Dumbfounded by the critical mind

Rating: Null/10 (27 December 2001)

I won't bore you with a blow by blow account of why I absolutely loved this film. I am here to express some feelings concerning critics of the film and the specific problems they have with it, if I don't get this off my chest I will explode.
Before I begin let me give you a little perspective on where I am coming from. I am not the type to judge someone's intelligence based on the films they like, nor do I feel that my taste is the preeminent gauge of all that is right. Even when someone tells me that their favorite film of all time is Top Gun, Or Rush Hour 2 was the best film of the summer I don't judge, I just pass it off as "hey,every one has an opinion, they are only films and obviously these kind of people don't take them too seriously and have more important things to do, I think"
Anyway, the things I am reading in negative reviews of Fellowship of the Ring just blow my mind. First off one of the constant complaints I hear is that the action scenes are poorly constructed and filmed. I would never have the arrogance to make a statement like this unless it is truly a bad film or overtly apparent that the guys who filmed the scene just suck I mean can these reviewers even come close to making a film like this, let alone film an action scene, even in its basic form. My only thought as to why people feel this way is that they sat too close to the screen, this would cause confusion and poor focus. How can I sit there and follow the fights perfectly and just be amazed at the beauty of them and the next guy can only complain about how bad they were handled? It must be an American thing, no offense, like the fact that the FOX network had to have glowing pucks for their NHL broadcasts because Americans couldn't follow the puck, maybe its the same thing. So that complaint doesn't wash with me.
The other complaint is the comparison being made to every detail of the book,they should of kept Tom Bombadil or give the members of the fellowship more of a back story. Jesus Christ! what more do you want, why not film every page of the book verbadem, and we can all sit in a theatre for 3 weeks. The fact that Legolas, Gimli, and Boromir see more heart and selflessness in this little hobbit then they do in themselves or each other and decide to follow him and protect him in his journey is enough to give you a good indication of who they are and why they go, I mean they see the threat.Tom Bombadil for obvious reasons could of and should of been cut.Lets get some solid criticisms please.I actually heard a guy behind me laugh at how unreal the film was, like that guy could shoot arrows so fast, holy s**t,can you believe that? What a moron.
The film is flawed, but man that adds to its beauty, like little imperfections on a beautiful girl, gives her character and Peter Jackson has transferred the essence of Lord of the Rings to the big screen and was able to maintain its character and even intilling it with his own love of the material. What about Star Wars? That film and its successors have way more flaws then Fellowship, i.e "This R2 unit needs a new power converter" very poor dialogue, but Star Wars is a great joy and most people regard it as such. Fellowship is a beautiful film and unfortunately some people have totally lost that little child like wonderment inside them and let the dark side of their critical mind poison them, negative old b****rds they are.
It amazes me that a person can sit back and decide to cut up a beautiful thing like this, why, jealousy, self hatred? Even Ebert isn't immune to falling victim to his critical mind, his review just didn't seem truthful, I strongly feel that for Ebert and many others this film will grow on them in time, and when all three are finally viewed they will be regarded as they greatest fantasy adventure films ever made