User Score
9.0

Universal acclaim- based on 1726 Ratings

User score distribution:

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. Jan 20, 2012
    10
    I am happy to see the awarness of the community. Reviews of those people who do not understand epicness and quality of this movie from some reason , are found unhelpfull. On the other hand almost everyone agrees with those who give compliments to this movie , peter jackson , and of course great tolkien. I watched whole trilogy many times and i can only say , that it is the greates trilogyI am happy to see the awarness of the community. Reviews of those people who do not understand epicness and quality of this movie from some reason , are found unhelpfull. On the other hand almost everyone agrees with those who give compliments to this movie , peter jackson , and of course great tolkien. I watched whole trilogy many times and i can only say , that it is the greates trilogy ever. By my opinion all three of these movies are best there is in the movie world. If someone hasnt still watched it , chances are slim but , he should watch it right away , not just this one but whole tirlogy. Thank you community. Expand
  2. Jan 9, 2012
    10
    You could easily tell the people that rate the film a 0/10 are either trolling or die hard fans of rival series such as Harry Potter and I pity those shameful morons because this film is excellent and a marvel at its time. When I first watched this film as a kid I have never seen anything like it on movie ever before. It was intense, it was interesting, the soundtrack is excellent and mostYou could easily tell the people that rate the film a 0/10 are either trolling or die hard fans of rival series such as Harry Potter and I pity those shameful morons because this film is excellent and a marvel at its time. When I first watched this film as a kid I have never seen anything like it on movie ever before. It was intense, it was interesting, the soundtrack is excellent and most importantly the ensemble cast was an absolutly perfect. My favourite scene was the council at Rivendell. It is very interesting how each character has their different opinion on the Ring and the best battle sequence was during Moria, of course the Cave Troll made it great. I personally praise the acting of Sean "Boromir Bean, Sean "Samwise" Astin and Ian "Gandalf" Mckellen I thought those 3 stood out because of how dramatic they can act without making a fool of themselves. When the film hit on Dvds and Videos I immediatly bought it along with the other 2 movies in support of the how inspiring and influentional those films were to me. Expand
  3. Dec 9, 2011
    10
    For hardcore fans, Peter Jackson's vision of the Middle-Earth may be a disrespect to the source material, but for me, "The Fellowship of the Ring" is the most faithful adaptation you cold ask of. Many people were bored by its length, but I found the first chapter of the trilogy an epic masterpiece.
  4. Dec 1, 2011
    8
    It was fine. I think it did get a little bit boring and it didnt peak until they got into Moria. From there and til the end of the film it was a lot better. The acting is ok, Sir Ian McKellen was amazing as Gandalf.
  5. Nov 19, 2011
    10
    An epic beginning, known for its impeccable sound, the script developed, very faithful to the book, good performances, a show well done, as I can say about the soundtrack, direction, costumes, makeup, art direction and visual effects. In short, an excellent movie.
  6. Nov 4, 2011
    10
    It's magical, emotional, captivating and epic. The Lord of the Rings is not only a literary classic, but thanks to Peter Jackson, it's now a cinematic classic. 4/4 stars.
  7. Sep 23, 2011
    9
    "Lord of the RIngs: The Fellowship of the Ring" may be boring for several people, but nevertheless it is a heart warming epic adventure that certainly is one of the year's best films.
  8. Sep 21, 2011
    10
    A masterpiece. This movie is a work of Art, and it portrays the great book series with excellence and majesty. It is an all time favorite, and my words fail to describe its magnificence.
  9. Sep 1, 2011
    9
    indeed,a fabulous work of art......highly captivating movie .....a great start to a highly acclaimed trilogy of cinema...im anticipating a lot to watch the remaining movies of the trilogy.....
  10. Aug 9, 2011
    10
    This movie is the beginning of the best trilogy ever and it's so good! It brings humor, sad moments, intense battles and solid performances. Every character can be appreciated because they are all likable. This movie is ridiculously good
  11. Aug 9, 2011
    10
    LOTR destroyed my life . Why? Because i will never see such a perfect film ever.This trilogy will hard find its equal
  12. Jul 21, 2011
    10
    This film is my favorite of all time. I usually never give a 10, but I'll make an exception with this masterpiece. All three LOTR movies are excellent, but this one is the best.
  13. May 27, 2011
    8
    My personal favourite of the trilogy. In large part I think due to the score, the strange hypnotic main theme works perfectly and may get stuck in your head. Fans of the books may be disappointed by characters that do not make it to the filmscript, however the adaptation is skilfully done. Because there is room to pace this large work correctly exposition is a joy and not a necessary chore.
