It's been 15 years since the Lord of the Rings trilogy ended, but we still can't get enough. Let's look at the stars who missed out on adventures in Middle-earth.
While Frodo and Sam edge closer to Mordor with the help of the shifty Gollum, the divided fellowship makes a stand against Sauron's new ally, Saruman, and his hordes of Isengard.
A meek Hobbit from the Shire and eight companions set out on a journey to destroy the powerful One Ring and save Middle-earth from the Dark Lord Sauron.
When the menace known as the Joker wreaks havoc and chaos on the people of Gotham, Batman must accept one of the greatest psychological and physical tests of his ability to fight injustice.
Director:
Christopher Nolan
Stars:
Christian Bale,
Heath Ledger,
Aaron Eckhart
The presidencies of Kennedy and Johnson, the events of Vietnam, Watergate, and other history unfold through the perspective of an Alabama man with an IQ of 75.
A thief who steals corporate secrets through the use of dream-sharing technology is given the inverse task of planting an idea into the mind of a C.E.O.
Director:
Christopher Nolan
Stars:
Leonardo DiCaprio,
Joseph Gordon-Levitt,
Ellen Page
In German-occupied Poland during World War II, industrialist Oskar Schindler gradually becomes concerned for his Jewish workforce after witnessing their persecution by the Nazis.
The final confrontation between the forces of good and evil fighting for control of the future of Middle-earth. Frodo and Sam reach Mordor in their quest to destroy the One Ring, while Aragorn leads the forces of good against Sauron's evil army at the stone city of Minas Tirith.Written by
Jwelch5742
The original design for the Witch-king of Angmar featured a helmet that resembled a bucket with a crown of spikes on top. However, after watching test footage, the producers thought it looked confusingly similar to Sauron's helmet from The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001). The redesign was made to pay homage to the Ringwraith designs. In addition, they also redesigned the Witch-king's flail. Peter Jackson said the original flail was okay, but he wanted it bigger. Weta workshop enlarged it, but Jackson wanted it bigger, so they made it bigger. In the end, it was so large and heavy, it had lost practical use for the fight scenes, in which it was replaced by a digital version. See more »
Goofs
When Smegol/Gollom is plotting the hobbits' demise by talking to his reflection in the river he coughs and dribbles. As his face is directly above his reflection the spit should drop directly onto it but it drops 'downward' as if he were upright. See more »
Quotes
[first lines]
Deagol:
Smeagol, I've got one! I've got a fish, Smeag. Smeagol!
Smeagol:
Pull it in. Go on. Go on. Go on. Pull it in.
See more »
Crazy Credits
Just like the two previous "Lord of the Rings" movies, there are no opening credits after the title has been shown. See more »
Alternate Versions
When Aragorn reveals Anduril to the King of the Dead, some prints of the film has his reply as "That blade was broken", while in other prints his response is "That line was broken." See more »
Just as Peter Jackson felt that LOTR had to be made as one large, three-part, cinematic piece, I decided to write my IMDb review of all three movies as a single, multi-part essay. Click on my screen-name and hit "Chronological" to view my reviews of the Fellowship and Two Towers. I make no guarantees about the quality and consistence of my review, but I do guarantee that these three films offer very high and very consistent quality from beginning to end. The acting, cinematography, art, and direction simply can not be beat.
Which of the three movies is my favorite varies with my mood and the same holds true for Tolkien's books. When I am immersed in the story, ROTK is my favorite. When I simply want to have fun with the whole experience, I love Fellowship. And when I want something intense, evocative and thoughtful, I go for the Two Towers.
Frodo, Sam and Golem are on their way to Mount Doom and their bodies, nerves, and relationships have borne the greatest burden on middle earth. The rest of the fellowship is rallying to the defense of Minas Tirith, and preparing for even more deadly battles to come.
The heroism and romance are incredibly moving - when was the last time you saw an entire audience leaving a theater after a fantasy movie rubbing their eyes? The sets are breathtaking - even moreso than in the previous two films.
The casting and acting are superb.
The film delivers at every level and is the jewel in the trilogy's well-earned crown.
Return of the King offers a resolution of all of the major story arcs in LOTR. As with the classic Tolkien trilogy, however, you may be able to predict some of what will occur, but never all of it and you'll never guess how you will get there. The same fatalistic and paradoxically unpredictable feeling of Tolkien's grand plots is present throughout ROTK especially. The major theme in ROTK, however, is the varied ways and means of heroism both intentional and unintended, and Tolkien's examination of sacrifice and heroism is as inspiring as it is subtle. Amazingly, it all comes through in the films.
Even more than the previous two films, Jackson and his writers took liberties with the story-line. Like the others, however, this serves the film better than simple adaptation from one medium to another. By reordering some of the chronology and adding scenes and plot devices which are consistent with Tolkien's world and characterizations, the film-makers actually do a better job of preserving the concepts and themes of the story than they could have with a pure adaptation. The lengthy epilogue in Tolkien's book is greatly reduced, reordered, and somewhat changed in order to work in the film. Some parts actually appear very early in ROTK. And some aspects of Tolkien's epilogue are disclosed in the Two Towers, though not directly depicted. But all of the really important components of the epilogue are, at least strongly implied if not well illustrated in ROTK.
101 of 126 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this
Just as Peter Jackson felt that LOTR had to be made as one large, three-part, cinematic piece, I decided to write my IMDb review of all three movies as a single, multi-part essay. Click on my screen-name and hit "Chronological" to view my reviews of the Fellowship and Two Towers. I make no guarantees about the quality and consistence of my review, but I do guarantee that these three films offer very high and very consistent quality from beginning to end. The acting, cinematography, art, and direction simply can not be beat.
Which of the three movies is my favorite varies with my mood and the same holds true for Tolkien's books. When I am immersed in the story, ROTK is my favorite. When I simply want to have fun with the whole experience, I love Fellowship. And when I want something intense, evocative and thoughtful, I go for the Two Towers.
Frodo, Sam and Golem are on their way to Mount Doom and their bodies, nerves, and relationships have borne the greatest burden on middle earth. The rest of the fellowship is rallying to the defense of Minas Tirith, and preparing for even more deadly battles to come.
The heroism and romance are incredibly moving - when was the last time you saw an entire audience leaving a theater after a fantasy movie rubbing their eyes? The sets are breathtaking - even moreso than in the previous two films.
The casting and acting are superb.
The film delivers at every level and is the jewel in the trilogy's well-earned crown.
Return of the King offers a resolution of all of the major story arcs in LOTR. As with the classic Tolkien trilogy, however, you may be able to predict some of what will occur, but never all of it and you'll never guess how you will get there. The same fatalistic and paradoxically unpredictable feeling of Tolkien's grand plots is present throughout ROTK especially. The major theme in ROTK, however, is the varied ways and means of heroism both intentional and unintended, and Tolkien's examination of sacrifice and heroism is as inspiring as it is subtle. Amazingly, it all comes through in the films.
Even more than the previous two films, Jackson and his writers took liberties with the story-line. Like the others, however, this serves the film better than simple adaptation from one medium to another. By reordering some of the chronology and adding scenes and plot devices which are consistent with Tolkien's world and characterizations, the film-makers actually do a better job of preserving the concepts and themes of the story than they could have with a pure adaptation. The lengthy epilogue in Tolkien's book is greatly reduced, reordered, and somewhat changed in order to work in the film. Some parts actually appear very early in ROTK. And some aspects of Tolkien's epilogue are disclosed in the Two Towers, though not directly depicted. But all of the really important components of the epilogue are, at least strongly implied if not well illustrated in ROTK.