yes, as good as expected.

Rating: 10/10 (26 December 2003)

I' m not going to go into too much details in respect for the few(I hope) who haven't seen this movie.

First of all, ROTK is flawless. There is nothing to complain about and if there was, I would feel too guilty to even bring it up(maybe i'm just not a good reviewer). The thing is, ROTK isn't just flawless, being flawless(post-any lord of the rings movie) is not good enough, it's a masterpiece. It can't have been any better. The "bar" the Matrix sequels attempted to raise has been shot up to the sky.

Yes - the story/directing/cinematography are all amazing.Yes - The acting is oscar-worthy for most performances.Yes - the special effects are groundbreaking.Yes - .... yes yes.
I can't bring up anything negative. The few complaints I've heard are:1) Eowyn's acting not being good enough.2) Gandalf not using his magic enough.3) The special effects when Gollum jumps on Frodo while he's invisible ruining a scene.
For me, these complaints are proof of how good ROTK really is. It's as if they tried desperately to try and find something wrong with the movie and came up with these sorry excuses for flaws.
What the most important part about the LOTRs trilogy is, is the fact that, indirectly, it has improved movies. By raising the bar to such heights future directors (who are passionate about their work and not cash-ins) will want to surpass it and as a result work harder on offering quality and creativity.

In fact, I believe LOTR is a first step towards a more American/European film standard which manages to incorporate the best of both worlds. Both deep and entertaining, philosophical and fun.

I gave ROTK 10/10 not only because of how much I loved watching it but also because of how grateful I am that it has improved the standards and as a result the movies I will be seeing in the future. Thank you Peter Jackson.