funny) and the zombie baby part (actually funny). But other than those scenes, this movie has nothing to offer except for evidence of the pathetic state of Peter Jackson's career before Lord of the Rings. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

In every aspect, the extended VHS edition of Peter Jackson's epic fantasy The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring blows away the theatrical version. No one who cares at all about the film should ever need to watch the original version again. Well, maybe the impatient and the squeamish will still prefer the theatrical version, because the extended edition makes a long film 30 minutes longer and there's a bit more violence (though both versions are rated PG-13). But the changes--sometimes whole scenes, sometimes merely a few seconds--make for a richer film. There's more of the spirit of J.R.R. Tolkien, embodied in more songs and a longer opening focusing on Hobbiton. There's more character development, and more background into what is to come in the two subsequent films, such as Galadriel's gifts to the Fellowship and Aragorn's burden of lineage. And some additions make more sense to the plot, or are merely worth seeing, such as the wood elves leaving Middle-earth or the view of Caras Galadhon (but sorry, there's still no Tom Bombadil). The only drawback is that the film is now spread over two tapes, but that's a minor inconvenience. The extended VHS edition is the Fellowship video to rule them all. --David Horiuchi ... Read more

Reviews (3438)

An astonishing masterpiece.
Considered both as fantasy adventure and as an adaptation of a beloved literary classic, Peter Jackson's film of "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring" sets new standards for cinematic excellence. Everything about this film feels exactly right, from the casting to the screenplay to the special effects. The last are amazing, putting to shame anything George Lucas has come up with, and yet they always serve to advance the story; unlike Lucas, there's never any hint that Jackson is merely playing with his toys. Jackson shows great respect for Tolkien's text, but not slavish devotion. Certain characters--such as the lovable Tom Bombadil and Frodo's poisonous Aunt Lobelia--are missing, and Tolkien would be chagrined to find that the little poems and songs he loved to write are nowhere quoted. But if Jackson gives short shrift to Tolkien's whimsy, he more than makes up for that by giving us Tolkien's intensity, pathos and moral vision absolutely undiluted. Above all, Jackson never forgets that Tolkien's chief emphasis was always on the characters he created. Jackson casts wonderful actors to play those characters and--again unlike Lucas--he actually allows them to give performances. How wonderful to find the great Sir Ian McKellen, a uniquely commanding and charismatic actor, as Gandalf, or the charming and touching Elijah Wood as Frodo. You can go straight down the list--Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn, Sean Astin as Sam, Ian Holm as Bilbo, Cate Blanchett as Galadriel--and find nothing but perfection. This is one of the very few big-budget blockbusters that unqualifiedly deserves its success, and all we can do now is look forward with excitement to the release of "The Two Towers" in 2002 and "The Return of the King" in 2003. Like the books they came from, these three fillms will be cherished by future generations.

The Wonders of Middle-Earth
The fate of Middle-earth lies in the hands of Elijah Wood in the grand fantasy epic "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring". When the forces of evil storm the mystical realm of Middle-earth to reclaim the Ring of the Dark Lord, Sauron, the brave Frodo (Elijah Wood) and the wizard Gandalf (Ian McKellen) embark on a quest to destroy the One Ring that could doom the land. With the help of a fellowship of good friends and powerful allies, Frodo faces incredible dangers and the fierce minions of the Dark Lord. "The Fellowship of the Ring" is an astonishing epic tale of good versus evil. Director Peter Jackson delivers the wonders and emotional intensity of J.R.R. Tolkien's classic with such stunning amazement. The movie includes exceptional performances by Viggo Mortensen, Elijah Wood, Cate Blanchett and Ian McKellen as the wizard Gandalf. It also contains amazing special effects, beautiful backgrounds and a superb music score.

"The Lord of the Rings: the Fellowship of the Ring" is certainly one of the best DVDs of the year. The splendid fantasy adventure is presented in standard full screen format. The DVD has marvelously flawless picture quality and a great 5.1-EX Dolby Digital sound. If special features are a must then this DVD is a welcome addition to any collection. Its supplemental material includes numerous behind-the-scenes featurettes, trailers including a preview of the upcoming "The Two Towers", a music video, DVD-ROM extras and impressive interactive menus. Overall, "The Fellowship of the Ring" scores an "A".

