Lord of the Rings »
I finally managed to see Return of the King. I was going to go on Tuesday, when it was dollar day at the discount theater, but they changed their schedule at the last minute and screwed me up. So I had to wait a couple days and put out $1.50 instead.
In any case, I enjoyed the film. I'd say that both The Two Towers and the Return of the King tied for second best in the series. I immensely enjoyed The Fellowship of the Ring. The other two were pleasant, but I found them lacking. The scary thought is that if the Fellowship hadn't come out, then the expectations would have been lower, and I would have enjoyed them more. That's just the way that it is.
Such as it is, I think the the first film raised the bar, and the second and third kept it constant, when instead they needed to build. The necessity of more CGI and the need for better storytelling meant that the latter two films had a much larger challenge to meet. While they performed well, I don't think that they exceeded the quality of the first film. Thus, they seemed to actually slide.
The landscapes in the Return of the King were, of course, outstanding - though much of that could have been natural! The work on Gollum was exceptional, especially in the third movie. Shelob was wonderful. The buildings were so-so.
Especially Minas Tirith when it was being attacked. The first few rocks to hit broke buildings like they were made of Legos. While the city was fantastic, the rendering of the attack was poor. Similarly, when Minas Morgul collapsed, it just didn't look right. Then at the end, the hobbits looked unreal for the first time in the series.
I'm glad The Lord of the Rings is complete, and I'm also glad that it stayed fairly true to the story. But the sense of wonder after the first movie faded, and instead of continuing to be amazing, the trilogy faded towards mediocrity in the end. Excellent for entertainment, but not so engrossing as it was in the beginning.
