
One star Amazon reviews of classic movies, music and literature. Today we take a look at the Fellowship of the Rings (the movie, not the book):
I’m a big movie buff, I’ve seen Citizen Cane and I love Castleblanca, but I can not see why this film has gotten so much attention! It bills itself as a historical drama, but none of the history books I’ve looked through mentioned any great war or things like Hobbits or Elves. And talk about a long movie! They think we need another half an hour? …
I recomend Pearl Harbor, it’s a much more historically acurate and the love story is more believable.
Though the movie is better then the books, I would still rather go to the dentist then watch it again.
I can’t actually reveiw this cause I couldn’t stay awake through it.
The dreadful mismash could only be understood by Tolkien Twits. It is dark and vague and wanders around without any real thread of plot. This lengthy and slow tale is beautifully filmed but lacks any substance. If you have nothing but re-runs of Gilligan’s Island watch Gilligan. It will cost you brain cells but at least you will be entertained.
“The Fellowship of the Ring” was one of the longest and most tedious movies I’ve ever seen. I sat for three hours in a theater chair watching the most weird-looking creatures battling a bunch of other guys over and over. The Orcs, or whatever you call them, are really disgusting. There were too many names that got confusing. There was Aragorn, Sauron, Saurumon, Gondor, and half a million other names and places that got confusing. What a waste of three hours.
I havent read the books, and this movie was totally confusing. I guess its only good for people who have read the books… IN my opinion, it stunk!! You could not get into the movie, like you could in Harry Potter. I personally think that they should have made a movie on the Hobbit (i read the Hobbit)instead of the Lord of The Rings, because it would have been much more easier to understand by people who havent read the books… This was a major disapointment, and a waste of 3 hours…
This film is devastatingly disappointing. If you have ever read the book, you know how wonderful it is. The movie is a mishmash of Hollywood ….and terrible writing and acting.
The screenplay has very little to do with the actual story; much is invented (very badly) and of course nearly all that Tolkien wrote (character development, story, motivation)is left out.
The characters, so lovingly and complexly rendered by Tolkien are reduced to one dimensional B-movie stereotypes.
Gandalf is ridiculous. No power, no wisdom, no subtle grandeur. He is Shemp in a “Soggy-Bottoms-Boy” false beard.
Frodo is a perpetually wide eyed wimp devoid of courage or wit. Just awful.
The other members of the “fellowship” are rendered as idiots.
The rest of the cast parts are poorly written and even more poorly acted.
Lots of pointless action, none of it scary or exciting. Just expensive.
When given such wonderful material with which to work and what is obviously an enormous budget, the makers of this film should be ashamed of themselves.
This film is an utter failure and must be regarded as one of the worst adaptations ever.
I’m giving my copy away. To someone I don’t like.
This film, and it’s sequel, were a nice reminder never to beleive any hype in the media when it comes to movies, no matter how pompous. This film is was mass-comsumption, like a Big Mac. The characters were so simple and undeveloped, that the film quickly becomes boringly, annoyingly predictable, no matter what fight, fantasy ‘people’, or any other situation turns up.
Three hours! Zero character development and even less development of the relationships between the characters. Extremely elaborate setup for something (I guess this is the mystery), 2 1/2 hours of which (at least) was dedicated to the seemingly same dark battles with underexplained evildoers…
maybe not as bad as episode 1 in star wars but i just didnt like this right from the beginning.
do you really have to read a book to like a movie? i think no.
Why in the world this film is SOOOOO revered is well beyond my capacity. Too Long. Too much bad CG. Too much running from annoying non-plot driving “threats”. Villians that ain’t scary and a slow motion death scene the like of which havent been seen since B rated schlock. You people can have have your sad devotion to a trilogy of films that have more flaws than 10 Star Wars prequels. It is a sad day for cinema…I am only staying anonymous to avoid a hundred thousand virgins emailing hate towards me.
They took a good story line, and made the war scenes so intensely violent that young children in the audience were getting distressed by it, as was I and the group of adults I was with. Really over the top.
Definitely the most overrated movie ever.
One of the most boring films I have seen. I felt embarrassed sitting in the theater watching it. This film is childish, mindless and pointless. Old good versus evil blah blah blah. I think we have seen that before. Stay away from it if you want too see more intelligent movies out there in the future.
Heavenly creatures was great though. I can’t believe Peter Jackson made it.
I love sci-fi or intellectual movies, whatever that means. However, I don’t like three hour boring movies. I never read the books, which I’d probably enjoy, but this movie was bad. I saw it a long time ago, during it’s cinemtic release, not on DVD, so I have forgotten, thankfully, what the lord of the ring is about. I think if you where it you’re invisible for three boring hours and than everybody sees you, gets angry that they looked for three hours when they had not a chance of finding you in the first place and than you escape your impending death by putting credits up so you get a a one year head start on a bunch of guys with swords and shields.
Unless you are a big Lord Of The Rings fan, as well as big on fairy tale sci fi flicks you are going to fall asleep with this one. After an hour I had to shut it off, aside from the fact that I had no idea what was going on in fairy tale land, the 3 hour long movie just moves at a snail pace! This is a love it or hate it flick, there’s really no room in between!