Awe-struck
I'm still reeling from this film! The performances, costuming, props and special effects, direction, and cinematography are astounding. There were times whilst viewing this film when I was on the edge of my seat or grabbing my seat to hold on; times when my heart was pounding; times when I was moved to shed a tear by either sadness or greatness. The movie captures every part of human emotions, wraps them all up, and unleashes them at the viewer at an almost rapid pace; which can, at times, be a bit too much. The Fellowship Of The Ring is a very strong, very powerful, visually stunning, and entirely emotive film. And I give top marks to WETA for the highly notable achievement of creating a thoroughly credible height ratio effect for the Hobbits and Dwarves in regards to the taller races of Middle-earth. Brilliant!

However, as much as I was stunned by this film, the screenplay and adaptions were absolute rubbish! In my opinion, Mrs. Jackson and anyone who worked with her should be fed to the Balrog, along with Peter Jackson himself for allowing it. Their were changes in characters and character, aspirations, and events. Tolkien's dialogue was rarely followed. Some reviewers say this doesn't deter from the story. It does deter from the story! That's exactly what it does. How difficult is it to follow a story and dialogue that has already been written? Editing is one thing and is understandable when approaching a big screen adaptation with time constraints, but arrant changes to a story are not. This I find unforgivable. In addition, no Fatty Bolger playing up appearances in Frodo's new house in Buckland; no Willow The Wisp; no Tom Bombadil; no Barrow-wights; no Rhadaghast The Brown, and very little attention payed to the Hobbits' stealth from and cat and mouse games with the Black Riders in The Shire. In addition, very little of Tolkien's dialogue was covered. The Fellowship Of The Ring is mainly dialogue, and takes place mainly in The Shire. What happened to Peter Jackson's boasting about how closely he was going to follow Tolkien's story? With all its faults, Ralph Bakshi's film follows Tolkien's story and dialogue more closely than Jackson's version does! Jackson is either pandering to his own ego (or his wife's), or just trying to make the film(s) appeal to more people than just Tolkien fans; and the only reason for the latter would be money.

Aside from the above criticism, I was very annoyed by WETA's cheesy computer-generated Cave Troll and Balrog. This garbage belongs in a video game, not an important epic film. What ever happened to employing the talents of real artists like Ray Harryhausen or Jim Henson's Creature Shop? Is it just me, or are today's film makers relying too heavily on computer-generated effects, and using the words "can't be done" or "not within the budget" as a scape-goat to seeking alternative ways of creating effects, like the filmmakers of old had to do?

However all scrutinising aside, The Fellowship Of The Ring is an overwhelming cinematic experience, and one which should not be missed by anyone; with the exception of pre-teens, to whom this film will only terrorise. This is a tremendous Christmas present, and I thank Peter Jackson and everyone involved in its creation for it. It's difficult to believe that there are two more films of this calibre to follow. I look forward to their release, as well as a few more viewings of The Fellowship Of The Ring.

In closing I'd just like to say that Tolkien fans have still not been given a definitive screen version of The Lord Of The Rings. In fact, the only way I believe it would be possible to remain faithful to Tolkien's story and (even edited) dialogue, would be to make a complete mini-series for non-commercial television; basically, a visual accompaniment to the long BBC Radio production. Perhaps one day someone with enough integrity and who cares enough will.

If I could give this more than five stars, I would!!!
"We can make them longer, stronger, better!" When Peter Jackson said this about the extended DVD versions of the films, I'm sure hordes of movie fans disagreed. They were WRONG!! The Lord of the Rings trilogy is quite possibly the best thing that's ever happened to the movie industry, and these extended version DVDs are the best things to ever happen to DVD players. This first installment was great in the theater, but the extended version is better. Several things are explained in greater detail, and you can't tell where new material has been inserted. It's flawless, from the acting to the music to the scenery. I can't say enough good things about this movie. Oh yeah, the extras are nice too.

Will be remembered as one of the best films of all time....
Without repeating the reviews of the rest listed here....I can say that the extended editions add more texture to the story and the documentary DVD's give you more background and understanding of the story.

