- Studio: New Line Cinema
- Release Date: Dec 17, 2003
User Score
8.9
out of 10
Universal acclaim- based on 1516 Ratings
User score distribution:
-
Positive: 1,366 out of 1516
-
Mixed: 27 out of 1516
-
Negative: 123 out of 1516
Review this movie
-
-
Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.
-
-
Submit
-
Check Spelling
- User score
- Most active
- By date
- Most helpful
- Most Clicked
-
LolitaJan 8, 20044Crying at the ending of this movie, pleeeeze? Sorry, not my cup of tea either.
-
-
ChristopherEMay 7, 20093Half way through this movie, my girlfriend and I lost interest and started talking instead - luckily, we were at the drive-in.
-
-
SallyL.Jan 1, 20040This film screams "OSCAR!" and it got annoying about half an hour into the film.
-
-
DavidR.Jan 5, 20043Much ado about nothing. Too long.
-
-
ForwegMar 5, 20040Tolkien deserves better than this trash. I miss you, Ghan-buri-Ghan.
-
-
CormacP.Jan 15, 20043It's a very messy, dull and unfaithfull retelling of a silly, confused and overrated book.
-
-
JRJan 2, 20040Peter Jackson has taken a beautiful story and ruined it. Lost is the scope, theme, and moral of the story. Changed are the plot and characters. Added is Hollywood sap and cheese. Sickening.
-
-
TacoM.Oct 9, 20061
-
-
RyanSAug 7, 20090
-
-
JamesP.Feb 29, 20043
-
-
PatrickSJun 22, 20042
-
-
IsaacMDec 18, 20070
-
-
KateKimJan 20, 20041This whole thing just doesn't make sense. 1 star for the pretty nice visual effects.
-
-
HarrietJan 2, 20042Extremely long winded and surprisingly boring. As far as I am concerned it is much overrated. Should appeal to children as the accolades it has received are not justified.
-
-
ArleenJan 4, 20042Found it very childish with redundant battle scenes. Not my cup of tea. Sorry.
-
-
RobertH.Jan 8, 20042Bambam BooBoo you're name is redundant and I have now seen all three sagas and it is not my cup of tea either. Too long for my taste and that ending, well I thought it would never end? But I am glad that the majority thought it was wonderful.
-
-
BassApr 20, 20060I hate all the Lord of the Rings films, there all pathetic works of cinema that should have never been made. If you ever see a copy of any of them on dvd somewhere, stop what ever you're doing and make every attempt to destroy the disk-you'll be making the world a better place.
-
-
MikeG.Dec 18, 20031
-
-
BobB.Jan 1, 20040BORING.
-
-
BobB.Jan 1, 20040BORING.
-
-
AndrewK.Jan 10, 20041Very uninspiring. I actually loved the first one, liked the second and now hated this one. What is it with sequels?
-
-
RachelW.Jan 17, 20043Extremely dissapointed as I was expecting to see an artistic masterpiece which it was not. Do not understand all the hoopla about this film. Below average and definitely about 40 minutes too long.
-
-
RichardL.Jan 19, 20042To call this the best film of all time is simply ridiculous. It is entertaining but way too long. Some of the acting and directing was atrocious. Too much emphasis on FX and not enough character development to suit my taste.
-
-
JoeB.Jan 2, 20040BORING and a massive waste of time. The ending is as predictable as a soap opera. Crap.
-
-
JawadS.Jan 2, 20040They say it's the greatest trilogy ever. Please! Save that title for The Godfather, these two shouldn't even be mentioned in the same line. This is a just a visual FX show folks, save your money.
-
-
WaltD.Jan 24, 20042Having seen all three I thought the trilogy is really overrated. I do not understand the ranting about how wonderful this film is? I found it very busy, loud and way too long for my taste.
-
-
GoliathJan 2, 20043Saw it this weekend and was not impressed. Thought it was boring to say the least. Not my cup of tea.
-
-
DwayneR.Jan 3, 20041Slow in places with a predictable ending. Too much emphasis on FX which took away from the acting. Overrated as far as I am concerned.
-
-
SimonK.Jan 8, 20040I only saw this because some friends dragged me to see it. Much ado about nothing, really! What's all these critics raving about? It's an average action flick at best.
-
-
SteveI.Jan 8, 20040ZZzzzZzZzZzZzZz, thank god this boring trash is done and finished with. I didn't think this movie would ever end. We won't have to deal with it next year. THANK GOD.
