Latest News
Archive News

Submit Work

Red Colony
Scientific American

The Lord of the Rings Trilogy

Written on December 21st, 2003.

*In this entry I do nothing but Bash Peter Jackson's adaptations of J.R.R. Tolkien's classics from book to film. If you are a Lord of the Rings Fan, read it and prepare to hear someone speak down on the trilogy. I apologize if for some reason you get insulted by this entry but hey, that's life.

I recently was reading up on reviews of Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, and some of The Fellowship of the Ring and I'm truly baffled. I was especially pissed off when someone made mention of this trilogy being better than the Godfather trilogy, which really got me fired up.

Everyone has a right to an opinion but when this person stated that The Two Towers was better than the Godfather part II, she also made mention of the movie being a good movie only when it is watched with the thought of the previous movie in your mind, that it cannot stand by itself. I personally felt insulted with that statement as this person was so dense that they probably have never even watched any of the Godfather films. I know most of the people I know haven't.

Unlike the Lord of the Rings films which simply do not survive on their own, which really is a shame Mr. Jackson, the Godfather films, don't need to be seen all together, each film can live and thrive on its own, Coppola wasn't nearly as simple minded as Jackson is. You can watch any of the Godfather films and understand and get involved with what is going on, each movie, at three hours long can live on its own and be enjoyed. Then we have the Lord of the Rings, which is only moderately rewarding to the viewer when they waste over nine hours to understand whats going on and get introduced to many characters who have no point in being in the movie besides adding to the runtime. This fault by Jackson can be attributed to the fact that he stupidly had all three films shot simultaniously, it feels like you are watching a TV mini series with an extremely inflated budget. I look at the Lord of the Rings as visually stunning which has lots of substance but lacks all of the flavour. There are plenty of characters, but literally no development, I must ask, what is the point?

I'm not denying Jackson as a risk taker, I love him, he's done some great work in the past, but I don't agree with all of the attention that these movies are getting. There is no way in hell that any of these pictures should be even mentioned in the same sentence as the best trilogy ever made, the Godfather trilogy(I am aware that I did just that).

I'm not saying that these movies are horrible movies, nor am I saying they are great movies, I think they are okay, but they NO where worthy of the attention they get. There are so many movies which slip by the masses, yet this mainstream garbage gets commended, it isn't fair. Everyone is piling in at the local theatre now to see The Two Towers, please don't, go see something else, give something else a chance, try Martin Scorsese's Epic Gangs of New York, Speilberg's Catch Me If You Can or even just watch the Godfather again, if you've been fancying over the Lord of the Rings so much you'll be in need of classic filmmaking to open your eyes.


28 Days Later



Donnie Darko


Resident Evil


The Crow

The Lord of the Rings Trilogy

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring

The Matrix: Reloaded


Terminator 2: Judgement Day

Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines

Total Recall

X2: X-Men United


Modern Movie Making - the Art of Selling Out