It made me want to read the books to see what the films couldn't touch upon ...the poetry and descriptions of middle earth are very much on target. I really hope that Jackson gets the chance to do the Hobbit. It would be a crime if it wasn't adapted by him in the very near future. All I have to say to the film makers is ..Lets see the Hobbit before the actors become unavailable to produce the film! ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

A starkly original film-going experience based on a true life story, this film from New Zealand director Peter Jackson (Dead Alive, The Frighteners) is a stirring drama that offers up the unexpected. The story concerns two girls, outcasts who become best friends, whose bizarre fantasy life becomes more intense as their bond becomes increasingly more obsessive. When the mother of one of the girls tries to intervene and split the girls apart, they kill her and stand trial for murder in what is to this day still a celebrated and controversial case. Kate Winslet (Titanic) and Melanie Lynskey create two sympathetic and yet uncomfortably eerie characters in riveting portrayals. Featuring some startling and unique moments of visual brilliance as well as a disturbing love story between the two girls, Heavenly Creatures is at once both unsettling and beautiful to behold. --Robert Lane ... Read more

Reviews (124)

Intense & Beautiful!
Heavenly Creatures is my favorite movie of all time. It's about two highly intense girls who become best friends in the deepest sense of the word. They don't really seem to have anyone but each other. To help deal with this, they create a fantasy world, first in words and books, then with clay. And all the while it's active in their mind. They escape into this world called Borovnia and into each other. When Juliet (played by the incredible Kate Winslet) comes down with another bout of tuberculosis, she's quarentined in a hospital and the separation proves to be extremely difficult for Juliet and Pauline. But the real test comes when Juliet is to be shipped out of the country. That bit of separation is too much for the girls to handle and they go to desperate lengths to prevent it. Whether or not they succeed, I won't say.

This movie is based in truth. Much research can be done online as to the factual content of the movie. Many people question if their friendship turned into any sort of lesbian relationship. Other questions have been raised as well. However, fact or fiction, this is one of the most incredible movies out there for viewing. It's beautiful and breathtaking and something everyone should see. I can't recommend it enough.

"Come with me..."
"How can these heavenly creatures be real?" asks Pauline in one scene of "Heavenly Creatures," the exquisite and horrifying docudrama of a real-life murder in New Zealand. Peter Jackson uses spectacular special effect, great actors, and outstanding direction to show us how these heavenly creatures became monsters.

In 1952, Pauline Parker (Melanie Lynskey) is a loner at her proper New Zealand school, until the day Juliet Hulme (Kate Winslet) arrives -- an intelligent, witty, daring girl who appeals to Pauline. They share a love of the arts, writing, sculpting, drawing, fantasy, and tenor Mario Lanza. Soon the two of them are nearly inseparable, spinning their fantastical tales of castles, knights, unicorns and beautiful ladies. (The foremost ladies, Deborah and Gina, are modelled on themselves) Even Juliet's four month stint in the hospital doesn't separate the girls through their letters and shared fantasies. But soon Juliet's father (Clive Merrison) becomes concerned that their close friendship is "unhealthy." It is, but not just in the way he thinks.

The two girls' emotional attachment has turned incredibly intense, so that they barely think of anyone but each other, and the fantasy stories begin to seep into reality for them . Pauline drops out of school and stops talking to her parents; Juliet learns that her mother is sleeping with one of her clients, and that her parents are divorcing. Now she's being sent to South Africa, and there is no telling when she will see Pauline again. Unless they do something about their parents so that they can stay together... such as murder.

Peter Jackson kicks off "Heavenly Creatures" by emphasizing what a beautiful, in most ways peaceful country (via a cheesy 1950s documentary). But he rapidly shows that beauty is not everything -- the complex and beautiful fantasy land of Borovnia has a sort of amorality in its stories, that reflects the girls' own minds. Their mothers are problematic -- one is selfish, the other is controlling -- but the girls begin to see them as mere obstacles to be dealt with. Jackson doesn't just show what the two did, but showed why they did it. But even then, he doesn't sugarcoat anything.