  14. May 26, 2011
    9
    The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring and its sequels are the only fantasy films based on books that have not disappointed me. I know that that isn't really saying much with great disapointments such as the Harry Potter movies, Twilight Saga and Eragon (yeah, I'm young) -Oh, and the Chronicles of Narnia, but this really is worth watching whether you read the books or not. BasedThe Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring and its sequels are the only fantasy films based on books that have not disappointed me. I know that that isn't really saying much with great disapointments such as the Harry Potter movies, Twilight Saga and Eragon (yeah, I'm young) -Oh, and the Chronicles of Narnia, but this really is worth watching whether you read the books or not. Based on the first two The Lord of the Rings books by J.R.R. Tolkien it is a typical fantasy with elfs, dwarfs, wizards and goblins(called Orcs) but is boosted up to such an epic scale. Peter Jackson and everyone else who worked on this film really knew what they were doing. Now stop reading this rambling of text and go watch the movie. Rent it if you have to. Just don't let this one by you. Umm... Why are you still here? Expand
  15. Apr 3, 2011
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The greatest movie I have ever ever ever seen...The actors are all great...No man can make a film like this...I am waiting for The Hobbit...everyone is waiting for this movie... Expand
  16. Mar 29, 2011
    8
    I didn't read the book, but this was a very enjoyable movie and the least complicated Lord of the Rings movie. However, did the movie really have to be that long?
  17. Feb 23, 2011
    10
    The scene where Gandalf fights the Balrog in the mines is easily the worst movie scene of all times. All that money for CGI, and they come up with THAT ?
    The problem with that movie is: everthing is meant to be SO meaningful. It is like an actor laughing at his own jokes. The futile attempt to create depth and meaning in each and every single scene completely destroys the movie, and the story.
  18. Feb 1, 2011
    9
    A fantastic and magical voyage to the unique world created by Tolkien. I think this is the best movie they could have done with this novel; they have captured the atmosphere excellently, and you can see this concretely at the beginning of the film, in The Shire (if I just could live there...). The interpretations are very good, except of Elijah Wood... he doesn't do it bad, but I neverA fantastic and magical voyage to the unique world created by Tolkien. I think this is the best movie they could have done with this novel; they have captured the atmosphere excellently, and you can see this concretely at the beginning of the film, in The Shire (if I just could live there...). The interpretations are very good, except of Elijah Wood... he doesn't do it bad, but I never liked him at all. Great movie, highly recommended to the people that likes this... magical and mystical stuff. Expand
  19. Nov 27, 2010
    10
    Possibly the best movie ever. It feels like your seeing the book, I unfortunetly watched the movie then read the book, such a mistake. Visually stunning. Sir Ian Mckellen was brilliant as Gandalf, this movie is almost flawless. That is why I give it a ten. The fools who rate this movie low should be ashamed!
  20. Oct 30, 2010
    10
    Peter Jackson's first awesome fantasy debut in this brilliant masterpiece!
  21. Sep 2, 2010
    8
    **** yeah! This **** cinematic glory, **** Fun and logical, this movie is one of the best adaptations of any book; a true master class for any director that strives to transcend the source material. My fave of the series because it has the least boring CGI battle scenes and negligible portions of Orlando Bloom in proportion to the rest of the cast. Toss on the Jiffy-Pop and treat yourself**** yeah! This **** cinematic glory, **** Fun and logical, this movie is one of the best adaptations of any book; a true master class for any director that strives to transcend the source material. My fave of the series because it has the least boring CGI battle scenes and negligible portions of Orlando Bloom in proportion to the rest of the cast. Toss on the Jiffy-Pop and treat yourself (to the non-extended theatrical). Expand
  22. Aug 31, 2010
    10
    Its been a while since I read the book, but from what I remember, the movie misses out a few things. But it doesn't matter! This is the perfect fantasy movie. It may be a bit clichéd at times, but that is expected. Watching it for the second (or maybe third) time, I realize how perfect this is, and how every other movie of this genre tries to live up to the bar set so high byIts been a while since I read the book, but from what I remember, the movie misses out a few things. But it doesn't matter! This is the perfect fantasy movie. It may be a bit clichéd at times, but that is expected. Watching it for the second (or maybe third) time, I realize how perfect this is, and how every other movie of this genre tries to live up to the bar set so high by this movie. Expand
  23. Aug 14, 2010
    10
    I love all of the Lord of the Rings books and movies. Everything about them is absolutely stunning. They are timeless and will be appreciated forever. These will never be redone.
  24. SebH
    May 31, 2010
    7
    OK, so it's a pioneering movie with some of the best special effects in existence, but that all seems to be a mask for this film's numerous flaws, namely the incredible broadness, the truly awful scripting and expository dialogue ("Even the smallest person can change the course of history"), and I know it's a small-ish gripe but the soundtrack is TERRIBLE; alternating OK, so it's a pioneering movie with some of the best special effects in existence, but that all seems to be a mask for this film's numerous flaws, namely the incredible broadness, the truly awful scripting and expository dialogue ("Even the smallest person can change the course of history"), and I know it's a small-ish gripe but the soundtrack is TERRIBLE; alternating between overstated portentous and sickeningly saccharine. Granted, it's incredible that they managed to make a film out of the book, but the execution could have been a hell of a lot more understated and slick. Expand
  25. VictorG
    May 4, 2010
    10
    This is my favourite movie of all Time & by saying so i don't need to give any details or reasons.
