Lord Of The Rings details
| Formats: | PG DVD, 12 Blu-ray |
|---|---|
| Starring: | Christopher Guard, William Squire, John Hurt, Annette Crosbie, Anthony Daniels |
| Director: | Ralph Bakshi |
| Genres: | Action/Adventure, Animated, Family, Sci-Fi/Fantasy - Sci-fi - General |
| Studio: | WARNER HOME VIDEO |
| Name | Discs | |
|---|---|---|
Lord Of The Rings |
PG Feature |
DVD Information
| Run time: | 2 hours 7 minutes |
|---|---|
| Rental release: | 26 Nov 2001 |
| Main languages: | English |
| Dubbed: | French, Italian |
| Subtitles: | Arabic, Bulgarian, Dutch, English, French, German, Italian, Portuguese, Romanian, Spanish |
| Hearing impaired subtitles: | English, Italian |
Write your own review
Most helpful review
Unintentionally hilarious
By TheRiddler from staffordshire , 06 Mar 2004[Highly rated reviewer]
I came to this with a large amount of curiosity. I had heard it was impressive considering Bakshi’s tiny budget, which was eventually not even enough to finish the trilogy (this ends just after battle of Helm's Deep). The main problem does obviously come down to the lack of money. It starts out mostly traditionally cell animated but filling in the larger, more complex scenes by animating over the top of real extras’ performances. It’s easy to see where, as the money ran out, Bakshi’s reliance on this odd-looking technique increased, until by the end, there’s barely any cell animation left. Both techniques are as poor as each other, the cell animation coming straight out of He-Man, and they jar against each other quite distractingly. Some problems cannot be written off as budgetary though. The vocal performances are terrible (even John Hurt as Aragorn); design is often ridiculous (Boromir looks like a Viking and the Orcs look like monkeys with fake teeth) and no character is fleshed out in the slightest, even Gandalf or Frodo (with other major characters like Gimli and Gollum barely registering at all). Also notably bad is the pacing, as major scenes from the books are excised completely, but then 20-odd minutes are wasted on a hallucinatory mess as the Ring Wraiths chase Frodo, which ends up being longer than it’s counterpart in Peter Jackson’s epics. Go rent them instead because they really are something special. All this version manages to be is unintentionally hilarious.- Was this review helpful to you?
- (15) Yes |
- No (7)
All reviews
(40)Beautiful- A Classic
By Aikatarine (1 review) , 28 Feb 2013I loved this as a child and I love it now! The animation is gorgeous and so rich- as is the voice acting. It's curious, but you either love or hate this adaptation of the famous classic. It's nothing like the movie but if you let it, it will capture your heart. Shame there isn't the rest of the Two Towers and the Return of the King.- Was this review helpful to you?
- (0) Yes |
- No (0)
Shame they never finished the animated trilogy
By Em1981 (133 reviews) from London , 30 Dec 2012Cor the long review i just read on this below mine. Its a cartoon!!!!! A classic. I love it. An atomsphertic animation that brings the drama and magic to life in a stylish technique. Dont bother reading review below mine its boring and lets face it all cartoons are great.- Was this review helpful to you?
- (0) Yes |
- No (0)
Absolutely Worth Watching
By Mag5 (2 reviews) , 28 Dec 2012Clearly the Jackson version has the advantage of modern special effects and is a great (and complete) version of the epic but there is some very clever and creative animation in this version. In particular the sequences involving the ring wraiths are more vivid and engaging - scarier - than in the Jackson version. Also the characterisation is closer to how I imagined the main protagonists in the book. Some aspects of the Jackson version were definitely geared at the youngest end of the audience (eg merry/pippin). Strider/Aragorn, for example is a much older more rugged/wisened character in the animation which is more how I imagined him. It's a different take on the trilogy, but I am sure Peter Jackson nicked a few ideas from it though! You will see some similarities. This is a great adaptation of the book, definitely worth watching and a real shame the film was never completed.- Was this review helpful to you?
- (0) Yes |
- No (0)
dont bother
By dannyhull (6 reviews) , 23 Feb 2012awful is the best way to describe this film. im a huge fan of LOTR the books and movies and this is a huge let down.
i know this film was made long before the modern live action movies and that will have some impact on peoples opinions of it but it really isnt good to watch. it does faithfully stick to the story we all know. but what really did it for me was the awful graphics and annimation. the film is annimated but the orcs and some other creatures are live action superimposed onto the annimation which makes it look tacky and confusing. im sure in its day it looked far more impressive to people and if your a hardcore LOTR fan then you should definatly watch it but if not then give it a miss as it will only disappoint you even more.- Was this review helpful to you?
- (0) Yes |
- No (2)
Inferior in some ways to the live action film, but so much better in more important ways
By paulyb (82 reviews) from Middlesex, UK , 03 Oct 2011Visually inferior to the modern film version, but utterly superior in terms of voice acting, character representation, and darkness. In fact, this film is a superior edited version of the overly long and complicated book.
If the means were available to improve the graphics, it would only be marginally better. It's rather like comparing old and new Star Wars, you either go with older endearing characters, or go with stunning visuals of modern flicks. My wife is no fan of Tolkien, but observed a much greater sense of pace, dread and fear in this cartoon compared with Jackson's version. Excellent film for it's time, I love watching it now.- Was this review helpful to you?
- (1) Yes |
- No (0)