Melanie Lynskey is excellent as Pauline; she has something of the look of both a child and a woman, switching between smiles and sullenness, depending on who she's speaking to. And the luminous Kate Winslet plays the somewhat devil-may-care Juliet, whose vivacity and charm overrule any of Pauline's reservations. "It's everyone else who's bonkers!" she says gleefully when Pauline casts doubt on her own sanity. The supporting actors are also good, especially Clive Merrison and Honora Peirse as Juliet's dad and Pauline's mom, who are both concerned about their children.

The dialogue is outstanding, both chilling and simple ("Our main idea for the day was to murder Mother"; "we decided to use a rock in a stocking, rather than a sandbag..."). And Richard Taylor's handling of the CGI and prosthetics is oustanding. One particularly vivid scene has a hillside transforming into an exquisite garden. And nobody except Peter Jackson could have pulled off the idea of including living clay figurines or four-foot-wide butterflies, but somehow it not only works, but adds to the surreality of the story. Jackson's unique camerawork is here as well; if you enjoy his swooping shots and close-ups, then this will be a treat to watch.

There is some sexual content, including Pauline in bed with a young man, and the two girls in bed with each other (where they envision the other as the guy they desire -- a very creepy scene). The DVD is pretty bare-bones, unfortunately, without a "making of" or director's commentary. There are some trailers for other movies, and the trailer for this one as well. (Which is not so amazing because it wobbles a little as it played)

While Juliet went on to become bestselling murder mystery writer Anne Perry, no one is entirely certain what happened to Pauline. This movie is frighteningly vivid, beautifully made, and exquisitely directed, destined to be a modern classic.

not so heavenly
While I watch alot of muder,mystery and suspence movies. This movie was an insight to two girls who murder. This true story is simply disturbing. Kate Winslet plays Juliet Hulme. Juliet and Pauline are selfish and cruel to think of only themselves and kill for the two girls to be together. Did anyone know that Juliet Hulme changed her name to Anne Perry? Name sound a little familiar? Well thats because Anne Perry is a murder mystery writer. What a way to channel thoughts of murder!!! Write about it and make lots of money. I guess since she couldnt just keep killing people for real. She decided to write about instead. Hey Anne, your one sick puppy!!!!!!

A Chilling And Suspenseful True-Story Classic
It still amazes me how Peter Jackson went on to direct three of the greatest epics in the form of "The Lord Of The Rings" that grossed a combined total of $3 billion worldwide when some six years previously directed low-budget films such as "Heavenly Creatures." They say the best things happen by accident (or is that just me?) and just two and a half hours ago I was flicking through the channels, looking for something to watch when I stumbled amongst Heavenly Creatures. Dubbed by my TV guide as an 'intense and atmospheric treat,' I decided to sit and watch it, if not only for the adorable Kate Winslet. By the end I was convinced I had just watched one of the best films I have seen in years!

In 1954 two girls brutally murdered one of their mothers in what still remains, to this day, perhaps the most documented and sensational murders in New Zealand's history. "Heavenly Creatures" tells the true story of this crime drama and highlights their strange friendship. If you think before you watch this that you're just in for another stereotypical blood-splatter flick then you are very much mistaken.

Pauline Rieper (Melanie Lynskey) is a typical student in a strict all-girls' school who is completely bowled over when Juliet Hulme (Kate Winslet) joins her school and tears up her pathetic existence into something radical and fresh. They have similar interests such as the arts, sculpture, English and the tenor Mario Lanza. Eventually both the romance and the frightfulness of it all reaches a tragic conclusion. In their all consuming friendship Juliet and Pauline create a "Fourth World," better than heaven (because it has no Christians), inhabited by the clay figures they have fashioned to represents their friends and where the music of Mario Lanza, the greatest tenor on earth, is always in the air.

The two girls' emotional attachment has turned incredibly intense, so that they barely think of anyone but each other, and the fantasy stories begin to seep into reality for them. Not even a four-month stint in hospital for Juliet can keep Pauline away. Pauline drops out of school and stops talking to her parents; Juliet learns that her mother is sleeping with one of her clients, and that her parents are divorcing. Now she's being sent to South Africa, and there is no telling when she will see Pauline again. Unless they do something about their parents so that they can stay together...such as murder.