  26. KenC
    Apr 25, 2010
    0
    It's generally accepted that when adapting a book you invariably end up removing scenes. A filmmaker's responsibility to the source material is to capture the essence of it with some respect. Jackson manages to only capture the surface layer of the story and by adding a good 100 minutes of additional scenes that are not in the book he lets the source down badly. Some argue that It's generally accepted that when adapting a book you invariably end up removing scenes. A filmmaker's responsibility to the source material is to capture the essence of it with some respect. Jackson manages to only capture the surface layer of the story and by adding a good 100 minutes of additional scenes that are not in the book he lets the source down badly. Some argue that it is a "reimagining" and that it was impossible to film otherwise which is nonsense. The added and erroneous scenes could easily have been replaced with some of the key ones that were removed. Tom Bombadil in "Fellowship" for example, and "The Scouring Of The Shire" which was critical to Return Of The King as you see how the members of the fellowship were so changed by their experiences. Replacing such critical scenes with dross shows a complete lack of respect for the source. In the end Jackson's LOTR is all sound and fury signifying nothing more than the filmmakers ego. What an awful waste. Expand
  27. RobbyZ.
    Apr 8, 2010
    10
    Extraordinary. Wondrous to behold.
  28. SamF
    Mar 23, 2010
    10
    This film is a breathtaking, awe inspiring masterpiece of cinema.
  29. ConnorM
    Sep 5, 2009
    10
    Simply; one of the best films of all time. This is my favorite of the 3 (and the other 2 weren't too shabby). Everything from the acting, to the script, to the action was just superb. Sir Ian McKellen was amazing and I can't wait for his next appearence in "The Hobbit".
  30. GavinC
    Jul 28, 2009
    7
    The biggest thing that ticked me off was the character of Frodo, who seemed a bit too 'I'm-so-heroic'.
  31. EricR
    Jun 16, 2009
    6
    It suffers from meandering moments that lag the story, choppy editing, and underdeveloped characters. But it somehow managed to hold my attention thanks to the amazing enthralling world Jackson has realized for the big screen and the flawless cast.
  32. ChristopherE
    May 7, 2009
    5
    One of the more over-rated films of the 21st century that owes it's success more to nostalgia than to taste.
  33. DudeP
    Apr 10, 2009
    10
    Prolly the greatest movie of alltime. The fellowship was the best of all three lord of the rings movies.
  34. AdnanA.
    Jul 19, 2008
    10
    When I watched the lord of the rings for the first time I was either 9 or 10 and I didn't understand a single thing about this movie. I was like why the hell is everybody jumping for this ring. Now many years later the lord of the rings trilogy remains my favorite! Story... If you get the plot then it's a story that's gonna captivate you even after the end of the movie. When I watched the lord of the rings for the first time I was either 9 or 10 and I didn't understand a single thing about this movie. I was like why the hell is everybody jumping for this ring. Now many years later the lord of the rings trilogy remains my favorite! Story... If you get the plot then it's a story that's gonna captivate you even after the end of the movie. Kudos to J.R.R.Tolkien for creating such a world and Peter Jackson for filling this world with life. Acting... Every character is special and all the credit goes to the actors. Each and every actor, has carried out their roles with dedication and devotion. No complains. Direction... I'd only say that no other person in this universe could have made lord of the rings other than Peter Jackson. Visuals... The fighting scenes are exhilarating! Visuals are one of the strongest points of this movie. It's not easy for a 3 hour movie to keep you entertained for long but this movie makes you beg for more! These movies are made once in a decade and to not see them is the biggest mistake of your life. Expand
  35. JaredC.
    Feb 14, 2008
    10
    Peter Jackson awakens us into this breathtaking astonishing trilogy The Lord of the Rings. Jackson views a unique conception of fantasy and engages us with plenty of detail. After that crap animated Lord of the Rings came out, I could never get the horrific sensation of bad elements in the film out of my head. But in The Fellowship, Jackson amazes our pupils and widens our hearts into his Peter Jackson awakens us into this breathtaking astonishing trilogy The Lord of the Rings. Jackson views a unique conception of fantasy and engages us with plenty of detail. After that crap animated Lord of the Rings came out, I could never get the horrific sensation of bad elements in the film out of my head. But in The Fellowship, Jackson amazes our pupils and widens our hearts into his beautiful imagination that will be cherished for generations. The soudtrack will raise your heart strings as every scene has its own heartwarming beat or song that brings each a favorable rhythm each time a new place in the story is discovered to develop more build-up in the plot and setting. The Shire, Rivendell, Lothlorien, Moria, and Amon-Hen each have their own soundtrack so when you think of that one place, you think of the music Howard Shore uses in that setting. The character development is tremendous and each and every image in this film is absolutely beautiful. Jackson succeeds in this brilliant and amazing picture and will now be defined as a master movie-maker. The Fellowship of the Ring is highly recommended and magnificent. Expand
  36. NiggA
    Oct 23, 2007
    0
    It sucked my left nut on the right side bullshit it sucked both the balls freestyle that shit and eat it.
  37. RandyM.
    Apr 22, 2007
    10
    An epic movie if I ever saw one. Captivating and just plain fun to watch. This movie is, indeed, art.