-
-
FreidaL.Jan 8, 20043Not my cup of tea either. The battle scenes seemed to never end and were totally predictable. Too much FX to suit me. The acting was at best passable.
-
-
JasonA.Feb 10, 20043It's big and at times visually thrilling, but even the CGI has moments of uncertainty. People seem to be blinded by the films size- anyone who really knows films should know that they get a lot better than this...
-
-
RogerK.Feb 11, 20043Not impressed at all. Too busy and long.
-
-
ArthurF.Feb 18, 20044I could take it or leave it. Not deserving of the raves it received.
-
-
SusanA.Feb 19, 20043Way overrated. Below average.
-
-
SerenaFeb 6, 2004011 Oscars? It should've been 11 Razzies especially in the acting department.
-
-
brandonbMar 27, 20043
-
-
DitchDiggernoMar 9, 20051This movie is horrible. To those who gave this film a 10, ah hell even a 5 or better, you need mental help! It is too long, pertictable, unoriginal, and yawns a'plently.
-
-
D.B.Feb 5, 20063
-
-
StefanMar 5, 20064
-
-
JacksonG.Jan 4, 20073Although it does have some gems, overall I'm glad that the trilogy is FINALLY OVER!!! I felt all three of them were incomparably boring.
-
-
JoeC.Dec 10, 20030Boooring crap. Better than TTT, but not as good as FOTR.
-
-
SammyK.Dec 10, 20030How is this movie getting such good reviews. It was absolutely awful and extremely tedious.
-
-
JDec 12, 20030
-
-
bwDec 16, 20030
-
-
BrianK.Dec 18, 20032The movie is way too boring. I almost fell asleep. I mean, seriously, the movie could have ended sooner but they have to draw it out.
-
-
SweetAngelDec 19, 20030So boring!
-
-
JudeT.Dec 30, 20033
-
-
TeddyB.Jan 14, 20041Is it over yet? Sorry, but it did not move me at all. Overrated terribly.
-
-
DetroitConnectionJan 16, 20042Perhaps I am in the minority here but this flick was too over the top for me. I do not understand how everyone thinks this is the second coming of Gone With The Wind. Plain and simple I found parts of it boring with poor acting and directing. Overrated.
-
-
TinaL.Jan 17, 20040The fact is the film doesn't deserve this rating. But it does deserve it because it is that overrated. I went in expecting the second coming of christ. What I got was an average action adventure.
-
-
DianeP.Jan 25, 20043Sorry Annette, we must have been watching two different versions of the same movie. I found it flawed and way too long. Way overrated in my book. To call this the best movie of all time does a great disservice to the all time classics. To be perfectly honest, I thought it was below average and thus the 3 rating.
-
-
PollyJ.Jan 28, 20044As far as I'm concerned this overrated turkey got 11 Oscar nominations too many. Can't understand all the hoopla? It was just okay but nothing spectacular.
-
-
MistressMalevolentJan 31, 20040Seriously, save your money and time!
-
-
CarolAnnC.Jan 31, 20043Just didn't do it for me.
-
-
LeighC.Jan 7, 20041This film is too long compared to the other two and the ending dragged on and on. The last 30 minutes or so could've been summed up in a voice-over epilogue like the way Fellowship of the Ring began.
-
-
TammyD.Feb 13, 20042Finally got around to watching LOR. I expected much more from a film that is expected to win every major award? Terribly disappointing as far as I am concerned. About an hour too long and just over the top to suit my taste. However, I can see that the majority of you compare this to Gone With The Wind? C'mon be serious.
-
-
DeloresH.Feb 15, 20040
-
-
TinaFeb 4, 20040Arrogant and egotistic.
-
-
JimL.Mar 10, 20042Derivative, no characterisation, maudlin, and why did gollum look like a rubber version of ET ?
-
-
JohnnyD.May 29, 20041Long, dull, extremely boring fighting scenes, and a stupid, endless ending. This movie is simply too overrated. People must have gone mad to really hail this piece of crap.
-
-
IllyaZ.May 30, 20051100+ Million Dollars = Good VFX/SFX That's about it; 1 out of 10. Unimaginative fools watch the film over reading the novels.
-
-
AlexC.Aug 3, 20052How the hell did this movie (and the others for that matter) do so well at the box office, clean-up at the Academy Awards and now rate within the top 100 movies of all time. People these days must only admire films which feature brilliant editing and sound. This was a torturously boring saga which I would rate on a par with the new Star Wars series. Don't waste your time watching it!
