7/10
Good animation, not necessarily so good adaptation.
21 March 2005
Bakshi's "The Lord of the Rings" was for a long time the only movie adaptation of the book - and that was a great shame. Mostly simply because it's so... abridged. Two hours long, and it covers most of Fellowship of the Ring and The Two Towers - hmm...

I remember seeing the animation a long time ago, and thought it was pretty awful. Now, after the Jackson trilogy and all, I finally found it again.

I have to say that I still hold my belief from those days: This is a great animation. I absolutely love the rotoscoping/live-action animation deal shown in the movie. It actually looks better than I imagined. Okay, some of the scenes were done with two-penny budget and are just painful, but at other times, this thing manages to be beautiful or just plain amazing, or even just stylish.

Yet, I'm a nitpicker here. If you want to see a good LotR movie, try the new trilogy. This isn't a good LotR movie. This is a very chaotic mess compared to them. Some of the deviations from the book are just flabbergasting. Dialogue gets weird. Some of the action scenes are just dumbfounding and corny.

But I still think it's a good *animation*. If you like awful movies, like I do, or just want to see something that definitely has style over substance, this isn't going to hurt you. Just grab something to eat and beware not to choke on it if you see something really funny. And every fan of the books should also see it, if not just for education, at least as an example of how *not* to do LotR movie adaptation.

I was going to hit this harder, but I don't have the heart, I sometimes just love a good "effect movie". 7/10 it is...
8 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed