I would have liked a slightly greater emphasis on the feud/differences between Elves and Dwarves, which was an element of the book I particularly liked. And in the book, the feeling of fear and darkness and hopelessness surrounding Frodo-and-co's journey from The Shire to Rivendell, escaping Black Riders and so on, was a lot more tangible than in the movie.

The movie was good though; it flowed better than the book did, as it moved quickly, but didn't leave important things out. It also made the characters more interesting, except Sam and Legolas who were my favourites in the book and already interesting. In the book, Gandalf was this boring, bland, wordy creature who was just a source of wisdom and useful advice and always doing the right thing and so on - like, he was nothing but a series of wise statements. In the movie he was much more warm and interesting.

Legolas is COOL. I don't have to tell anyone who has seen the movie THAT. (He's the Elf. Elves are cool. With one exception.)

Galadriel! Aaargh!

Well, I saw the movie with Sunny. It saved the movie, I think - because Sunny and I kept up this running commentary through the movie (which must have annoyed everyone else!! - but we didn't talk *too* loud and the cinema had only a few people) making fun of it.

Anyway, Galadriel (the Lady of the Woods - the annoying Elf) was kind of insufferable in the movie. She was quite cool in the book, but... ehh. She was one of those elements of the movie that just required making fun of. In the book, you can take seriously people who say things like "you needn't tell me what you saw, for I saw it in my heart". In the movie, you just can't... she just sounded kind of pretentious.

Merry and Pippin were more intelligent and more cool in the book, but in the movie they distinguished themselves more; were more different from the others. I guess their character change was okay. They were never the most serious members of the party even in the book, and there were enough serious characters without making them like everyone else!

Sam was cool; I liked all the scenes between him and Frodo.

Frodo was good but I didn't like him sooo much. He spent 95% of the movie with that troubled/sad/afraid look on his face. I mean, you can't blame him but it comes to look like a permanent feature on his face. When he smiles at Sam at the end, it's like - aaaaah, another facial expression!

You know what I think woulda been a good idea? You know how the books are already sorta divided in half? Maybe they coulda made a movie for each half. I guess that's going a bit far but then they could really go all-out developing characters and keeping things in and so on. I also missed the absence of the songs. They coulda had three or four and made a cool soundtrack... I liked the songs... but it might have come off as just silly, in a movie, while in a book it's a lot cooler.

The film didn't drag on like I expected. Yeah, it was a long movie, but the time went quite quickly and I didn't get bored.

Overall, not quite as good as everyone said, but surely a good movie. Easier to follow than the book, but I'm glad I read the book first, to fill in details and understand it all better. In some ways (characters, lack of long boring descriptions) the movie is better, in some ways (tension, plot details and dramatic speeches) the book is better.

[following part written some weeks after the previous part]

One of the few movies I've seen twice at the cinema. The first time I saw it was a few months ago, just after reading the first book. The second time I saw it was a coupla days ago. When I saw it the second time I liked it more, actually. This is because a) I've read all three books now so I have a better perspective of the whole LotR world and b) I've seen it once so I know basically everything in it. That meant I could pick out details and focus on things that I hadn't noticed the first time.

Anyway, I really do quite like this movie. It does have one flaw, if you can call it a flaw. It's that it's very obviously the adaption of a book. What I mean is, most movies have a structure where they have a beginning, a serious of events, some kind of epiphany, some kind of conclusion. Everything is linked together. But this story was more linear - something happens, something else happens, then something else happens... they go to this place, then this, then this... it's a long series of events and places, rather than one central story. It definitely has the feel of being the first of three parts, and as such doesn't quite have the structure and feeling of most movies.

I don't mind this at all because I've read the next two books and know how it ends, and know that I have the next two movies to look forward to. But in some ways it feels a little rushed, that it doesn't cover some elements as much as it should 'cos it's trying to cram things into three hours and include all the important elements...

In particular, Aragorn was like this. They could have had him get the broken blade more properly... he was constantly making allusions to things and talking about places with strange-sounding names... throughout the movie he just kept mentioning all these strange words until I just wanted him to shut up; nobody cares; nobody knows what you're talking about... his romance with Arwen was a short interlude in the middle of the movie, just one of many parts to contribute to the aforementioned rushed/linear feeling of the movie... (Eg, if it had just been one movie instead of three, Arwen would have reappeared or they would have further developed the relationship, but since it was just the first part of three, it just seemed like a little miscellaneous part tacked onto the middle.)

I can not really tell Merry and Pippin apart but I suppose it doesn't matter. Heheh... In the book the hobbits were my favourites, being the only ones with personalities and who were interesting. In the movie it's the same. The exception is Legolas, who is just cool, but he still doesn't have much personality to speak of and he's too perfect. I'll just watch him for eye candy and 'cos he's cool, but not 'cos he's an interesting character.

Well, most characters are like that. What I mean is, they're good and noble and brave. But the only things they seem to say are profound statements, or wise advice, or... well, you know what I mean? It's like they only ever say things to help further the plot and further our understanding - not to help us understand them as characters, or to empathise with them.

This was a lot better in the movie. For example, Gandalf in the book bored me. Just plain bored me. When he died I didn't even care nor could I really understand why everyone was so upset. I mean, sure, they lost a good guide but it's not like he had any PERSONALITY to speak of. (Now that I'm rereading it I can see a little more personality because I think of him saying the things the way he said them in the film.) In the movie he was really cool. In the book, I barely acknowledged Boromir's existence, and Aragorn seemed like a tedious, boring character too, but they were both cool in the movie too. Gimli, I quite like in the book as well as the movie. But they're still not as interesting or enjoyable to watch as the hobbits.

I've just started reading the series again, inspired by watching the movie. I'm gonna enjoy it more the second time, 'cos I won't have to wade through all the boring details and I'll be able to look forward to particularly good parts. ^_^.

The coolest parts of the movie are the beginning (not the very beginning, where Galadriel-the-pretentious-loser is narrating, but the beginning from where we're in the Shire) and a few other particular scenes like the council of Elrond (Rivendell itself looked so cool!) and the battle in Moria's mines.

The hobbits are definitely the most interesting characters - by 'the hobbits' I mean Sam, Merry and Pippin especially, but also Bilbo. Frodo is cool but he's the focus of the whole movie so I don't have to take special notice of his scenes. (Also, most Frodo scenes involve him being serious, getting injured or having a serious, doom-laden conversation, so they're not as enjoyable to watch. ^_^.)

Examples? Well, all the scenes with Bilbo in the Shire were good... Sam dancing, Sam getting caught eavesdropping by Gandalf, Frodo and Sam setting off, Merry and Pippin running from the farmer with armsful of his stuff, Merry and Pippin trying to pursuade Aragorn to let them eat more, etc... even in the second half of the movie, the little scenes with the hobbits were what I liked... Pippin knocking something into the well, the hobbits 'fighting' Boromir, the hobbits determined to be part of the Fellowship, Merry and Pippin leading the orcs away from Frodo, Sam joining Frodo at the end...

Other scenes I liked were any time when Legolas is fighting... when Boromir died (because it was touching, not because I was glad to see him go... heh)... escaping Moria where everyone is jumping across the bridge...

So yeah. I'm looking forward to the next one! (Although I did think the second book was the least interesting out of the three... and the half with Aragorn and company was mostly quite tedious... so I hope it's good and they still have lots of hobbit focus. ^_^.)

I think I'd like to see the animated version, just for morbid curiousity... it sounds so bad as to be funny... I'd still like to see it with someone who likes LotR so I could pay it out with them but I dunno. I saw it in my video shop so I'll probably get it when I take back my current lot of videos.

Back to movies page