  38. MikeF.
    Jul 25, 2006
    0
    Quite possibly the worst movie I have ever seen. I mean this. Even bad movies are better, because at least the directors of those know thy're not making art. What sent this picture plummeting off the scale, earning a complete zero, was the impression I had that Jackson thought he was creating a work of art. What a joke. In fact, I wish it were a joke -- a bunch of one-dimensional Quite possibly the worst movie I have ever seen. I mean this. Even bad movies are better, because at least the directors of those know thy're not making art. What sent this picture plummeting off the scale, earning a complete zero, was the impression I had that Jackson thought he was creating a work of art. What a joke. In fact, I wish it were a joke -- a bunch of one-dimensional characters speaking a sort of bad-Shakespeare dialect. Good lord. Expand
  39. AnsonG.
    Jun 23, 2006
    10
    Wonderful adventure movie. Best ever.
  40. JeffZ.
    May 2, 2006
    10
    The whole series is the best, but the first movie is the most faithful of the bunch. a better fantasy epic than star wars. why roger ebert thinks harry potter and star wars is better is beyond me.
  41. OR
    Jan 5, 2006
    8
    The ratio of green to red ratings r around 7 : 3.. tats enough to watch tis movie, story is simple enough, not much use of a brain here to figure it out.
  42. Leo
    Dec 8, 2005
    10
    Amazing Film.
  43. JamesM
    Nov 19, 2005
    9
    What a magnificent and striking this film is. Masquerading as commercial entertainment, The Fellowship of the Ring sometimes borders on being art, and demonstrates was is possible when a truly brave filmmaker is given a good idea and a large budget. A must see.
  44. KatieM.
    Oct 28, 2005
    9
    The
  45. Pedro
    Oct 6, 2005
    8
    I used to think it was the best movie ever...until i saw part 3 :D. i much prefer the extended DVD cut, which really enhances the movie, bringing up to a 9/10 rating. But RoTK kicks this one's butt!
  46. Chris
    Sep 24, 2005
    10
    I love this film. In fact I love all three. I cannot fault them. The backdrops is fantastic, the acting is fantastic and the soundtracks to all the LOTR films is just superb. Its also so nice to sit down and watch a film that does have some meaning and one that doesn't contain foul language these days.
  47. LisaG.
    Sep 12, 2005
    10
    Wonderful, just wonderful.... even 4 years later.
  48. IceFlow
    Aug 23, 2005
    10
    I thnk it was a great movie!!!!!, and the fact that Orlando Bloom is in it makes it even better!!!!!!! The first movie was just getting the journey started. And all you guys who rated this movie below 4 can stuff it!!!
  49. BeccaP.
    Aug 3, 2005
    10
    Great movie!
  50. Jake
    Jul 17, 2005
    10
    Well, Ilze S., if you think there's no storyline, maybe you should pay more attention, if you can focus for more than an hour-and-a-half. Although the fight scenes, special effects, and costumes are breathtaking, the heart of the movie is the story, one of the greatest tales of Good and Evil of all time, ever. For that, we can giveTolkien ALL the credit. All in all, this trilogy is a Well, Ilze S., if you think there's no storyline, maybe you should pay more attention, if you can focus for more than an hour-and-a-half. Although the fight scenes, special effects, and costumes are breathtaking, the heart of the movie is the story, one of the greatest tales of Good and Evil of all time, ever. For that, we can giveTolkien ALL the credit. All in all, this trilogy is a masterpiece, and as a long time fan of the books, they've lived up to ALL of my expectations. (except Tom Bombadil, sadly......maybe they should do a T.V. series spin off!) Expand
  51. LlsE.
    Jun 18, 2005
    10
    The best film I have ever seen.
  52. Anonymous
    Jun 8, 2005
    10
    A great start to a great trilogy. Never bores you. Despite all the mythicism surrounding him, Frodo is a character almost anybody can relate to. The battles are great, but Moria's where it really shines. Scenery is great. Start here and work you way through. It only gets better.
  53. Mike
    Feb 6, 2005
    5
    I was sooo disappointed by this movie!!!
  54. chrism.
    Jan 28, 2005
    10
    Great, great movie. emotional and detailed to the last scene. I did not read the book, but this movie makes me want to.
  55. MattL.
    Jan 28, 2005
    10
    This is the movie that started the mother of all movie trilogies. Filmmaking will never be the same. Visually stunning, emotionally riveting, and dramatically inspiring.
  56. richardf.
    Jan 11, 2005
    10
    The new star wars for the 21st century. One of the most perfect films ever made. Screenplay, Directing, Editing, Costume, Casting, special effects all mold together seamlessly to create an istant masterpeice that is going to imitated for years to come.
  57. IlzeS.
    Dec 26, 2004
    4
    Not a bad movie, but theres no plot and storyline is really bad!