Watching the film I felt a continual underbelly of lesbianism playing a major role. These suggestions are continually squashed, however, due to the times the movie is set in where homosexuality is an 'unnatural' subject. Kate Winslet is superb as the bright and luminous Juliet and with her posh accent, she brings a certain level of humor to the film that would have been impossible without her. Melanie Lynskey portrays Pauline superbly too, contrasting from the mature attitude of a fully grown woman to the sly grin of an evil teenage girl who knows too much. The films comedy moment can be cheesy at times, but are intentional in their positions in that they counterbalance the horrifying scenes. Many moments pre-horror build up the suspense brilliantly, then perform a sort of anticlimax. However, the peaceful and tranquil music that plays just before the brutal and obscene ending is obviously intentful.

The ending is what stays with the viewer most when looking back on the film The way Jackson directed the scene to be something truly spectacular was superbly pulled off. The screams of the mother and the cuts to the alternative-world made me want to cover my eyes in fear, but I persisted and watched through the horror. The dialogue of the film is brilliant, and only Peter Jackson could come up with the idea of life-size clay models that walk and talk. Six years later he'd be making something a lot grander. Richard Taylor supplies the CGI effect and is superb in doing so making for surprisingly life-like, realistic characters - remember, this was 1994!

In the end what you have here is a fantastic and timeless film that is perfect for college/University studies both in direction and content. What is most fascinating, apart from the real-life chilling theme that features prominently throughout, is the fact that Peter Jackson went on to become one of the world's most celebrated directors in history, whilst Kate Winslet went on to star in the most successful motion picture of all time! This is a film that will appeal to all generations (obviously not youngsters) of people with a thirst for crime, horror, blood, gore and fantasy. Don't try and ignore it - this film will make your head spin!

Absolutely breathtaking...
Recently, I was fortunate enough to have my fiance introduce me to this movie. Its one of her all time faves, but she wasnt sure if I would like it or not. Truthfully, neither was I.

Good LORD, I loved it.

Kate Winslet and Melanie Lynsky were absolutely phenomenal; the story was at once disturbing, brilliant, and cute; the scenery was breathtaking, and the direction showed that Peter Jackson was brilliant long before making LotR.

All in all, if you enjoy movies that make you think, you'll love this. I loved it when I saw it, but after having a while to process it, and mull it over, it's become an instant favorite.

This movie at times has a VERY David Lynch-type vibe to it, and as I said, will definitely make your head spin.

I dont think I could possibly recommend this movie more. SEE IT! ... Read more

Reviews (133)

Astounding
Directed by Peter Jackson who has newfound fame thanks to his work on the Lord of the Rings trilogy, this movie (his second, after Bad Taste) has to be seen to be believed.

Jackson takes the basic concept of the Muppet show (combining puppets and humans in animal costumes to tell the story about the action backstage at a popular variety show) but carries the concept to a sick extreme, creating a hybrid offspring of the Muppets and such schlock entertainment-industry classics as The Valley of the Dolls. For example, look at the absurdity of the relationship between Miss Piggy and Kermit the Frog. In the Feebles, animal characters eat other animal characters or have hybrid offspring. Characters have drug addictions, extramarital affairs, degenerative diseases, star in S&M porn movies on the side, etc. There is an amazing Deer Hunter inspired Nam flashback, a hillarious war between drug dealers and some entertainment bigwigs on a pier (which includes a whale, giant crabs and a giant spider), bodily fluids fly all over the place, a massacre ensues near the end, and it is all topped of by a "where are they now" type of ending as in Animal House or American Graffitti. Oh, yes, there are also musical numbers (I won't spoil the title of the best one).

Not as gory as Jackson's Dead Alive, but MUCH sicker.

Astounding
Directed by Peter Jackson who has newfound fame thanks to his work on the Lord of the Rings trilogy, this movie (his second, after Bad Taste) has to be seen to be believed.

