|
www.kevacho.com
©2002-2024
Kevin Michael Vance
Writer - Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Go Back To Reviews
Title: The Fellowship of the Ring, The Return of the King
Director: Peter Jackson
Year: 2003
Reviewed: December 29, 2003
| Rating: |
|
 | |
| |
| |
| |
Four Course Meal-Highest Rating |
[Rating Definitions]
|
|
|
All right, I saw it, and I give "The Lord of the Rings, The Return of the King", a FOUR COURSE MEAL REVIEW.
What's to say really except for the fact that this movie was fantastic. The emotions were not forced or contrived, but real and honest, as was the humor and the danger. Peter Jackson was true to the story and did not readily insert his own ideals and aesthetics to such a degree that it awakened you out of the wondrous dream that is Return of the King.
This movie is good, and I loved it, you would have to… if you plan on dealing with blood clots forming in your knees and your ass becoming stone from sitting in the same position for well over three hours.
I have one itsy bitsy quibble… WHAT IN THE NAME OF SAURON HAPPENED IN THE SECOND FILM! (My brother and I go round and round on this, considering he is the biggest "Ring-geek" I have ever witnessed.)
Still… I strongly stand by my review of the second film, which irks and vexes me to no end because now, seeing as how I love the first and third film, I am forced to buy the second. (Mind you I still think The Two Towers sucks Hobbit's turds, but you can't have two of a trilogy, even if the second installment bites huge, fat Orc dick!)
However, Jackson did fulfill, and fulfill big in the third movie. Well done.
|
|