  58. SamG.
    Dec 12, 2004
    10
    I think the reviewers below me need to take another good look at why people say these movies are great. They complain about lack of character development and overused CGI, yet they are completely ignoring the HEART of this enterprise. Not once does Peter Jackson move a scene forward, especially in this first movie of the trilogy, without showing the characters; their feelings, hopes, I think the reviewers below me need to take another good look at why people say these movies are great. They complain about lack of character development and overused CGI, yet they are completely ignoring the HEART of this enterprise. Not once does Peter Jackson move a scene forward, especially in this first movie of the trilogy, without showing the characters; their feelings, hopes, dreams, fears and regrets. We get to see each main character conquer their fear in some way, in the face of grander adversity then appears on the screen more than probably once a year (if at all). Also, the entire crew clearly had a philosophy of not letting special effects overpower the heart of this movie. When something could be filmed without CGI, it WAS filmed without CGI. That's why, if any research is done, their were so many methods of making the hobbits look small, the most rarely used being CGI. Mostly, I feel complaints against this movie surface after the fact that it wins Oscars, as backlash surfaces against anything with so much success. Overall, this movie deserves the highest grade imaginable as it grabs your heart and doesn't let go. To Mr. Matthew A.'s statement he didn't fall in love with it, I can only counter with the fact that I did. But I think an entire generation has as well. Expand
  59. AlexM.
    Dec 4, 2004
    4
    Not only was I massively disappointed by this film, but having re-watched it several times in the years since I originally saw it, I have come to believe that it is actually a flat-out bad film. This entire trilogy has, in my opinion, been hideously overblown. This first film is clearly the weakest: a mess of oppressive close-ups, shoddy CGI and ludicrous sequences (like a lame scene in Not only was I massively disappointed by this film, but having re-watched it several times in the years since I originally saw it, I have come to believe that it is actually a flat-out bad film. This entire trilogy has, in my opinion, been hideously overblown. This first film is clearly the weakest: a mess of oppressive close-ups, shoddy CGI and ludicrous sequences (like a lame scene in which Gandalf and Sauron do battle). "The Two Towers" was not much more interesting, but at least the bizarre spectacle of Gollum kept things interesting. "The Return of the King" was the only one of the trilogy that I semi-enjoyed, but even that is a deeply flawed movie. I just don't sense any artistic invention from Peter Jackson. His roots are in schlocky horror films, and I think those roots are quite evident in the way he has interpreted Tolkien's work. I had not read the "Lord of the Rings" books before seeing the films, and afterwards I sought them out so that I could discover whether the books themselves were overrated or whether Jackson had simply blown the adaptation. I found the books to be masterful: captivating, imaginative and with a genuine sense of invention and wonder. It is that sense that is missing from the films...instead, the overall tone of the movies is reverential, hushed, quasi-Shakespearean and, frankly, boring. I agree with what another poster said: the first three "Star Wars" films are brilliant and far superior to these movies, and despite the current hype, I predict that in 30 years when people look back at the "LOTR" films, they will see that they don't stand the test of time. Expand
  60. MatthewA.
    Dec 1, 2004
    5
    I know that my rating will encite hatred from LOTR fans but I'm sorry, the movie, sans the special effects, did not make me fall in love with it. I NEED to fall in love with a movie. I WANT to fall in love with a movie. And LOTR was just a bad date to me. Normally in these big budget adaptations they try and be as accurate as possible regarding time, events, wardrobe, etc. In this I know that my rating will encite hatred from LOTR fans but I'm sorry, the movie, sans the special effects, did not make me fall in love with it. I NEED to fall in love with a movie. I WANT to fall in love with a movie. And LOTR was just a bad date to me. Normally in these big budget adaptations they try and be as accurate as possible regarding time, events, wardrobe, etc. In this case the totally forgot character development. I couldn't have cared less what happened to Frodo and his crew. Sorry fans of the movie I just don't get LOTR and I even love Sci-Fi and Fantasy movies. Star Wars (the first three, episodes 4, 5, & 6) kick this movie's ass all over Gondor. Expand
  61. a.smith
    Nov 18, 2004
    10
    The film was bloody brilliant also my kids agree to if we could we would of rated the film 20 out of 20. But them was say it no good what to look agin and see what thay like seen as people all have different points all things so if thay done like it thay should not watch in the first place.
  62. DanielleB.
    Nov 13, 2004
    10
    I LOVE THIS MOVIE!!
  63. RyanW
    Oct 20, 2004
    10
    I think this was the greatest movie ever It was so much better than that Harry Potter junk. this movie was so exciting and once I saw the first one I couldn't wait to see what the ending was. so peace brother.
  64. JaneA.
    Aug 8, 2004
    10
    I love the Lord of the Rings films (and books). See the extended editions.
  65. HarrisonB.
    Aug 8, 2004
    9
    I've never read the books before, so I really didn't want to see this. But when I saw it, I loved it. It is so mesmorizing. Effects are one of the best. Loved the prologue, and loved the characters. Especially Aragorn, Legolas, and the hobbits. Gimli was good. The only thing I thought was a little weird was the ending. But I must say I am very dissapointed with some of the I've never read the books before, so I really didn't want to see this. But when I saw it, I loved it. It is so mesmorizing. Effects are one of the best. Loved the prologue, and loved the characters. Especially Aragorn, Legolas, and the hobbits. Gimli was good. The only thing I thought was a little weird was the ending. But I must say I am very dissapointed with some of the reviews that gave this movie a bad rating. And who ever did, this is a tip, IT'S?A?MOVIE!!!!!! You don't have to hate it because it's different from the book. It's still a great movie. Very good movie. Expand
