A slightly medicore review here. Just to keep the praises in check...

www.filmjerk.com/nuke/article732.html

Another here:

http://www.joblo.com/returnoftheking.htm

I can't take him seriously. He hated FOTR, which is my favorite movie, so our tastes must be totally different.

Did we read the same review? He never said he hated FOTR.

"Sadly departed are the unspoken and nuanced moments that made “The Two Towers” a enormous step up from “Fellowship.”
seems to me like he didn't particularlly like it.

Saying "TTT was a step up from FOTR" is the same as saying "I hated FOTR"?

I don't know about you guys, but I love a debate about semantics. Oh, and rolling my eyes is fun too...

Clearly, this particular reviewer isn't too fond of this series of movies. There, that really ought to be enough about that.

OK, maybe “hated” is a strong word, but he certainly didn’t like it in his original review.

Wow.

Here I thought posting a rare mediocre review would spark an interesting debate. Heavens, I was wrong.

I saw ROTK at a , and I it – the filmjerk review, I about the that he gives, and say that he’s completely thoughts (especially to see the extended versions of for the trilogy to sense).

Of course, will just say; I don’t want panties to get in a bunch. I just was a well written review that . already has so many positive at the film…

That's a pretty rude post, as it basically implies that anyone that doesn't see the same flaws in the film that you do is a "Tolkien or Orlando Bloom" fanatic and that fans aren't "ready to accept" that it's not a flawless movies.

That's just arrogant and elitist. Films are 100% entirely subjective. You thought ROTK was good but not great, others will think it's perfect, others just very good, others will think it sucks. None of these opinions are wrong, as opinions can never be wrong. Sure there are some fanboys out their who will love it no matter what, and some haters that will hate it no matter what, but that is the minority.

Fixed.

My first run-in with the infamous Josh Hinkle... Wow, just like I pictured it.

And I wasn't trying to sound "arrogant and elitist," just honest. I got some "arrogant and elitist" E-mail about this thread, and was disappointed at all the anger directed towards me for suggesting that someone might not love the film – A “Bloom owns your a**” was thrown around, but how could you know?. Opinions are opinions, and I don’t recall suggesting that mine are more important. This was a forum for ideas and reaction to the film, and I posted my, I guess, harsh thoughts. But that little fact does get lost to the people who have been here for years upon years. I can’t compete with that.

You write: “None of these opinions are wrong”

Then why call my post “arrogant and elitist?” That “implies” you are elitist as well, Mr. Hinkle. “Imply” is an easy word to use, isn’t it? Shouldn’t my thoughts be covered under the “opinions are like a**hol**” clause of 1936? Maybe I used the wrong words to post with, but my intentions was not to harm.

If the moderator doesn’t like this thread (it’s ruined now, or was to begin with), I trust they will close it. It was not my intention to offend anyone. I apologize to those that were.

I also thank everybody for the obscenity-laden e-mails!

what the hell?

Engrish, peoples, Engrish!

If you thought that was a bad review, check this one out (it is for FOTR though):

http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/f...1501090200.htm

Yeah.. That guy is a moron. I liked Harry Potter, but it's not even in the same league as LOTR. He seems upset with the "ugliness" of the orcs. I guess Jackson should have prettied them up for him.

Some people have legitimate criticisms of the movies (though I disagree with them), but critics like these should probably remain silent.

Keep it real, peeps, aiight!

Here is the ending quote from the 2nd review, atleast he stated how he felt about the movies:

In the end, I enjoyed the film, but like I said earlier, felt like a lot of it just regurgitated what we'd already experienced in the two previous installments (lots of folks preparing for battle, lots of long gazes and poetic one-liners, lots of walking, lots of Gollum drooling over the ring, etc...), but also inserted enough coolness to amaze those who didn't believe that more "oomph" was possible. Now I've said it before but I'll say it again...these "types" of movies don't do it for me in the first place. I haven't read (or care to read) the books, so if you enjoyed the previous two movies, you're likely to appreciate this finale as well, and if you didn't, well...just wait until the longer ass version comes out on DVD in a few months and watch it from the comfort of your own living room sofa, your own remote control (with stop/fast-forward buttons) and your own schedule. Gondor!!

Full circle: 'Return of the King' partly entertains


Tuesday, December 16, 2003


BY STEPHEN WHITTY
Star-Ledger Staff

The darkest magic done in "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy -- now in its final chapter, "The Return of the King" -- is a perplexing act of vanishing.

Seen as a whole, the saga stretches like a grand medieval morality tale, full of good and evil, temptation and redemption. But divide it into equal parts and watch it separately, and it shrinks, reduced to mere, muddled entertainment.

What manner of infernal devilment is this?

Well, it's the new way of story-telling, and we only have the success of Peter Jackson's trilogy to blame for it.

The three parts of "The Matrix," the two "volumes" of "Kill Bill" -- directors no longer seem capable of telling an adventure without stretching it out over several parts and many years. What might be told in three hours is now told in four -- and then split in half, to stoke the filmmaker's ego and further fuel the merchandising.

Of course, Tolkien set the stage himself as novelist, with his original triple-volume epic. But even that was eventually issued in a one-volume edition. Besides, books are different from screenplays. They work in different ways, and their very nature requires different rules.


^what a moron
He really has no idea what he is talking about.