I'm sensing some patterns amongst the negative reviews...

Rating: 10/10 (18 June 2018)

Take your time to read this; I think you will find it useful.
I watched ROTK while on a day-per-movie marathon of the LOTR trilogy. The only time I had come upon it before was having watched the fellowship at the age of 9; but MY GOD, was it worth going through.
My favourite film before seeing this was The Shawshank Redemption. While I'm not a very critical person, Shawshank was a film in which I could see where it's cinematic excellence comes from. On the other hand, The Godfather was the film I most couldn't understand the love for; it seriously has not aged well, and I think my stance on it is the same as those of the critics who say this film has some serious critical issues.
However, I still don't understand those people who like the first two but dislike this one; there is no doubt that it is the strongest one, even from a critical viewpoint; not a lot really happens in the first one; it follows linearly danger after danger, Balrog after the weird creature in the lake, and yet some people are saying that is the best. ROTK, however, has some epic fight sequences, amazing character development, and the most incredible climax scene I have ever watched.
Those who are wondering about the title of this review: I noticed that most of the negative reviews were about the film being disloyal to the source material. Yes, I understand those peoples' motives and ideas, but I feel it is better to focus on what it is than what you believe it is meant to be. In my opinion the loyalty to the books doesn't affect the quality greatly if at all, and sometimes the changes are for the better, something I can apply to How to Train Your Dragon. However, a few book-to-film changes DOES NOT MEAN YOU SHOULD DEMAIN YOUR RATING DOWN TO A ONE. This is what I have seen many reviews doing, and I just don't see the rationale behind it.
All I can say to to summarise the likability is that it seems split from a critical viewpoint, sometimes good, sometimes bad; but for a simple moviegoer who is not too bothered about book-to-film changes, this is the cinematic masterpiece it deserves to be called.