  66. AndrewM.
    Jul 14, 2004
    9
    I haven't read the books...so I can only comment on what I saw and what I experienced when watching this film. And I will keep it short... This is grand filmmaking in the utmost sense. Jackson and co. know and use their tools so adriotly, so passionately, that they have created not just a film but a work of art. It truly is stunning! The story at times is a little slow, but that is I haven't read the books...so I can only comment on what I saw and what I experienced when watching this film. And I will keep it short... This is grand filmmaking in the utmost sense. Jackson and co. know and use their tools so adriotly, so passionately, that they have created not just a film but a work of art. It truly is stunning! The story at times is a little slow, but that is only a reflection of the depth of Tolkien's novels, and also the knowledge of the filmmakers in depicting what they believe important for the film to work, and discarding what is not needed. The slower parts are there for a reason and actually enhance the overall experience. As for the action/war scenes, they are simply mindblowing! If anybody is not satisfied or impressed (if not astonished) with the visuals and sound recording in these scenes, they are never going to be. It just doesn't get any better than this! It's not a film intended for a once-only viewing; there is so much more to glean and sop up here. On a final note, one of the most impressive things about this film is that it works so effectively on it's own, even though it is an adapted work from a trilogy. Doesn't get a 10 only because one of the sequels may be better...though I don't know how! Expand
  67. BenjaminA.
    Jun 17, 2004
    10
    One of the greatest movies of all time.
  68. BoogerSnot
    Apr 27, 2004
    10
    Some snooty people have given this movie a zero! Which is very uncalled for! I think you people have PMS! Give it another chance! Yes I do have reason to give it a ten! For people who think I'm just shooting the breeze. It had amazing effects that people worked hard on to impress you! Not for you to just sit there and critize. The acting was awesome, it had a good mix of actors. I Some snooty people have given this movie a zero! Which is very uncalled for! I think you people have PMS! Give it another chance! Yes I do have reason to give it a ten! For people who think I'm just shooting the breeze. It had amazing effects that people worked hard on to impress you! Not for you to just sit there and critize. The acting was awesome, it had a good mix of actors. I think its terrible to give this movie a zero! (Although I did have a problem with the fact that Arwen stole Glorfindell's part.) Expand
  69. BritneyB.
    Apr 19, 2004
    10
    Excellent. One of the best fantasies of all time. Peter Jackson & cast/crew have turned J.R.R. Tolkien's book into a fantastic movie.
  70. JoshM.
    Apr 17, 2004
    10
    Excellent! A truly amazing, captivating adventure. One of the greatest movies of all time!
  71. CameronS.
    Mar 31, 2004
    9
    This movie was a classic. peter jackson has taken a book and turned it into a masterpiece!
  72. JohnO.
    Mar 10, 2004
    10
    This might just as well be the the best film ever made. Setting a new standard for motion picture, this is one of those movies that will become a classic, just like Jaws, Psycho and Raiders of the Lost Ark. Except that this one's better. Much better.
  73. Forweg
    Mar 5, 2004
    0
    Hollywood trash. Please read the books and never watch this garbage. At least they didn't ruin Tom Bombadil's image.
  74. LanceE.
    Feb 16, 2004
    6
    -Not a total dissapointment but nontheless, overrated. -The Pros: -Ian McKellen and Viggo are rather apt for their roles. The music is epic and exhilarating. The scenery of New Zealand is wonderfully captured. There are some nice battle sequences. -The cons: Firstly, it is not very true to the novel-counterparts, as many have pointed out. In the novels the characters lived and breathed. -Not a total dissapointment but nontheless, overrated. -The Pros: -Ian McKellen and Viggo are rather apt for their roles. The music is epic and exhilarating. The scenery of New Zealand is wonderfully captured. There are some nice battle sequences. -The cons: Firstly, it is not very true to the novel-counterparts, as many have pointed out. In the novels the characters lived and breathed. In this, the heroes have been twisted to suit Jackson's need to make them more "bigger" than the actually are. What this means is that the characters in the novels are deeply flaws, even great Gandalf. In the movies they are much more grand. This is mostly because the movie has been made more action-oriented than the novels. As Jin C said, "Jackson approaches the film DEATHLY AFRAID that he will bore someone. Many scenes from the book are re-imagined for excitement's sake but it makes for an altogether different experience than that conveyed by the original story." -The characters have surely been slaughtered, made more epic. -Everyone says the special effects are great, but they're decent. Jackson and team make the scenes very dark, to hide the need for detail in the cgi. Monsters move unrealistically and look plastic. The point is, you can easily tell that the scenes inteded to look real, look fake. As F. Scott Fitzgerald said about the Thirties is true of this movie and its sequels, "the most expensive orgy in history". -As for those who say this movie has no plot, no, it does have a plot, and its a good one. Well, the book has a plot and the movie doesn't carry it out well. The problem is in the book we feel for the characters, we get much more information on the situation than the movie can ever give, and the narrator acts as a guide. That is why the movie seems lacking in plot, because LOTR is meant to be a novel, not a movie. -Jackson has royally screwed up by putting in his own scenes, altering others, and totally removing some. So if you got a problem with plot, don't blame Tolkein, blame the director. -And yes, the ending did suck because it really didn't end. For those of you who say this is a trilogy and it's supposed to make