-
-
MarionmMay 1, 20084The music is the best ever for any relaxation therapy !!!! Its kinda like church MUSIC!!!!!! sadly most of these people think this movie is GREAT!!!! its aint trust me folks!!! It was boring and REALLY REALLLY CHEESY. It might have passed as a when-you-have-nothing-to-do FILM!!!! but ist just wayyyyyyyyy tooo long!!!
-
-
JohnS.Dec 13, 20030The worst film I've ever seen.
-
-
MattR.Dec 17, 20030Memo to Keith W: if you're trying to appear literate, do try to put together a coherent sentence. Tolkien as art? You must be joking!
-
-
JeffreyG.Dec 17, 20030I have to agree with Maria T. This movie is very long, and poorly acted. The books had a lot more potential, and it's unfortunate the way that Peter Jackson decided to edit the film. The previous two movies are great, but this one has very poor acting, and gets extremely cheesy in the endings...come on, let people leave.
-
-
MarcusB.Dec 17, 20031So this is what passes for great cinema? I suppose when a nation considers Tolkien to be "literature" then we're all in trouble.
-
-
MariaT.Dec 17, 20030What, is there some spell that makes people love this really long, badly acted, tedious and contrived piece of excrement? The only good thing about ROTK is that it's the last LOR film, and then we can get back to non-geek fantasy entertainment.
-
-
LegionODorkSDec 19, 20030
-
-
JoyceT.Dec 20, 20030A terribly long, tedious movie; the technology is wondrous, but the fact is this thing is freaking silly and the acting (with only a few exceptions) really sucks.
-
-
AntonioA.Dec 23, 20033
-
-
FantasyDec 31, 20032
-
-
HenryJan 29, 20042Much ado about nothing.
-
-
CaptainStarrFeb 14, 20043Disappointing.
-
-
DelmarH.Mar 18, 20040Best picture? How could a the best picture be a movie that gets advertised on pepsi bottles? Best Picture? Only in world that is so bland that it is evil. This is f..king garbage.
-
-
SeadN.Mar 21, 20044I think that academy awards are going too far about this movie, i dont think that the "RETURN OF THE KING" is so good to get 13 oscar for movie included oscar for the best picture. The Academy Awards are not what they used to be in 1950 to 1990.
-
-
KevinM.Jun 23, 20040That was an awesome movie, you can really attach to the charactors, you feel that you know them. The battles are great and also the acting. Overall, one of the best movies I have seen in my life.
-
-
PaulShoomanJun 23, 20040
-
-
PeterJacksonJun 23, 20040
-
-
JamesMNov 19, 20053What rubbish! After first and second chapters of magnificence and beauty, Peter Jackson inexplicably ruins the epic trilogy with a boring and overlong third installment.
-
-
T.M.Jan 24, 20054
-
-
MatthewP.Dec 15, 20031Painfully boring, depressingly overrated.
-
-
EricM.Dec 17, 20030How, how, how is this considered "good"?
-
-
MatthieuB.Dec 17, 20030I'm sorry, but since when did huge monster battle scenes become the standard of "good" cinema? Used to be that deep characters, good acting (both of which are absent in ROTK) and a compelling storyline were the norm. I swear that half of this movie is little CGI army men lunging at each other... OOOOH entertainment!
-
-
RickS.Dec 19, 20032
-
-
JohnD.Dec 21, 20031
-
-
C.B.Dec 27, 20032A long-winded, woodenly acted, suspenseless, humorless, violent, appallingly dull piece of computer-generated hype and hooey.
-
-
SimonL.Dec 29, 20030I loved loved loved the books and am EXTREMELY disappointed by this effort from Peter Jackson. It's basically just a special FX extravaganza. Did they just get an special FX company to make the film or something? Where was all the emotional, dramatic aspects written in the books? They have gone for the big FX film, and they got it. It makes a lot of money but it has NO heart or soul.
-
-
RebeccaR.Dec 31, 20030Very disappointing. I actually liked the first two movies, but this one screamed out "OSCAR! We want Oscars!". Sean Astin's scene next to Mount Doom is embarassing.
-
-
100The conclusion of Peter Jackson's masterwork is passionate and literate, detailed and expansive, and it's conceived with a risk-taking flair for old-fashioned movie magic at its most precious.
-
An epic success and a history-making production that finishes with a masterfully entertaining final installment.
-
100The second installment was better than the first, and this one is best of all. It has spectacular action scenes and imaginary creatures, and it’s by far the most moving chapter. The performances have deepened.