This review is really a warning to anyone who isn’t specifically interested in that fairies, wizards and magic kind of fiction. If you don’t like that sort of stuff, DO NOT attempt to watch this. I tried twice and I just could not get through it. There were just too many little things that bothered me and that I had to roll my eyes at. The worst part of this ordeal is that the movie moves SO slowly and it’s SO long!
i took my young brother and sister(jack and sue) out to see this movie when it was time to go home jack and sue came out of the cinema crying and frightend the next
day sue told me that she had a nightmare and her heart was
beating very fast so i am not shure if
kids who are a bit sensitive can watch it
Lord of the rings, not my type. Fighting,alot of action a lot. I do like the actioning films but not this type. By looking at the box, you can tell what sort of film it is going to be. Glad i didn’t go and see it at the cinema couldn’t of sat through 3 hours. Too much fighting.
This movie, was the most boring piece of [trash] I’ve ever seen! The entire story was “good guys walk for a while, they stop, the bad guys find them, the hero is stabbed, good guys walk for a while, they stop, the bad guys find them, the hero is stabbed, the good guys run away, good guys walk for a while, they stop, the bad guys find them, the hero is stabbed, the good guys run away……” that seems to be the ENTIRE storyline of the movie. The effects are good, but good effects don’t make a good movie. If you feel you have to waste money on this, by all means, go ahead, but I’ll never watch this stinker again.



Comments
16 Comments so far. Leave a comment below.Wow.
‘Gandalf … is Shemp in a “Soggy-Bottoms-Boy†false beard.’
That’s actually pretty good. I thought most of the folks who posted these things were morons.
Heh.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
“The entire story was “good guys walk for a while, they stop, the bad guys find them, the hero is stabbed, good guys walk for a while, they stop, the bad guys find them, the hero is stabbed, the good guys run away, good guys walk for a while, they stop, the bad guys find them, the hero is stabbed, the good guys run away……â€
COULD NOT HAVE SAID IT BETTER MYSELF
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I love all the LotR films, though I have to agree with: “Frodo is a perpetually wide eyed wimp devoid of courage or wit. Just awful.” I almost warmed up to his portrayal eventually.
Also,”It bills itself as a historical drama”…Uh, what?
My SO hates the films, mostly because they don’t jive with his impression of the books. Alas! I am doomed to stare forlornly at my LotR Trivial Pursuit game as it gathers dust *le sigh*
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I agree with everyone. It was the worst science fiction, fantasy, historical drama, action movie where nothing happened that I have ever seen!
Would have given another star if they’d added an hour of competely relevant Tom Bombadil.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Why do people gripe about it’s historical accuracy? The book & movie are entirely fictional.
Personally, I enjoyed the movie. So did most of the people I know. It’s not exactly deep or philosophically exciting. But it was really COOL!
And I’m sorry, but I can’t remember the last time you posted a movie review about something you liked. I wish you would.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Is Castleblanca like Castlevania?
Like or Dislike:
0
0
“I’m a big movie buff, I’ve seen Citizen Cane and I love Castleblanca..”
uuuh.. … ..
….
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I might have been one of those.
Fake, plastic-looking, syrupy movie with bored, stereotype-cast actors that looks like something you’d see on a Saturday morning kid’s program. The book might have invented the genre, but the movie only celebrated the kitschy clichés that formed in the 50 years since then.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
My goodness, how easy people pass off innovation as passe so quickly.
This movie broke rules in cinema, had fantastic cinematography and special effects. The only reason it is long, arduous and syrupy is because the original book was just that.
And don’t get me started on how Tolkein treated religion and women.
From an artistic stand point – the movie is amazing. But Jackson was working with the story he was given, and stayed as true as he could to it. It’s not his fault that the book was an utter piece of pants.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
i can’t abide Peter Jackson’s taste. but the first of the trilogy was indeed the most enjoyable. i nearly walked out of the third movie when Jackson had all his actors s p e a k i n g … v e r y … s l o w l y … to show us how momentous and profound everything was (and add an unnecessary 15 minutes to the run-time.
and yes, Elijah Wood’s performance was abominable. Can’t fault Ian McKellan, though; anything wrong with the gandalf portrayal was strictly Jackson’s fault.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I don’t get this. Jackson was god just a few years back. No one spoke one bit of ill then. What’s happened?
Sorry, I’m a kiwi. He’s a bloody hero for stimulating the NZ film industry, and bringing notice to our country for something more than rugby and flightless birds.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
“Hate mail from 100,000 virgins” classic. And I actually agree, LOTR movie = boring and overrated. And I’m a kiwi too (and one who LOVED the books as a kid, but who has outgrown them – sorry virgins).
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I didn’t like this one either, though it was better than the other two. Just too friggin’ sweet and cute. Meh.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Abi, you beat me to it! I wanna see Castleblanca! Does Humpy run around and whip people while dousing them with holy water?
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Lol. I’m waiting for some moron to write about the lack of machine guns or light sabre duels.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
HereticChick, are you completely dense? You have completely missed the point of this.
Like or Dislike:
0
0