you anticipate the next movie, you're wrong. Firstly, it ended on a poor note--not at all making me anticipate the next movie. Secondly, the LOTR books aren't a trilogy, they're one novel. Tolkien has said this himself. Don't believe me? Read the novels. Book 1 ends and Book 2 picks up not days or hours afterward, but mere seconds. That's why the FOTR's ending is poor, because it was meant to be read one after another--and the movies can't do that. -Other things: Arwen has been included as an imporant character in this. Why? Because they got an big-shot actress to play her, and not wanting to let the money go to waste, they gave her additional scenes and a love-subplot with Aragorn, which is only mentioned in the notes section of the book. -With this comes another problem. People say a 400+ page book is hard to convey in movie form, but guess what? Jackson adds his own scenes to make it even longer. Besides, the book focuses heavily on describing every little detail in the surroundings; it is not really longer than 250+ without description. (Since the movie doesn't describe anything, it's free from time constraints) -Also, for those who think Jackons is the greatest filmmaker of all time because of the LOTR series, think again. What makes him the greatest director? The fact that he already had a whole story on his hands complete in excruciating detail, with plot and characters already mapped out? Or the fact that the script was already 99% complete? Or maybe the locales which were so vividly described in the novels or the pictures that Tolkien drew his backgrounds. Yeah, I'm sure Jackson was stumped when begining this series. -Yes, he has dedicated about a decade of his life to this series, and it does have its merits, and I'm sure he DID work hard; but what do you expect from a trilogy? Movies take from 2-3 years, so what's the big deal? Lucas has been working on StarWars from 1977 to the present. -Summary: Good in some respects, but pretty bad in others. Too long, decent as a standalone movie, and terrible as a rendition of the book. Much too over-hyped. This is not Tolkien's LOTR, it is Peter Jackon's LOTR. Expand
  75. MikeC.
    Feb 7, 2004
    10
    This is the best of three, if you ask me. The strong story more than makes up for the less epic battle scenes. Here the ring is sinister and menacing and the quest to destroy it means something. In addition the story is much stronger and better written than in the sequels.
  76. MoviemanMaxdawg
    Jan 26, 2004
    0
    I must say that I watch films all the darn time, and I know a good one when I see it. This was not one. The movie will delight two groups. Those who are either so amazed with the wonderful eye candy that the film is full of that they don't care that the story is unengaging and simplistically boring, or those who have read the book and are so happy to see their fictional little I must say that I watch films all the darn time, and I know a good one when I see it. This was not one. The movie will delight two groups. Those who are either so amazed with the wonderful eye candy that the film is full of that they don't care that the story is unengaging and simplistically boring, or those who have read the book and are so happy to see their fictional little friends played out on the screen. I don't fit into these groups. Let me just say that a properly used battle would be something more like what you saw in The Last Samurai where the battles were there as an element of the plot, not a relief from the lack of it. Expand
  77. MartinG.
    Dec 18, 2003
    10
    Great movie, great direction, great photography. Outstanding and amusing from the first minute. The Best: the music and the landscapes, also Sir Ian´s McKellen´s performance The Worst: maybe the end, but it is reasonable because it´s the first movie of the trilogy.
  78. Chickenmouth
    Dec 15, 2003
    10
    I realize this isn't a forum, but seriously... "Worse, everything here is a rudimentary sword/sorcery cliche" Tolkien was one of the first fantasy writers and they weren't cliches when he wrote them... but Peter Jackson's done a great job adapting and this is one of the best movies ever made, I think.
  79. JonasM.
    Dec 15, 2003
    10
    A true masterpiece!
  80. ElendilA.
    Dec 12, 2003
    10
    Wonderful!!!!!
  81. J
    Dec 12, 2003
    0
    All of these movies are no good at all! It's just one gigantic battle scene, that is boring after about 1 minute. Everything is too weird with all these hobbits and dwarves and wizards and magical people that don't exist. All of this is too fake and I can't believe that so many people love these worthless movies so much. How can you sit through 3 straight hours of junk like that?
  82. ChadG.
    Dec 10, 2003
    10
    A masterpiece. The second best film of the trilogy after the miracle that is ROTK.
  83. Starfox
    Dec 10, 2003
    10
    Quite simply one of the greatest films ever made. Slightly better than part two. Now bring on number three!
  84. JohnnyBlaze
    Nov 29, 2003
    10
    This is a marvel in modern moviemaking. Anyone who couldn't find this movie entertaing needs to develop a little something called IMAGINATION!!!!! No story?? Give me a break, there is a reason that these stories are some of the most famous, and best-selling books of all-time. Peter Jackson has done more than an admirable job of bringing the story to the big screen , and these movies This is a marvel in modern moviemaking. Anyone who couldn't find this movie entertaing needs to develop a little something called IMAGINATION!!!!! No story?? Give me a break, there is a reason that these stories are some of the most famous, and best-selling books of all-time. Peter Jackson has done more than an admirable job of bringing the story to the big screen , and these movies will go down in histroy as cinema classics. Enough said!!! Expand
  85. Corey
    Nov 28, 2003
    10
    If there ever was a movie that i would marry this would be it. I love this movie. The greatest movie ever made. Overwhelming!! Awe inspiring!!! mocostrulating!!! hapervestulating!!! I'm making up words because there are none that exist that can describe this movie.
