Good, but less enjoyable than its predecessors

Rating: 7/10 (29 December 2003)

First, let me say that I did like "Return of the King." It's a special effects masterpiece that is destined to become a classic, along with the first two installments in the "Lord of the Rings" saga.
But, to me, it was far less enjoyable than the first two films, the second of which was the best of the three.
"King" was far too long for what it had to say. And the ending (or should I say endings) really disappointed me. I kept waiting for the film to end, but it just kept going on and on. There were at least four times that I thought the film was over, but then the next scene would fade in. It would have been a much better ending if the film had finished with the resolution of the final battle, and then showed the denouement as a montage next to the closing credits. It would have removed about 20 minutes from the overly-lengthy film and would have made the ending less of a "cut-and-paste" style.
So I'll give it a solid 7. But to me, it has been seriously over-rated by both fans and critics. I'm surprised that more of the critics, at least, haven't picked up on the weak ending.