Insufferably long

Rating: 3/10 (24 December 2001)

I will not join the parade of favorable reviews of this film.
Lord of the Rings was at least an hour too long. More attention should have been paid to tight, cogent screen writing. Moreover, unless one familiar with the books, the movie is hard to follow as the development of many of the characters in the latter part of the movie was sorrowfully lacking. Perhaps the film was attempting to take on too large of a project, resulting in a "classic" film for those who read the books.
The acting was rich and beautiful, especially considering the limitations place on the actors by the script. For the most part, the special effects were first rate. However, there were inconsistencies in the computer generated character size disparities. While for the most part the computer worked fine, at others it failed miserably. Far too often, for example, Frodo and Gandalf appear almost the same size.
What kept this from becoming a great film was its inability to appeal to all moviegoers with a screenplay that stands on its own without relying on the viewers' knowledge of J.R.R. Tolkien's works.