  86. JazG.
    Oct 25, 2003
    10
    An incredible achievement in filmmaking.
  87. BengerH.
    Oct 1, 2003
    10
    What can i say about the lord of the rings, everything! It had action, comedy, suspence, and more. Peter Jackson made a great novel an even better. Elijah Wood, Orlando bloom, and more made the move great with their talents. This movie we make u belif that it is true becase of the plot, setting, and the great battle scenes. I've watched this movie atleast 30 times and it is still What can i say about the lord of the rings, everything! It had action, comedy, suspence, and more. Peter Jackson made a great novel an even better. Elijah Wood, Orlando bloom, and more made the move great with their talents. This movie we make u belif that it is true becase of the plot, setting, and the great battle scenes. I've watched this movie atleast 30 times and it is still exiting. IF u haven't seen this movie, then u have not lived. See the movie all ur friends r talking about and see the two suspensful sequels!!! Expand
  88. YoonMinC.
    Sep 26, 2003
    4
    Maybe the book is a literary classic but I suspect this movie left out everything except the violence. Worse, everything here is a rudimentary sword/sorcery cliche, the special effects are murky, and the characters only frown, growl, or sweat. The pointyeared archer is handsome and dashing, and there are a couple of impressive images, but overall you're better off playing with your Maybe the book is a literary classic but I suspect this movie left out everything except the violence. Worse, everything here is a rudimentary sword/sorcery cliche, the special effects are murky, and the characters only frown, growl, or sweat. The pointyeared archer is handsome and dashing, and there are a couple of impressive images, but overall you're better off playing with your Playstation instead. Expand
  89. KeithE.
    Sep 20, 2003
    10
    The first installment of the classic series the Lord Of The Rings was cinematically beautiful and awe inspiring. The battle scenes were very enjoyable. The creatures of Tolkien's world were well portrayed and believable. I would have chosen someone other than Elijah Wood to portray Froto, but Wood played his part well. Fabulous movie and left most viewers awaiting more.
  90. LivT.
    Sep 11, 2003
    10
    I think one word could describe this movie- BEAUTIFUL. Andrew J., I'm sorry you thought the movie was boring, but then again, why should anyone who hasn't seen this movie trust a reviewer who can't even spell "wasn't" right?
  91. MichaelR.
    Sep 8, 2003
    10
    Defines the fantasy genre. Possibly the best movie of this type ever made, and benefits from some careful pruning of Tolkien's overly long narrative by Jackson. One unavoidable drawback: my wife had a difficult time following, having never read the book.
  92. AndrewJ.
    Aug 26, 2003
    7
    This movie was really boring. it wastn the best i would expect. i thought that it would shock me out of my seat but no it didnt i fell asleep. Untill the ending. That was ok.
  93. raVen
    Jul 19, 2003
    10
    Beautifully done--Tolkien was not betrayed. Abridged, yes, but never betrayed. Beyond the endless eyecandy, what I loved most was that it wasn't made specifically for the large segment of our population that would rather watch a movie than read the great book it was based on. "Fellowship" has action and swordplay, but doesn't depend on them. The characters are fantastical, but Beautifully done--Tolkien was not betrayed. Abridged, yes, but never betrayed. Beyond the endless eyecandy, what I loved most was that it wasn't made specifically for the large segment of our population that would rather watch a movie than read the great book it was based on. "Fellowship" has action and swordplay, but doesn't depend on them. The characters are fantastical, but not unreal. It's a special effects gem that isn't dumb. And this one's only the beginning... Expand
  94. Sammiv.
    Jun 24, 2003
    10
    This was a great movie. it has become one of my personal favorites!
  95. GaladrielL.
    Jun 13, 2003
    10
    Superb movie. Beautiful, moving, and fast-paced.
  96. NathanH.
    May 14, 2003
    10
    This is the best movie ever made, the only other movie that comes close to it is The Two Towers.
  97. PederD.
    May 2, 2003
    10
    Best movie ever!!!
  98. LindaL.
    Apr 30, 2003
    9
    Nearly perfect. This movie takes you into middle earth and leaves you begging for the next installment.
  99. JoelA.
    Apr 22, 2003
    9
    A great movie with Frodo and all.
  100. SamanthaH.
    Apr 13, 2003
    10
    All the peps worry cool and frodo wasthe coolest.
Metascore
92

Universal acclaim - based on 34 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 33 out of 34
  2. Negative: 0 out of 34
  1. 100
    I see it as nearly perfect: It's one of the best fantasy pictures ever made.
  2. An extraordinary work, grandly conceived, brilliantly executed and wildly entertaining. It's a hobbit's dream, a wizard's delight. And, of course, it's only the beginning.
  3. Above all, Jackson evokes an almost palpable sense of the will to power trapped within the ring. Without this evocation of the ring's insidious ability to sniff out the potential for corruption and capitalize on it, the entire enterprise would be precious drivel.