The Lord of the Rings - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

The Lord of the Rings Reviews

Page 3 of 562
July 4, 2014
Many consider Ralph Bakshi's Lord Of The Rings film to be utterly pointless in the wake of the successful and popular adaptations that Peter Jackson directed years later. This movie does have its flaws, but it's visually ambitious and it actually does a fair job at squeezing The Fellowship Of The Ring and half of The Two Towers into a two-hour running time. Personal enjoyment will largely depend on whether the viewer finds the rotoscoped animation to be engaging or clumsy. It's far from Bakshi's best work, but this movie is an interesting curiosity to an enthusiast of either animation or medieval fantasy.
May 31, 2014
Watch Peter Jackson's live-action movies instead.
½ April 15, 2014
Prefer it to the Peter Jackson version. (sorry)
½ April 12, 2014
This film is, in a word, fascinating.
April 10, 2014
i have never seen this one anyway i will give it five stars because i know it will be cool
April 6, 2014
This is the first Tolkien film I saw as a kid in the 90's, my mother having read the books to me already. I loved it then as a movie fairly literally retelling a favorite story, and I still like it post-Jackson because it offers something qualitatively different to Jackson and satisfying in a different way. I don't think either film production completely captures the books, so variety is an excellent spice. The musical score is weak, but the artwork and many of the actors are fabulous (John Hurt plays Aragorn!).
½ March 25, 2014
It got about half of the characters totally right, but the other half ranged from "not quite" to "dear God in Heaven". Plus, the animation looks stunning in some settings, and yet hideous in others. Just overall, this movie is about 50% on everything.
½ March 17, 2014
I have the greatest possible loathing for live-action animation or offshoots of it but this film in all fairness is a really cool representation of The Lord of the Rings franchise. They stay really close to the books and it is very fun to see how much stuff Peter Jackson ported over into his version of LOTR.

Aragorn is played by John Hurt.

Anthony Daniels (C3PO from Star Wars) voices Legolas.

I also want to give a special shoutout to the dude who voices Gollum. He does a superb job.
½ March 13, 2014
Hated it, but to be fair I saw it after seeing the Peter Jackson Trilogy! Perhaps if I had seen it when it came out back in 1978, I might have been impressed by the now dated animation and special effects, and been on the edge of my seat, instead of bored out of my mind struggling to stay awake.
March 2, 2014
Great animation at its time, but it gos as far as The fellowship and The Two Towers and understandable why...due to money.
February 10, 2014
Nada muy bueno, nada horrible. El intento de adaptar los libros a una peli de 2 horas es admirable, aunque siento que pasa demasiado rápido. Como que te quieren introducir muchas cosas de golpe sin tomarse el tiempo de desarrollar. Pero se nota que Jackson se inspiró mucho en esta para la Trilogía.
February 1, 2014
Some really great moments but overall very forgetable
½ January 6, 2014
Under appreciated in its own time and dwarfed by Peter Jackson's epic trilogy, Ralph Bakshi's animated stab at the one fantasy series to rule them all is a beautifully animated rich tale that feels incomplete. That's because it is. It ends at the end of the 2nd book, The Two Towers. Return of the King, the 3rd book, was to be covered in a sequel that never happened due to disagreements between Bakshi and the studio. I for one think it aged well. If you are a fan of Tolkein's world or the filmmaker, of which I am both, you'll like the best animated effort of old J.R.R.'s beloved series.
December 22, 2013
Some strong things and some weak things.
December 18, 2013
Awful piece of work. Inconsistent and difficult to sit through
December 12, 2013
It's impressively animated and decently performed, but in the end, Ralph Bakshi's extremely sloppy take on the classic tale is far too messy, rushed, and illiterate to care much for.
½ December 7, 2013
(Upcoming Review) Rating: 7.9/10 Overview: I must say, Ralph Bakshi perfected the use of rotoscoping, but.... suffers to extremely floaty animation and totally eliminates the "squash and stretch" animation principal. I'm guessing that he wanted it to look as realistic as possible, and it does come in useful for quick battle scenes. Great Voice acting, interesting music, and a pretty good job putting two books into one movie and still be immersible. First version of the Lord of the Rings I've ever seen. It's slightly better than Rankin/Bass's Return of the King.
½ December 7, 2013
I LOVED this movie and it got me into the books.
the rotoscope treatment gives it a very "epic" feel and the wraiths are properly creepy.. OK, so it doesn't cover everything, but a great interpretation! :)
December 4, 2013
When Peter Jackson was told to make the LOTR in two films, shouldn't they know they already did that two decades before?
Still a really ambitious project cramming huge books into an animated feature.
Sure the screenplay skimp over a lot of details but with what they got left they did alright and never rush it in terms of pace.
What really weighs this down, yet makes it more memorable, is the overacting in a lot of bits. The animation is a real hit and miss.
Try to ignore that closing statement in the end and you would have had this be a two for one deal.
½ November 25, 2013
Not EXACTLY like the Peter Jackson series, but perfect for any newbie Ringer to watch! "The Return of the King" is not in this version, though. Just a warning.
Page 3 of 562