Fabulous

Rating: 10/10 (2 January 2004)

With more than 1,000 comments already listed here, I doubt if anyone will have read far enough to get to this one. However, in case you have, I'd like to point out two glaring errors that seem to be commonly repeated by those who wrote before me.
First is the odd notion that "The Return of the King" can be called better, or worse, than the other two films. It's important to realize that even though "The Lord of the Rings" was printed in three volumes, it was one continuous story. It wouldn't make any sense to read just one of the books, nor would it make any sense to write a literary review of just one. So it is with the movie. Comments like "this one was boring" or "this one was better" are meaningless. This should be considered one long movie, presented in three parts.
Second: This trilogy is a film adaptation of a book, and that book is considered an important literary work. So comments like "the ending went on too long" are ridiculous. The ending was faithful to the story that Tolkein told ... and in fact, there were things that the movie left out, so if anything, the ending could have been longer.
Possible spoiler follows, regarding the ending:
Some reviewers here suggest that the movie should have ended with the destruction of the ring, or with the crowning of the king. They overlook the fact that the story celebrates fellowship, and sacrifice. To deny us the chance to see the characters afterward, cherishing the type of closeness that such an ordeal fosters, would be inconceivable. And it is very, very important that we learn what finally happened to Bilbo and Frodo. That's the story that Tolkein told, and that's the story that the movie, faithfully, leaves to us.
Speaking of the trilogy as a whole, I thought it was brilliant, and highly fulfilling.