Jackson takes the basic concept of the Muppet show (combining puppets and humans in animal costumes to tell the story about the action backstage at a popular variety show) but carries the concept to a sick extreme, creating a hybrid offspring of the Muppets and such schlock entertainment-industry classics as The Valley of the Dolls. For example, look at the absurdity of the relationship between Miss Piggy and Kermit the Frog. In the Feebles, animal characters eat other animal characters or have hybrid offspring. Characters have drug addictions, extramarital affairs, degenerative diseases, star in S&M porn movies on the side, etc. There is an amazing Deer Hunter inspired Nam flashback, a hillarious war between drug dealers and some entertainment bigwigs on a pier (which includes a whale, giant crabs and a giant spider), bodily fluids fly all over the place, a massacre ensues near the end, and it is all topped of by a "where are they now" type of ending as in Animal House or American Graffitti. Oh, yes, there are also musical numbers (I won't spoil the title of the best one).

Not as gory as Jackson's Dead Alive, but MUCH sicker.

One of the most bizarre, demented movies ever made
I've seen a lot of bizarre movies. Unusual, weirdo films are one of my biggest passions. I can easily say that Meet The Feebles ranks as one of the most bizarre, even downright crazy films that I've ever seen. It's about a puppet variety show, similar to Jim Henson's Muppet Show from the 1970s, The Feebles Variety Hour. It begins with a little musical number, "Meet The Feebles", complete with a singing hippo, bunny and all sorts of other creatures. Unlike the Muppet Show, however, Meet The Feebles is far from wholesome, as the backstage lives of the performers reveal. The boss, a giant walrus, makes porno films in the basement involving a cow in S&M gear. The walrus also does drug deals with an evil warthog. There's a heroin-addicted Vietnam Vet frog, a hippo with an eating disorder, a rabbit who believes he has AIDS, you get the picture. The film's finale must be seen to be believed. The hippo loses it and goes on a shooting spree while a fox sings a production number about sodomy. At this point, the viewer must think to him or herself, "this is one ... up movie". It will make you laugh, it will make you cringe, it will shock and disturb you, it will make you question the sanity of the filmmakers that made it.

The filmmakers who made Meet The Feebles, oddly enough, are now Academy Award nominees. Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh (director and co-screenwriters of The Lord of the Rings trilogy) were responsible for this sick little film. Who would have guessed that a mere ten years after making Meet The Feebles, Peter Jackson would be directing the greatest fantasy epic in film history. A grand epic completely devoid of vomit, porno and drug-addicted animals. Well, it's a crazy business. Peter Jackson earned himself a large cult of fans with his early films beginning with Bad Taste, a horror-comedy about aliens invading New Zealand and dining on the inhabitants. Meet The Feebles followed, and then came Dead Alive (aka Braindead) in 1992, a film that still ranks as one of the goriest movies in existence. These films cemented Jackons's status as a cult film icon. Now, added to that cult are millions of J.R.R. Tolkien fans, and soon Jackson may even claim the title of Oscar winner.

Anyone who was introduced to Jackson via Lord of the Rings would be interested to see his early films, but they should be cautious. He was a daring low-budget filmmaker. Admittedly, demented at times, he nonetheless displays a true passion for his craft. The title of his first film, Bad Taste, lets you know what to expect from his early films. They display a joyous dementia that is sure to offend prudish types. Those who get the joke however, will be delighted with his audacity and enjoy the ride.

Cult movie fans should certainly check out Meet The Feebles and Jackson's other early films. Just be sure that you know what you're in for.

Meet the Feebles
Hey, I was just noticing that of the two DVD's in question, the first choice is the one with better quality. That's the one without the colored lines across the front. An excellent dark look into the mind of Jackson. Even Elijah Wood like this flick. Chances are that your video store doesn't carry this title, but a speciality store like 'Suncoast' for example may be the best place to go. Buy this before you can't find it.

another cult favorite of mine
I could probably recite every part of this movie by heart if I wanted to. I have seen this movie literally over a hundred times, and I love it each time I see it. I love impersonating my favorite characters, like wyniard the frog, Wobert,Harry, Heidi and all the other hilarious characters with so many excellent one liners. Reading through the reviews I don't understand wy peiple are offended by this movie. It is just hilarious, and it really isn't even that disgusting. So many memorable moments, including the sodomy song( "I want that fudgepacker eliminated"), Wyniard's war flashback,and his numerous knife throwing slipups(...) Harry's vomiting incident, Bletch's drug deals.... I just can't give this movie enough praise. Very hilarious movie. Great to watch with friends at sleepovers over and over again ... Read more